Real Issues

[pepper brooks 579]

I know this is likely to turn political even though it is not really meant to be a political post.  I do believe we as voters need to find some common ground on real issues we can actually solve in a bi-partisan way.  The issue I see is one where I have donated time and money.  It's a simple one and one I believe can be solved, and one where both sides could easily find common ground.  Hunger.  As I was walking down Smith Street yesterday in downtown Houston to pick up my lunch I see a very gaunt man near a bus stop start digging in the garbage.  He pulls out a discarded piece of pizza and starts eating it.  This absolutely hurt my soul.  The man appeared to be homeless, obviously hungry, very dirty.  I asked him to wait where he was, consider putting that pizza back where he found it, and I would return in a few minutes with lunch.  I picked up my lunch and had them make a few sandwiches.  Luckily the man was there when I returned.  I just cannot wrap my head around how we let shit like this be a continuing problem in America.  We waste so much money on so much shit it's incalculable.  How is it we cannot find a way to fund shelters with some basic care and food.  That's rhetorical, we don't need your snarky answers from the left about the military industrial complex, nor from the right about how we spend trillions on handouts already.  I get it.  Both of those things are true.  We have to find a way to fix this.  No one in this country should go hungry.  Ever.  I get some may be beyond help to some degree.  My guess is this man probably had some form of mental issue that possibly doesn't allow him to function in a way where he can get help at some of the places it is offered. 

 

What can we do?  I know this isn't an issue that gets as much attention as it should because it's one where people can generally agree.  If it isn't an issue that is going to divide us the news, nor politicians are going to put much effort into it.  Anyone have any ideas?  ANyone ever had much luck lobbying their representatives on this?  what about at local levels?  I feel like I can devote a bit more time and energy to this cause.  Anyone with any insight into how to go about it, I'm all ears.  I know this get more attention as we enter the holidays, and there will be some nice news stories about people at foodbank kitchens serving meals.  I've done that.  It's nice and all, but that is not getting it done.  We need to think "bigger".

[David Dennison 18607]

You have to be willing to pay a lot more in taxes. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

15 minutes ago, pepper brooks said:

I know this is likely to turn political even though it is not really meant to be a political post.  I do believe we as voters need to find some common ground on real issues we can actually solve in a bi-partisan way.  The issue I see is one where I have donated time and money.  It's a simple one and one I believe can be solved, and one where both sides could easily find common ground.  Hunger.  As I was walking down Smith Street yesterday in downtown Houston to pick up my lunch I see a very gaunt man near a bus stop start digging in the garbage.  He pulls out a discarded piece of pizza and starts eating it.  This absolutely hurt my soul.  The man appeared to be homeless, obviously hungry, very dirty.  I asked him to wait where he was, consider putting that pizza back where he found it, and I would return in a few minutes with lunch.  I picked up my lunch and had them make a few sandwiches.  Luckily the man was there when I returned.  I just cannot wrap my head around how we let shit like this be a continuing problem in America.  We waste so much money on so much shit it's incalculable.  How is it we cannot find a way to fund shelters with some basic care and food.  That's rhetorical, we don't need your snarky answers from the left about the military industrial complex, nor from the right about how we spend trillions on handouts already.  I get it.  Both of those things are true.  We have to find a way to fix this.  No one in this country should go hungry.  Ever.  I get some may be beyond help to some degree.  My guess is this man probably had some form of mental issue that possibly doesn't allow him to function in a way where he can get help at some of the places it is offered. 

 

What can we do?  I know this isn't an issue that gets as much attention as it should because it's one where people can generally agree.  If it isn't an issue that is going to divide us the news, nor politicians are going to put much effort into it.  Anyone have any ideas?  ANyone ever had much luck lobbying their representatives on this?  what about at local levels?  I feel like I can devote a bit more time and energy to this cause.  Anyone with any insight into how to go about it, I'm all ears.  I know this get more attention as we enter the holidays, and there will be some nice news stories about people at foodbank kitchens serving meals.  I've done that.  It's nice and all, but that is not getting it done.  We need to think "bigger".

Actually we don't spend trilions on handouts, but that's not really true. We actually waste/throw away more than enough food to feed everyone, we just lack the market mechanism to provide distribution and delivery of food, and the structure of commodity markets do not incentivize efficient buying behaviors at the end point. And then there are the cultural challenges around getting people to prepare more of there own food and move further up in the supply chain. 

BUT - I think all those issues would sort themselves out with some kind of UBI, which is attracting increasing support on both the left and right.

[Chrispy 132]

17 minutes ago, pepper brooks said:

I know this is likely to turn political even though it is not really meant to be a political post.  I do believe we as voters need to find some common ground on real issues we can actually solve in a bi-partisan way.  The issue I see is one where I have donated time and money.  It's a simple one and one I believe can be solved, and one where both sides could easily find common ground.  Hunger.  As I was walking down Smith Street yesterday in downtown Houston to pick up my lunch I see a very gaunt man near a bus stop start digging in the garbage.  He pulls out a discarded piece of pizza and starts eating it.  This absolutely hurt my soul.  The man appeared to be homeless, obviously hungry, very dirty.  I asked him to wait where he was, consider putting that pizza back where he found it, and I would return in a few minutes with lunch.  I picked up my lunch and had them make a few sandwiches.  Luckily the man was there when I returned.  I just cannot wrap my head around how we let shit like this be a continuing problem in America.  We waste so much money on so much shit it's incalculable.  How is it we cannot find a way to fund shelters with some basic care and food.  That's rhetorical, we don't need your snarky answers from the left about the military industrial complex, nor from the right about how we spend trillions on handouts already.  I get it.  Both of those things are true.  We have to find a way to fix this.  No one in this country should go hungry.  Ever.  I get some may be beyond help to some degree.  My guess is this man probably had some form of mental issue that possibly doesn't allow him to function in a way where he can get help at some of the places it is offered. 

 

What can we do?  I know this isn't an issue that gets as much attention as it should because it's one where people can generally agree.  If it isn't an issue that is going to divide us the news, nor politicians are going to put much effort into it.  Anyone have any ideas?  ANyone ever had much luck lobbying their representatives on this?  what about at local levels?  I feel like I can devote a bit more time and energy to this cause.  Anyone with any insight into how to go about it, I'm all ears.  I know this get more attention as we enter the holidays, and there will be some nice news stories about people at foodbank kitchens serving meals.  I've done that.  It's nice and all, but that is not getting it done.  We need to think "bigger".

He was most likely suffering from substance abuse or mental illness. These guys end up on the street because a lack of family support, whether they burned too many bridges or resisted taking their required medicine. Their immediate family needs to step up, when it’s feasible, but the reality is that it comes down to personal accountability. I’m all for more resources to distribute the necessary assistance, but the difficult part will be encouraging these individuals to participate. There doesn’t seem to be an easy answer to this issue, but it’s important to jump on it now, before we end up in a situation like California. 

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You have to be willing to pay a lot more in taxes. 

This is the heart of it, in my opinion. Which is why change from the government won't happen until the voters come around to this necessary fact.

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

Well, we really ought to not have the worst and least cost effective healthcare delivery system in the 1st world because that naturally leads to the worst mental healthcare intake mechanism in the world, but at least we pay the most, general the most paper and employ the most people in non-care roles!

But seriously - we would pay less for all this stuff and live in a much happier country if we did basic things like making sure everyone can live with some basic level of dignity and care in the richest society in the history of man.

[Parliament 14112]

My view is that the kind of homelessness OP describes is the result of mental illness more than poverty.

[David Dennison 18607]

6 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

He was most likely suffering from substance abuse or mental illness. These guys end up on the street because a lack of family support, whether they burned too many bridges or resisted taking their required medicine. Their immediate family needs to step up, when it’s feasible, but the reality is that it comes down to personal accountability. I’m all for more resources to distribute the necessary assistance, but the difficult part will be encouraging these individuals to participate. There doesn’t seem to be an easy answer to this issue, but it’s important to jump on it now, before we end up in a situation like California. 

Oh?

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

36 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You have to be willing to pay a lot more in taxes. 

That's totally false, and this kind of data-and-logic-free nonsense is what separates "progressives" from real liberals and it's why you lose so fucking always. We've already got Republican Trumpism for the distribution of toxic thinking and we don't need more. The combination of bad ideas with appeals to stupidity usually comes out behind for everyone. 

[David Dennison 18607]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

That's totally false, and this kind of data-and-logic-free nonsense is what separates "progressives" from real liberals and it's why you lose so fucking always. We've already got Republican Trumpism for the distribution of toxic thinking and we don't need more. The combination of bad ideas with appeals to stupidity usually comes out behind for everyone. 

No, it's true. 

[tantric superman 4667]

40 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You have to be willing to pay a lot more in taxes. 

D'oh!

[FondrenRoad 4378]

France has a food waste law that requires supermarkets to donate food rather than throw it away when it is too old to sell, but still edible.  Many restaurants in France also do this although I don't believe there is a law requiring them to do so.

One of the reasons we don't do this is the misguided belief that everyone will just wait and go around back instead of buying food at the front.  French grocers avoid this by having distributors take the food to shelter/food pantry locations.  However, french bakeries do give food away at the end of the day without damaging their business.  I don't see why Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks would be any different.

Also, NYC does have a shelter and prepared meal system like the OP suggests.  And even with the fact that its a magnet for the homeless/needy from other areas, it isn't particularly overstressed.  A couple of things keep the streets crowded though.  Shelters simply aren't equipped to handle intoxicated people so they don't allow them entry.  And nobody can forcibly shelter anyone, including the mentally ill, so people are free to choose the streets whether they are mentally competent or not.  This changes in the winter when cold weather does allow the city to go street to street and move people to shelters no matter their mental state. 

A quick google shows Houston has a few options for free lunch in or near downtown for those who choose to go there too.  Yet the man the OP met chose not to go there.  I'm all about making sure the apparatus is available to get everyone fed and have a roof over their head so they can get back on their feet.  I'm not quite sold on pushing people there against their will.

Edited October 10, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[elfenix 34168]

https://www.foodnetwork.com/shows/food-network-specials/episodes/the-big-waste

we waste a huge amount of food in the US:
 

Quote

In the United States, food waste is estimated at between 30-40 percent of the food supply. This estimate, based on estimates from USDA’s Economic Research Service of 31 percent food loss at the retail and consumer levels, corresponded to approximately 133 billion pounds and $161 billion worth of food in 2010. This amount of waste has far-reaching impacts on food security, resource conservation and climate change:

• Wholesome food that could have helped feed families in need is sent to landfills. 
• The land, water, labor, energy and other inputs used in producing, processing, transporting, preparing, storing, and disposing of discarded food are pulled away from uses that may have been more beneficial to society – and generate impacts on the environment that may endanger the long-run health of the planet.
• Food waste, which is the single largest component going into municipal landfills, quickly generates methane, helping to make landfills the third largest source of methane in the United States. 

https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/faqs.htm

Edited October 10, 2018 by elfenix

[David Dennison 18607]

The best way to handle this is to give the poor money so they can buy food.

And yes, there will be abuse and some will use the money to buy alcohol or drugs.

But it's the best way to help the poor get what they need. Money works.

Crazy.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That's totally false, and this kind of data-and-logic-free nonsense is what separates "progressives" from real liberals and it's why you lose so fucking always. We've already got Republican Trumpism for the distribution of toxic thinking and we don't need more. The combination of bad ideas with appeals to stupidity usually comes out behind for everyone. 

Throwing money at the problem alone isn't the solution, but don't the things that are the solutions require money, and ultimately higher taxes?

Edited October 10, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

13 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

No, it's true. 

No, it's really not. There are lots of reasons why aggregate taxation should go up (primarily to contain the expansion of federal debt), but addressing hunger and healthcare do not necessarily require higher federal revenues. A minor shift in priorities could easily accomplish both. 

[Chrispy 132]

16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Oh?

If I have to fork out a bit more to avoid tent cities, sure. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

The best way to handle this is to give the poor money so they can buy food.

And yes, there will be abuse and some will use the money to buy alcohol or drugs.

But it's the best way to help the poor get what they need. Money works.

Crazy.

That's all true, but combining truth with bullshit is a bad plan. We don't need higher aggregate taxation to do any of those things. 

[David Dennison 18607]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, it's really not. There are lots of reasons why aggregate taxation should go up (primarily to contain the expansion of federal debt), but addressing hunger and healthcare do not necessarily require higher federal revenues. A minor shift in priorities could easily accomplish both. 

But it does require cutting the Pentagon's budget, which will put even more pressure on social services because the military industrial complex is the United States government's largest jobs program.

[Pig Bellmont 8679]

Bozo making too much sense here. Keep up the good work. 

[Chrispy 132]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The best way to handle this is to give the poor money so they can buy food.

And yes, there will be abuse and some will use the money to buy alcohol or drugs.

But it's the best way to help the poor get what they need. Money works.

Crazy.

You may be conflating the poor with the homeless. 

[David Dennison 18607]

Just now, Chrispy said:

You may be conflating the poor with the homeless. 

I'm talking about the poor. 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But it does require cutting the Pentagon's budget, which will put even more pressure on social services because the military industrial complex is the United States government's largest jobs program

But there again, merely shifting funds from unnecessary and wasteful military spending to a jobs guarantee via something like the works progress administration and public infrastructure would replace all that at a much lower cost and deliver net-positive economic stimulus and have added benefit of getting people off the dole. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[F250 28659]

24 minutes ago, Parliament said:

My view is that the kind of homelessness OP describes is the result of mental illness more than poverty.

I agree, that wasn't a good example. I think malnutrition in children is a better starting point. Malnutrition is a real problem and impacts children who have no ability to control their situation.

 

[David Dennison 18607]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

But there again, merely shifting funds from unnecessary and wasteful military spending to a jobs guarantee via something like the works progress administration and public infrastructure would replace all that at a much lower cost and deliver net-positive economic stimulus and have added benefit of getting people off the dole. 

Agreed. But one person's wasteful military spending is another person's job with benefits. In a private corporation, no less. Military budget cuts will affect hundreds of thousands of jobs that would not exist but for military contracts. Add that to the fact that these jobs exist in nearly every congressional district in every state and you have a situation where Congress is unwilling to shift those funds because they know military budget cuts will result in lost jobs.

 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Agreed. But one person's wasteful military spending is another person's job with benefits. In a private corporation, no less. Military budget cuts will affect hundreds of thousands of jobs that would not exist but for military contracts. Add that to the fact that these jobs exist in nearly every congressional district in every state and you have a situation where Congress is unwilling to shift those funds because they know military budget cuts will result in lost jobs.

I remember the early 90s, if that's what you mean. Is Austin's Airport and the economic value it provides worth more than Bergstrom AFB?

Edited October 10, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[David Dennison 18607]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I remember the early 90s, if that's what you mean. Is Austin's Airport and the economic value it provides worth more than Bergstrom AFB?

Bergstrom to the City of Austin, yes.

Fort Hood to Killeen?

See the problem?

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Bergstrom to the City of Austin, yes.

Fort Hood to Killeen?

See the problem?

Who's talking about closing Ft. Hood? You're treating the minor shifting of priorities as some kind of massive defunding or net loss. This is why our politics don't work. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[David Dennison 18607]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Who's talking about closing Ft. Hood? You're treating the minor shifting of priorities as some kind of massive defunding or net loss. This is why our politics don't work. 

How much money is involved in "minor shifting?"

[elfenix 34168]

3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

The best way to handle this is to give the poor money so they can buy food.

And yes, there will be abuse and some will use the money to buy alcohol or drugs.

But it's the best way to help the poor get what they need. Money works.

Crazy.

direct monetary welfare (TANF, the result of the welfare reform act back in the 90s) is all of about $4 billion in the US.  another $4 billion of TANF each year goes to job training/placement.  the rest (about $8 billion) goes to other.  a lot of that is pre-K, a bunch of it is not.  yay block grants! find your state here

in the meantime, the federal government had a $1.4 trillion deficit this last year, a year leading up to an election.  we're now south america, but that's a different story.  another $4 billion (so, $1.404 trillion) would go a long way toward solving hunger, and amounts to a hair on the dog's ass of federal spending without changing any other spending.

Edited October 10, 2018 by elfenix

[Bateshorn 9882]

Sigh,  There are so many issues in the O.P. that I don't know where to begin:

-Agriculture Policy

-Hunger Assistance

-Education Policy

-Housing Policy

-Urban Planning

-Healthcare

That's just a few off the top of my head.  These issues are hard and complicated and require committed, bright people to come up with compatible and workable solutions.  And many, if not all, involve a significant government role.

But the American public, and most the people on this page, keep screaming about how corrupt and stupid government is.  How Congress is the FUCKING WORST.  FIRE THEM ALL.  I don't want some politician who has a specialty degree in food security and ag policy from a quality school.  A local dentist will know far better how to address these issues!!!!

If you want solutions, you need, as a society, dedicated public servants who are supported in their mission and job. Policy is fucking hard.  Think about the next time you watch a debate or interact with a politician.  Think about the details, not the shit that gives you a partisan rage boner.

 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Bateshorn

[Bat Guano 359]

35 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

But there again, merely shifting funds from unnecessary and wasteful military spending to a jobs guarantee via something like the works progress administration and public infrastructure would replace all that at a much lower cost and deliver net-positive economic stimulus and have added benefit of getting people off the dole. 

Good post. I think if you set out to create the most wasteful and expensive jobs program possible, it would look a lot like the military budget.

[pyrohornIII 4801]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

France has a food waste law that requires supermarkets to donate food rather than throw it away when it is too old to sell, but still edible.  Many restaurants in France also do this although I don't believe there is a law requiring them to do so.

One of the reasons we don't do this is the misguided belief that everyone will just wait and go around back instead of buying food at the front.  French grocers avoid this by having distributors take the food to shelter/food pantry locations.  However, french bakeries do give food away at the end of the day without damaging their business.  I don't see why Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks would be any different.

Also, NYC does have a shelter and prepared meal system like the OP suggests.  And even with the fact that its a magnet for the homeless/needy from other areas, it isn't particularly overstressed.  A couple of things keep the streets crowded though.  Shelters simply aren't equipped to handle intoxicated people so they don't allow them entry.  And nobody can forcibly shelter anyone, including the mentally ill, so people are free to choose the streets whether they are mentally competent or not.  This changes in the winter when cold weather does allow the city to go street to street and move people to shelters no matter their mental state. 

A quick google shows Houston has a few options for free lunch in or near downtown for those who choose to go there too.  Yet the man the OP met chose not to go there.  I'm all about making sure the apparatus is available to get everyone fed and have a roof over their head so they can get back on their feet.  I'm not quite sold on pushing people there against their will.

I live in a small town that has one little donut shop.  I asked the lady what they did with all their leftover donuts and such.  She said they had to throw them away now.  Can't even feed them to pigs.  She used to donate the surplus to the nursing homes in the neighboring town but they can't do that anymore due to Texas Health codes.  I could see that for food that had meat in them, or eggs..but plain breads?  I imagine there are other regulations that prevent others from donating excess goods as well. 

Anybody know where most of the mental health money spent by the state goes?  Or goes through?

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

How much money is involved in "minor shifting?"

That depends on how much is shifted and what's being done. If you were to merely fund a UBI and Medicare For All* using a what already goes to medicare/caid, food and income assistance and just took the remainder from various programs, not a lot because you would be starting with a truly massive entitlement funding and delivery reform. If we were talking about restarting the CCC and WPA, more than minor, but it's difficult to imagine a scenario where that change of priorities exerted a net negative economic impact over time. 

 

 

 

 

 

* NOT promoting Medicare for All here. I've said on this board and others going back years that I do not support a transition to a single payer system. I'm using this as an example because it's the most public money intense means of delivering UHC.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

France has a food waste law that requires supermarkets to donate food rather than throw it away when it is too old to sell, but still edible.  Many restaurants in France also do this although I don't believe there is a law requiring them to do so.

One of the reasons we don't do this is the misguided belief that everyone will just wait and go around back instead of buying food at the front.  French grocers avoid this by having distributors take the food to shelter/food pantry locations.  However, french bakeries do give food away at the end of the day without damaging their business.  I don't see why Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks would be any different.

Also, NYC does have a shelter and prepared meal system like the OP suggests.  And even with the fact that its a magnet for the homeless/needy from other areas, it isn't particularly overstressed.  A couple of things keep the streets crowded though.  Shelters simply aren't equipped to handle intoxicated people so they don't allow them entry.  And nobody can forcibly shelter anyone, including the mentally ill, so people are free to choose the streets whether they are mentally competent or not.  This changes in the winter when cold weather does allow the city to go street to street and move people to shelters no matter their mental state. 

A quick google shows Houston has a few options for free lunch in or near downtown for those who choose to go there too.  Yet the man the OP met chose not to go there.  I'm all about making sure the apparatus is available to get everyone fed and have a roof over their head so they can get back on their feet.  I'm not quite sold on pushing people there against their will.

*anecdote alert*

I went to a Tiff's treats brick-and-mortar location a few months ago *just* as they were closing. I slipped in right before the buzzer and the teenage worker was bagging up all the old cookies and bagging them. I bought a dozen in a box and then just offhandedly asked; so, can you sell these old cookies to me that you are about to throw away for like half off or something (a la day-old pastries or whatever)? And the worker just dispassionately said nope they can't sell them so they throw them away.

It made sense at the time that it is a moral hazard of sorts. If I know that food is half the price at 9pm or something, I probably won't buy it at a premium unless I'm feeling lazy. I guess the key is to create a business model that makes the profits/numbers work on the discounted pricing like Sonic's Happy Hour Drink business model. Buy a cheap drink and get some other crap at regular price to offset the fact that a lot of consumers won't go to Sonic for just a drink except during 2 and 4p.

[Kyle 207]

A lot of really good thoughts on this thread. My guess is the root of the problem is there is not enough money spent on social services. That likely is an easy distraction, and my guess would be that if everyone paid 99.99% income tax there would still be homeless and hungry people. The challenge as noted above IMHO is finding the right incentives, the right way to execute / deliver, and a holistic perspective that includes regulatory, social, and cultural implications. Unfortunately, government is just not really good at that.

[Guest]

For those more interested in some "slacktivism" on how you can help world hunger, a guy I know has an awesome approach to this. Travis Frederick from the Dallas Cowboys has made this his platform issue as well and I've taken the kids to one of the meet ups where we broke a world record for number of sandwiches made, but anyone can do this: http://www.tangotab.com/ EVERY TIME YOU CHECK-IN AT A PARTNER RESTAURANT USING THE TANGOTAB APP, A FREE MEAL IS DONATED TO A PERSON IN NEED. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Guest

[pepper brooks 579]

Bozo bringing the goods here.  Appreciate your thoughtful input.  

[David Dennison 18607]

Just now, pepper brooks said:

Bozo bringing the goods here.  Appreciate your thoughtful input.  

So to be clear, you're down with the federal or state government just giving the poor money? That's something you can get behind?

[bad_teammate 13125]

- Create a federal agency whose entire purpose is to collect and distribute edible food produced by restaurants/grocery/other food businesses.

- Indemnify businesses who donate food to that agency. (since the food is actually distributed by the government, sovereign immunity or whatever)

These businesses would like to not throw away all this edible food. The reason they don't is (1) regulations and (2) fear of undercutting sales. Take those two problems away and the problem reduces.

Edited October 10, 2018 by bad_teammate

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

So to be clear, you're down with the federal or state government just giving the poor money? That's something you can get behind?

 I agreed and continue to agree with you, higher taxes will have to be a reality.

Bozo's technically right, but practically speaking nobody is going to allow without a fight and political fall-out that will need to be avoided, any substantial cuts in their fiefdoms and backyards (IMO).

Edited October 10, 2018 by Guest

[RDCanecutter 26239]

What kind of pizza were we talkin bout here, and what kind of sammits?

Good for the OP to help a dude out.

[bad_teammate 13125]

2 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

 I agreed and continue to agree with you, higher taxes will have to be a reality.

It depends on how you look at it, really. The reality of how we operate right now is that we pay high taxes to subsidize private capitalist enterprise. A restructuring of the economic capital system wouldn't necessarily raise taxes per se and would guarantee a lot more economic security than we have now (mandatory profit-sharing schemes, worker co-op structures, executive pay caps, etc...).

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

 I agreed and continue to agree with you, higher taxes will have to be a reality.

Bozo's technically right, but practically speaking nobody is going to allow without a fight and political fall-out that will need to be avoided, any substantial cuts in their fiefdoms and backyards (IMO).

Ok, fine. But a 10% lifetime cost reduction in one program - the F35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter - would yield a savings of $3B/year for the next 50 years.

[Bat Guano 359]

14 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

*anecdote alert*

I went to a Tiff's treats brick-and-mortar location a few months ago *just* as they were closing. I slipped in right before the buzzer and the teenage worker was bagging up all the old cookies and bagging them. I bought a dozen in a box and then just offhandedly asked; so, can you sell these old cookies to me that you are about to throw away for like half off or something (a la day-old pastries or whatever)? And the worker just dispassionately said nope they can't sell them so they throw them away.

It made sense at the time that it is a moral hazard of sorts. If I know that food is half the price at 9pm or something, I probably won't buy it at a premium unless I'm feeling lazy. I guess the key is to create a business model that makes the profits/numbers work on the discounted pricing like Sonic's Happy Hour Drink business model. Buy a cheap drink and get some other crap at regular price to offset the fact that a lot of consumers won't go to Sonic for just a drink except during 2 and 4p.

CSB.

Dueling anecdotes: One time many years ago I was walking down the drag and happened on a pizza place (I don't remember which one) giving out free pizza to the homeless. I wasn't homeless but as a broke graduate student I was hungry, so I had a couple of slices and chatted with the homeless folk for a while. So it comes down to corporate policy; if giving away food was prohibited by the city or whoever, the pizza place didn't give a fuck and did it anyway. According to the people there, it was a daily thing. Tiff's treats seems greedy and soulless by comparison. I'm more willing to patronize places that do good things than greedy soulless places.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

It depends on how you look at it, really. The reality of how we operate right now is that we pay high taxes to subsidize private capitalist enterprise. A restructuring of the economic capital system wouldn't necessarily raise taxes per se and would guarantee a lot more economic security than we have now (mandatory profit-sharing schemes, worker co-op structures, executive pay caps, etc...).

Like Bozo before you, I believe you are technically correct here and probably soft-shoeing it a bit. My only point was that the agreements/concessions/approvals needed to make these architectural and fundamental changes won't happen short of a revolution or something. Incremental/continuous change can't work when you have the pendulum swinging from end to end, you end up with a Frankenstein monster.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Bat Guano said:

CSB.

Dueling anecdotes: One time many years ago I was walking down the drag and happened on a pizza place (I don't remember which one) giving out free pizza to the homeless. I wasn't homeless but as a broke graduate student I was hungry, so I had a couple of slices and chatted with the homeless folk for a while. So it comes down to corporate policy; if giving away food was prohibited by the city or whoever, the pizza place didn't give a fuck and did it anyway. According to the people there, it was a daily thing. Tiff's treats seems greedy and soulless by comparison. I'm more willing to patronize places that do good things than greedy soulless places.

I don't think we disagree here. Your one-location/mom-and-pop shop doesn't care about moral hazards and shifts in a few dollars because they have no scale and it's largely a lifestyle business. Your corporations/franchises with stake and shareholders are terrified of the numbers. So essentially your argument is "eat local/small business and avoid corporations....man."

[bad_teammate 13125]

3 minutes ago, Bat Guano said:

Tiff's treats seems greedy and soulless by comparison. I'm more willing to patronize places that do good things than greedy soulless places.

And if it's the case that it is simply businesses throwing away edible food, that should be stopped by government policy as well.

[relapse98 634]

23 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

I live in a small town that has one little donut shop.  I asked the lady what they did with all their leftover donuts and such.  She said they had to throw them away now.  Can't even feed them to pigs.  She used to donate the surplus to the nursing homes in the neighboring town but they can't do that anymore due to Texas Health codes. 

There's either more to the story or there is education needed.

She most certainly feed it to pigs. The farmer would need to apply for, and get, a max $25/year permit from the Texas Department of Agriculture.

 

 

[pyrohornIII 4801]

36 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

There's either more to the story or there is education needed.

She most certainly feed it to pigs. The farmer would need to apply for, and get, a max $25/year permit from the Texas Department of Agriculture.

 

 

I'm pretty sure it has to be boiled/cooked before to a certain temperature to give it to pigs.  At least pigs whose meat might end up in the public food chain.  The prison system does that with all its kitchen waste.  Big steamer trailers are used.   I would guess she could give it to some local guy who just raises pigs for his own consumption.  Not a whole lot of those guys around anymore though.