Help feed the poor... with expensive cereal and junk foods

[FireLane]

I got this charity solicitation from a church-run food pantry. The letter talks about how badly they need donations to feed the poor and how important it is to stretch every dollar as far as possible. As proof, they enclosed a receipt of the cost to provide "modest meals for a family of 4 for a week":





... except, this receipt includes raisin bran (5.29), corn flakes (6.99!!), tortilla chips (4.59), a whole chicken (15.71!), fruit juice (4.49) and chocolate cookies (5.52). Of the $75 spent, over $42 went to luxury meat and packaged junk food! This is pretty damn far from a "modest" selection.

It's not a total disaster. They also bought rice, peanut butter, dry peas, tomato sauce, pasta and other non-perishable staples. But they could easily have reduced this grocery bill by half while still supplying just as many meals, and they'd be more nutritious in the bargain.

Instead of expensive sugary cereal, they could've bought a big bag of rolled oats. No harder to prepare than cereal, and much better for you. Whole wheat bread would be better and more filling than tortilla chips. If money is such a concern, I'd have skipped the meat entirely, but if you absolutely have to have it, there are cheaper cuts than 3.49/lb for chicken. Or get eggs (at wholesale prices) for protein. And it should go without saying - don't buy sugary fruit juice or cookies if you're living so close to the edge that your kids are in danger of going hungry!

Look, I get it. Poor people don't always have ready access to a kitchen, or time to cook if they do, so convenience matters. But even taking that into account, there are better choices than these. If this is what they consider stretching a dollar, I'd have serious second thoughts about donating to this charity.

[Morning Glory]

Those prices seem high even for the canned stuff, pasta, and rice. The receipt is from NYC though.  Perhaps they only have access to high priced corner shops with limited selections.

[Askel]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.   

[iris lily]

You aren’t going to win this argument. The opposing side says we have to give people what they want to eat.

“Big bag of rolled oats…”.  Ha haha. Hahaha…

Ok, that is rude of me, sorry. but no. The sugary sweet expensive cereal is what they want.

Each and every time we delve into what people who don’t buy their own food should have to eat, this we learn anything they want is the best answer because why should they be denied basic things like food? Ee are a rich country, we can afford to give them that! Where is your humanity?!!!and etc.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

You aren’t going to win this argument. The opposing side says we have to give people what they want to eat.

“Big bag of rolled oats…”.  Ha haha. Hahaha…

Ok, that is rude of me, sorry. but no. The sugary sweet expensive cereal is what they want.

Each and every time we delve into what people who don’t buy their own food should have to eat, this we learn anything they want is the best answer because why should they be denied basic things like food? Ee are a rich country, we can afford to give them that! Where is your humanity?!!!and etc.

Each side is having an entirely different argument.

One side is debating whether people who aren't paying their own way should be able to dictate what other people provide for them (i.e. "beggars who are choosers").
The other side is debating whether everyone should have an equal right to some of the surplus wealth sloshing around in an extremely wealthy economy.

[FireLane]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

No, it doesn't do either of those things. But if the food pantry doesn't have enough to feed everyone who wants it, every $7 box of corn flakes or $5 bottle of flavored sugar water they buy does mean that someone else has to be turned away empty-handed.

When you have limited resources, you should be thinking carefully about how to do the most good for the greatest number. Prepackaged junk food is both less nutritious and more expensive than other things they could be giving out.

[Mrs. Fire Lane]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

We buy off brand sugar cereal in New York City and it’s $2.50, not $7. That’s the issue.

[Morning Glory]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

No, it doesn't do either of those things. But if the food pantry doesn't have enough to feed everyone who wants it, every $7 box of corn flakes or $5 bottle of flavored sugar water they buy does mean that someone else has to be turned away empty-handed.

When you have limited resources, you should be thinking carefully about how to do the most good for the greatest number. Prepackaged junk food is both less nutritious and more expensive than other things they could be giving out.

I think the receipt was an example of what things cost to retail customers at area bodegas. The food pantry can get things much cheaper in bulk, and probably healthier items as well.

[GuitarStv]

Anything other than lentils, rice, and a multivitamin is (of course) an unmitigated extravagance.  That is, assuming that subsistence survival is the goal for assistance in the richest country in the world.

FWIW, I think it's reasonable to provide people with food they want to eat.  Even if it's food that I wouldn't necessarily purchase/eat.

[Brit71]

I've recently started doing some voluntary work in a foodbank and there is some demand for sugary stuff that's not much good for you but a lot of this is because of not just lack of cookery skills but also because there's really not much idea of how to plan and useful food to have on hand just in case.

And the thing is that as someone who is comfortably off, I have just as bad habits and just as poor skills.

[YttriumNitrate]

Based on the wording of the letter, it seems like those where the items the food pantry had in stock for the week, so they went to the local store and created a receipt using the most expensive items they could find. For example, the corn flakes shown in the picture do not appear to be name brand, but I'd guess the ones in the receipt were Kellogg's brand.

[GuitarStv]

Based on the wording of the letter, it seems like those where the items the food pantry had in stock for the week, so they went to the local store and created a receipt using the most expensive items they could find. For example, the corn flakes shown in the picture do not appear to be name brand, but I'd guess the ones in the receipt were Kellogg's brand.

You have to spring for name brand corn flakes though.  Dr. Kellogg designed corn flakes to stop children from masturbating (https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/32042/corn-flakes-were-invented-part-anti-masturbation-crusade).  Who knows what could happen if you feed kids off brands?

[Metalcat]

Based on the wording of the letter, it seems like those where the items the food pantry had in stock for the week, so they went to the local store and created a receipt using the most expensive items they could find. For example, the corn flakes shown in the picture do not appear to be name brand, but I'd guess the ones in the receipt were Kellogg's brand.

You have to spring for name brand corn flakes though.  Dr. Kellogg designed corn flakes to stop children from masturbating (https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/32042/corn-flakes-were-invented-part-anti-masturbation-crusade).  Who knows what could happen if you feed kids off brands?

Sure, but his brother Will was the one who added sugar to cereal to actually sell it to people. The brothers despised each other.

[Imma]

I'm actually surprised they included a whole chicken in the list. That's a lot of work to prepare and not everyone would know how to do it / have access to an oven and oven dish to prepare it in. Of course meat is expensive but when we were on a low income I'd try to buy a whole or half chicken every now and then, because that's a lot of meals in one purchase.

Obviously some things could be purchased for much cheaper or skipped entirely (like the cereal, cookies, grapefruit juice, tortilla chips) but all in all this is much more healthy than what most people buy in the grocery store.  I mean, rice, several kinds of beans, chickpeas, beets, tomato sauce, chicken.... could be a lot worse.

And seconded that cereal makes a lot of sense for those in a really terrible situation because it keeps forever, you can eat it dry if you have to, you don't have to spend time and energy to prepare it. Oatmeal is healthier and cheaper and I eat it every day but you need milk and you need to watch it on the stove for 15 minutes, and people generally add some sort of fruit, raisins, cinnamon etc to make it taste better. It's  a frugal option if you have a bit of time and a pantry full of toppings you bought in bulk.

[Metalcat]

I'm actually surprised they included a whole chicken in the list. That's a lot of work to prepare and not everyone would know how to do it / have access to an oven and oven dish to prepare it in. Of course meat is expensive but when we were on a low income I'd try to buy a whole or half chicken every now and then, because that's a lot of meals in one purchase.

Obviously some things could be purchased for much cheaper or skipped entirely (like the cereal, cookies, grapefruit juice, tortilla chips) but all in all this is much more healthy than what most people buy in the grocery store.  I mean, rice, several kinds of beans, chickpeas, beets, tomato sauce, chicken.... could be a lot worse.

And seconded that cereal makes a lot of sense for those in a really terrible situation because it keeps forever, you can eat it dry if you have to, you don't have to spend time and energy to prepare it. Oatmeal is healthier and cheaper and I eat it every day but you need milk and you need to watch it on the stove for 15 minutes, and people generally add some sort of fruit, raisins, cinnamon etc to make it taste better. It's  a frugal option if you have a bit of time and a pantry full of toppings you bought in bulk.

Huh...I would much prefer eat oatmeal without milk than dry cereal.
Actually, I never have oatmeal with milk, I find it gross and soupy.

[charis]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

[Metalcat]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

There really are two different conversations going on here though.

Those criticizing the list aren't criticizing feeding these things to poor people, they're criticizing an inefficient use of resources for feeding people who are starving/malnourished.

If an organization only has so many dollars to spend, buying fewer, expensive, nutrient poor options doesn't seem like the most optimal way to fend of malnutrition and starvation among their many, many people they are saying they need to feed.

I personally grew up very, very poor and we never had commercial cereal because it was too much of a waste of money. My dad made us a muesli of ground rolled oats, raisins, peanuts, and stale bread. We are it mostly with water, but sometimes with milk when it was on sale.

Obviously people not knowing how to cook with staples is a major issue, as is not having time if someone is working multiple jobs, commuting hours a day by bus, etc.

I'm not one of those people to say "I did it, so everyone else should." My point was just that cereal, to me, has always been an ultra-processed, luxury snack that mostly gets its nutritional value from being drenched in milk, which is also a premium grocery item.

It's the same way Kraft dinner always gets donated to food banks, but many poor folks can't afford the milk and butter required to make it taste good. It's actually a luxury item.

For the cost of supplying people with cereal, tortilla chips, etc, it would be cheaper for someone to bulk cook a nutritious rice and beans meal and send it home with people ready-made just needing to be reheated.

So again, those arguing against this are just commenting on how it's not a very efficient strategy for getting nutrients into people who need them. Not a commentary on whether or not it's okay to give a poor person expensive foods.

Of course it is, and if there were endless resources, I would say to give them whatever they want. If they want to eat gobs of ultra-processed crap like wealthier Americans, that's their prerogative, who am I to judge?

But if I'm an organization with limited resources trying to fend off starvation and malnutrition among a growing population of people who can't afford food, I'm probably not going to make the same choices listed in that receipt.

[GuitarStv]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

There really are two different conversations going on here though.

Those criticizing the list aren't criticizing feeding these things to poor people, they're criticizing an inefficient use of resources for feeding people who are starving/malnourished.

If an organization only has so many dollars to spend, buying fewer, expensive, nutrient poor options doesn't seem like the most optimal way to fend of malnutrition and starvation among their many, many people they are saying they need to feed.

I personally grew up very, very poor and we never had commercial cereal because it was too much of a waste of money. My dad made us a muesli of ground rolled oats, raisins, peanuts, and stale bread. We are it mostly with water, but sometimes with milk when it was on sale.

Obviously people not knowing how to cook with staples is a major issue, as is not having time if someone is working multiple jobs, commuting hours a day by bus, etc.

I'm not one of those people to say "I did it, so everyone else should." My point was just that cereal, to me, has always been an ultra-processed, luxury snack that mostly gets its nutritional value from being drenched in milk, which is also a premium grocery item.

It's the same way Kraft dinner always gets donated to food banks, but many poor folks can't afford the milk and butter required to make it taste good. It's actually a luxury item.

For the cost of supplying people with cereal, tortilla chips, etc, it would be cheaper for someone to bulk cook a nutritious rice and beans meal and send it home with people ready-made just needing to be reheated.

So again, those arguing against this are just commenting on how it's not a very efficient strategy for getting nutrients into people who need them. Not a commentary on whether or not it's okay to give a poor person expensive foods.

Of course it is, and if there were endless resources, I would say to give them whatever they want. If they want to eat gobs of ultra-processed crap like wealthier Americans, that's their prerogative, who am I to judge?

But if I'm an organization with limited resources trying to fend off starvation and malnutrition among a growing population of people who can't afford food, I'm probably not going to make the same choices listed in that receipt.

From an efficiency perspective, we should only provide poor families with rice, beans, and a daily multivitamin to cover the lack of fruit/vegetable.

I suspect though, that any place providing food to the poor wouldn't look too good if they were found to be doing this and would be forced to change policies when the outrage at treating their clientele like calorie sinks rather than humans became well known.  So I bet that you would make the same (or similar choices) regardless of the limited resources your organization has.

[RetiredAt63]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

There really are two different conversations going on here though.

Those criticizing the list aren't criticizing feeding these things to poor people, they're criticizing an inefficient use of resources for feeding people who are starving/malnourished.

If an organization only has so many dollars to spend, buying fewer, expensive, nutrient poor options doesn't seem like the most optimal way to fend of malnutrition and starvation among their many, many people they are saying they need to feed.

I personally grew up very, very poor and we never had commercial cereal because it was too much of a waste of money. My dad made us a muesli of ground rolled oats, raisins, peanuts, and stale bread. We are it mostly with water, but sometimes with milk when it was on sale.

Obviously people not knowing how to cook with staples is a major issue, as is not having time if someone is working multiple jobs, commuting hours a day by bus, etc.

I'm not one of those people to say "I did it, so everyone else should." My point was just that cereal, to me, has always been an ultra-processed, luxury snack that mostly gets its nutritional value from being drenched in milk, which is also a premium grocery item.

It's the same way Kraft dinner always gets donated to food banks, but many poor folks can't afford the milk and butter required to make it taste good. It's actually a luxury item.

For the cost of supplying people with cereal, tortilla chips, etc, it would be cheaper for someone to bulk cook a nutritious rice and beans meal and send it home with people ready-made just needing to be reheated.

So again, those arguing against this are just commenting on how it's not a very efficient strategy for getting nutrients into people who need them. Not a commentary on whether or not it's okay to give a poor person expensive foods.

Of course it is, and if there were endless resources, I would say to give them whatever they want. If they want to eat gobs of ultra-processed crap like wealthier Americans, that's their prerogative, who am I to judge?

But if I'm an organization with limited resources trying to fend off starvation and malnutrition among a growing population of people who can't afford food, I'm probably not going to make the same choices listed in that receipt.

Looking at some of Malcat's points, I am wondering if part of the overall issue is the lack of cooking time/skills.  Group kitchens where volunteers could make large meals and then have people pick them up seems like a very sensible idea.   Certainly more efficient in terms of the time and energy needed to make a meal - an industrial kitchen should be much more energy efficient than a bunch of people each in their own kitchen, especially if where they live the kitchens are really not very good.  Of course that means that the supplier needs to be flexible in timing since people work so many different hours and have varying commutes.

I'm not thinking group cooking and freezing, since that assumes lots of refrigerator/freezer space.  Just a situation where someone could pick up dinner for their family instead of having to cook.

The other aspect is cooking classes - assuming the people using the food bank have the time to attend them.  But unfamiliar ingredients will just not get used, if people don't know how to cook them.

I didn't like Home Ec back in grade 7, but looking back that is becasue I already knew 90% of what we were doing in class.  But it would have been great to have if I hadn't already known those things.

[lhamo]

This food bank needs to fire their PR person.  Any food bank that is actually paying these kinds of prices to secure a diverse range of healthy foods is incredibly poorly managed. 

I volunteered at our local food bank for several months.  Almost ALL of their food came from local stores (including Trader Joe's) that pulled and donated as things neared their sell-by date.  They had a multi-person volunteer team and at least two vans doing "grocery rescue" runs five days/week.  When they did buy things to supplement, it was typically direct from distributors/warehouses.  They would NEVER waste their resources paying retail prices on things, esp. not at NYC prices.

If you actually volunteer at a food bank you may find what I did -- most clients were eager to get as much of the healthier stuff as they could.  We often ran out of fresh produce the most quickly.  Good quality meat also went quickly. 

[Imma]

I'm actually surprised they included a whole chicken in the list. That's a lot of work to prepare and not everyone would know how to do it / have access to an oven and oven dish to prepare it in. Of course meat is expensive but when we were on a low income I'd try to buy a whole or half chicken every now and then, because that's a lot of meals in one purchase.

Obviously some things could be purchased for much cheaper or skipped entirely (like the cereal, cookies, grapefruit juice, tortilla chips) but all in all this is much more healthy than what most people buy in the grocery store.  I mean, rice, several kinds of beans, chickpeas, beets, tomato sauce, chicken.... could be a lot worse.

And seconded that cereal makes a lot of sense for those in a really terrible situation because it keeps forever, you can eat it dry if you have to, you don't have to spend time and energy to prepare it. Oatmeal is healthier and cheaper and I eat it every day but you need milk and you need to watch it on the stove for 15 minutes, and people generally add some sort of fruit, raisins, cinnamon etc to make it taste better. It's  a frugal option if you have a bit of time and a pantry full of toppings you bought in bulk.

Huh...I would much prefer eat oatmeal without milk than dry cereal.
Actually, I never have oatmeal with milk, I find it gross and soupy.

What do you prepare it with, water? I'm not a fan of cereal but I know lots of people eat it dry. Eating dry oatmeal would be like eating sawdust.

[Metalcat]

I'm actually surprised they included a whole chicken in the list. That's a lot of work to prepare and not everyone would know how to do it / have access to an oven and oven dish to prepare it in. Of course meat is expensive but when we were on a low income I'd try to buy a whole or half chicken every now and then, because that's a lot of meals in one purchase.

Obviously some things could be purchased for much cheaper or skipped entirely (like the cereal, cookies, grapefruit juice, tortilla chips) but all in all this is much more healthy than what most people buy in the grocery store.  I mean, rice, several kinds of beans, chickpeas, beets, tomato sauce, chicken.... could be a lot worse.

And seconded that cereal makes a lot of sense for those in a really terrible situation because it keeps forever, you can eat it dry if you have to, you don't have to spend time and energy to prepare it. Oatmeal is healthier and cheaper and I eat it every day but you need milk and you need to watch it on the stove for 15 minutes, and people generally add some sort of fruit, raisins, cinnamon etc to make it taste better. It's  a frugal option if you have a bit of time and a pantry full of toppings you bought in bulk.

Huh...I would much prefer eat oatmeal without milk than dry cereal.
Actually, I never have oatmeal with milk, I find it gross and soupy.

What do you prepare it with, water? I'm not a fan of cereal but I know lots of people eat it dry. Eating dry oatmeal would be like eating sawdust.

Well, to be fair, dried oats aren't oatmeal, they're just oats, and no, I don't just eat heaps of dried oats.

I do cook it with water. Do people normally cook their oatmeal in milk???? I've never seen this, nor have I ever seen a recipe for it. Not saying it doesn't exist, but I've recently looked up many, many steel cut oats recipes for my instant pot and not once have I seen milk instead of water.

I have seen milk/coconut milk in overnight oats recipes though, so it's not that odd, I suppose.

I've only ever seen it cooked with water, and then people pour milk on it, which is what makes it dreadfully soupy for my taste.
I generally cook it less watery, so more of a risotto consistency, rather than a runny consistency. I don't like soupy, runny oatmeal.

[Metalcat]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

There really are two different conversations going on here though.

Those criticizing the list aren't criticizing feeding these things to poor people, they're criticizing an inefficient use of resources for feeding people who are starving/malnourished.

If an organization only has so many dollars to spend, buying fewer, expensive, nutrient poor options doesn't seem like the most optimal way to fend of malnutrition and starvation among their many, many people they are saying they need to feed.

I personally grew up very, very poor and we never had commercial cereal because it was too much of a waste of money. My dad made us a muesli of ground rolled oats, raisins, peanuts, and stale bread. We are it mostly with water, but sometimes with milk when it was on sale.

Obviously people not knowing how to cook with staples is a major issue, as is not having time if someone is working multiple jobs, commuting hours a day by bus, etc.

I'm not one of those people to say "I did it, so everyone else should." My point was just that cereal, to me, has always been an ultra-processed, luxury snack that mostly gets its nutritional value from being drenched in milk, which is also a premium grocery item.

It's the same way Kraft dinner always gets donated to food banks, but many poor folks can't afford the milk and butter required to make it taste good. It's actually a luxury item.

For the cost of supplying people with cereal, tortilla chips, etc, it would be cheaper for someone to bulk cook a nutritious rice and beans meal and send it home with people ready-made just needing to be reheated.

So again, those arguing against this are just commenting on how it's not a very efficient strategy for getting nutrients into people who need them. Not a commentary on whether or not it's okay to give a poor person expensive foods.

Of course it is, and if there were endless resources, I would say to give them whatever they want. If they want to eat gobs of ultra-processed crap like wealthier Americans, that's their prerogative, who am I to judge?

But if I'm an organization with limited resources trying to fend off starvation and malnutrition among a growing population of people who can't afford food, I'm probably not going to make the same choices listed in that receipt.

From an efficiency perspective, we should only provide poor families with rice, beans, and a daily multivitamin to cover the lack of fruit/vegetable.

I suspect though, that any place providing food to the poor wouldn't look too good if they were found to be doing this and would be forced to change policies when the outrage at treating their clientele like calorie sinks rather than humans became well known.  So I bet that you would make the same (or similar choices) regardless of the limited resources your organization has.

IDK, I've worked at many shelters and soup kitchens, we primarily depended on subsistence-type foods to feed people in need. A LOT of bean soups were made.

[GuitarStv]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

Agreed, this list is not bad, although the price of the cereal and chicken seems a little high.  Cereal is something that kids are generally willing to eat when they aren't in the mood for much else, plus it's a safe snack if their parents aren't home or are unable to cook.  And god forbid a family gets a treat like tortilla chips.

There really are two different conversations going on here though.

Those criticizing the list aren't criticizing feeding these things to poor people, they're criticizing an inefficient use of resources for feeding people who are starving/malnourished.

If an organization only has so many dollars to spend, buying fewer, expensive, nutrient poor options doesn't seem like the most optimal way to fend of malnutrition and starvation among their many, many people they are saying they need to feed.

I personally grew up very, very poor and we never had commercial cereal because it was too much of a waste of money. My dad made us a muesli of ground rolled oats, raisins, peanuts, and stale bread. We are it mostly with water, but sometimes with milk when it was on sale.

Obviously people not knowing how to cook with staples is a major issue, as is not having time if someone is working multiple jobs, commuting hours a day by bus, etc.

I'm not one of those people to say "I did it, so everyone else should." My point was just that cereal, to me, has always been an ultra-processed, luxury snack that mostly gets its nutritional value from being drenched in milk, which is also a premium grocery item.

It's the same way Kraft dinner always gets donated to food banks, but many poor folks can't afford the milk and butter required to make it taste good. It's actually a luxury item.

For the cost of supplying people with cereal, tortilla chips, etc, it would be cheaper for someone to bulk cook a nutritious rice and beans meal and send it home with people ready-made just needing to be reheated.

So again, those arguing against this are just commenting on how it's not a very efficient strategy for getting nutrients into people who need them. Not a commentary on whether or not it's okay to give a poor person expensive foods.

Of course it is, and if there were endless resources, I would say to give them whatever they want. If they want to eat gobs of ultra-processed crap like wealthier Americans, that's their prerogative, who am I to judge?

But if I'm an organization with limited resources trying to fend off starvation and malnutrition among a growing population of people who can't afford food, I'm probably not going to make the same choices listed in that receipt.

From an efficiency perspective, we should only provide poor families with rice, beans, and a daily multivitamin to cover the lack of fruit/vegetable.

I suspect though, that any place providing food to the poor wouldn't look too good if they were found to be doing this and would be forced to change policies when the outrage at treating their clientele like calorie sinks rather than humans became well known.  So I bet that you would make the same (or similar choices) regardless of the limited resources your organization has.

IDK, I've worked at many shelters and soup kitchens, we primarily depended on subsistence-type foods to feed people in need. A LOT of bean soups were made.

Did you waste money on flavouring for the soup?  Or just straight beans and water?

'Cause if you were flavouring the bean soup you were not optimizing for subsistence nutrition.


:P

[Metalcat]

This food bank needs to fire their PR person.  Any food bank that is actually paying these kinds of prices to secure a diverse range of healthy foods is incredibly poorly managed. 

I volunteered at our local food bank for several months.  Almost ALL of their food came from local stores (including Trader Joe's) that pulled and donated as things neared their sell-by date.  They had a multi-person volunteer team and at least two vans doing "grocery rescue" runs five days/week.  When they did buy things to supplement, it was typically direct from distributors/warehouses.  They would NEVER waste their resources paying retail prices on things, esp. not at NYC prices.

If you actually volunteer at a food bank you may find what I did -- most clients were eager to get as much of the healthier stuff as they could.  We often ran out of fresh produce the most quickly.  Good quality meat also went quickly.

This too.

My comment earlier was more about why people were reacting negatively, but in reality, my opinion is that this food bill just doesn't make much sense for a food charity.

None of the charities I've worked for buy food at retail prices. And yeah, nutritious foods have always been in high demand with the populations I worked with. Even when I was working with IV drug addicts living on the street, they often requested fresh produce. Apples were like solid gold.

[Metalcat]

Did you waste money on flavouring for the soup?  Or just straight beans and water?

'Cause if you were flavouring the bean soup you were not optimizing for subsistence nutrition.


:P

I forget how obnoxiously literal you can be, lol.

[PDXTabs]

C'mon man, give them a break- they're poor, their life sucks enough- let 'em have a damn box of off brand cereal.  Giving people too much ready to eat cereal is neither bankrupting society or keeping them poor.

The amount of processed carbs in that basket might literally be keeping them poor. But I won't complain about the meat.

[StarBright]

This food bank needs to fire their PR person.  Any food bank that is actually paying these kinds of prices to secure a diverse range of healthy foods is incredibly poorly managed. 

I volunteered at our local food bank for several months.  Almost ALL of their food came from local stores (including Trader Joe's) that pulled and donated as things neared their sell-by date.  They had a multi-person volunteer team and at least two vans doing "grocery rescue" runs five days/week.  When they did buy things to supplement, it was typically direct from distributors/warehouses.  They would NEVER waste their resources paying retail prices on things, esp. not at NYC prices.

If you actually volunteer at a food bank you may find what I did -- most clients were eager to get as much of the healthier stuff as they could.  We often ran out of fresh produce the most quickly.  Good quality meat also went quickly.

I laughed at the PR thing. Our all volunteer run food pantry had a mini PR crisis last year and had to send out an explainer/make the rounds at area churches because there were complaints that we were wasting money on fancy ready to eat meals.

About 15% of our clients live out of motels and a lot of the food we offered wasn't a good fit for them. So we ran a survey asking what would help people. Cereal, boxed milk, and microwavable packet meals (think Tasty Bite curry)  were the most requested.

It was a surprising amount of effort to explain what we were doing and it drained a lot of my volunteer energy last year.

I also agree that our clients take fresh food whenever it is available. We always run out of produce, bread, and eggs if we get more than 20 clients during operating hours.

[RetiredAt63]

I've always given money to my local food bank instead of donating actual food - I know they can do better shopping with my money.  When we have had food drives as part of an activity I always bought canned meat - because meat is always an expensive part of the diet.

So yes, that original post and receipt just don't make much sense.

[MustachioedPistachio]

@Malcat...the local Kroger brand oatmeal suggests milk or water for preparation. I sometimes do half milk & half water, but it gets too fussy, so I typically stick to just water. I do add plenty of butter though heh.

[Morning Glory]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

[Metalcat]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

[Dicey]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

[Morning Glory]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

 I also think i remember when a science teacher held a magnet over corn flakes and all the shavings came out. It doesn't make sense to put it in cereal though because the calcium qnd phosphorus in the milk would hinder the absorption.  Small kids usually eat cereal dry though,  so maybe they are the target audience???

You can also get enough iron in your diet by cooking in iron pans or putting one of these figurines in with your soup:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_iron_fish

[Metalcat]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

Yep, iron shavings.

[MrsP]

This is tough. First, $75 for a family of 4 for a week isn't terrible. That is $2.67 per day, per person. In NYC. The chicken is the only meat they would have. Having grown up really poor there are a few things that come to mind:
 
Bugs -- Everything needs to be airtight or put in the fridge (presuming of course that you have a working fridge)
Appliances -- In bigger cities, these don't always come with the apartment. Even when they do, they don't always work. Landlords in lower-income areas don't actually fix things because people can't afford to take them to court. A microwave and a minifridge might be the only thing available. And even those can be luxuries.
Pots/Pans/cooking implements -- not in big supply.

Live like this for a couple of generations and no one knows how to cook even when things get better.

The prices listed make me want to hyperventilate. But that is probably what people would have to pay retail in their food desert, not what the food bank paying.

I think people in those situations don't want to waste food, so they lean toward the foods that won't go bad, and yes, bring some comfort.

[charis]

This is tough. First, $75 for a family of 4 for a week isn't terrible. That is $2.67 per day, per person. In NYC. The chicken is the only meat they would have. Having grown up really poor there are a few things that come to mind:
 
Bugs -- Everything needs to be airtight or put in the fridge (presuming of course that you have a working fridge)
Appliances -- In bigger cities, these don't always come with the apartment. Even when they do, they don't always work. Landlords in lower-income areas don't actually fix things because people can't afford to take them to court. A microwave and a minifridge might be the only thing available. And even those can be luxuries.
Pots/Pans/cooking implements -- not in big supply.

Live like this for a couple of generations and no one knows how to cook even when things get better.

The prices listed make me want to hyperventilate. But that is probably what people would have to pay retail in their food desert, not what the food bank paying.

I think people in those situations don't want to waste food, so they lean toward the foods that won't go bad, and yes, bring some comfort.

All of this.

[GuitarStv]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

Yep, iron shavings.

Holy crap, I didn't know that!

[Metalcat]

This is tough. First, $75 for a family of 4 for a week isn't terrible. That is $2.67 per day, per person. In NYC. The chicken is the only meat they would have. Having grown up really poor there are a few things that come to mind:
 
Bugs -- Everything needs to be airtight or put in the fridge (presuming of course that you have a working fridge)
Appliances -- In bigger cities, these don't always come with the apartment. Even when they do, they don't always work. Landlords in lower-income areas don't actually fix things because people can't afford to take them to court. A microwave and a minifridge might be the only thing available. And even those can be luxuries.
Pots/Pans/cooking implements -- not in big supply.

Live like this for a couple of generations and no one knows how to cook even when things get better.

The prices listed make me want to hyperventilate. But that is probably what people would have to pay retail in their food desert, not what the food bank paying.

I think people in those situations don't want to waste food, so they lean toward the foods that won't go bad, and yes, bring some comfort.

To be fair, we don't know that these are foods that the people receiving them would choose for themselves.

Also, yes, bugs can be an issue, which was a reason my dad gave me for not buying cereal incidentally. Also, a whole chicken is a pretty intimidating thing for someone if we're concerned about cooking skills and appliances.

That said, there are usually a lot of factors that influence what gets purchased for these types of programs, and they're rarely based on what people want or even what's best for them. It's usually based on what can be gotten cheap from suppliers.

[Metalcat]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

Yep, iron shavings.

Holy crap, I didn't know that!

This little head of mine is filled with these kind of useless facts.

[RetiredAt63]

Actually, a whole chicken needs an oven or crock pot and a lot of electricity to cook. Of course if it is cost effective for the food bank it can always be cut into pieces by the cook. And as a lot of cooking demonstrates, there are lots of recipes that cook fast when the meat is in small pieces.

I used to worry about cooking skills, but there is so much available on line now that it is not an issue for anyone who wants to learn.

[PoutineLover]

I think there are a lot of different ways to get food to people, and it's impossible to optimize for everything. I volunteer for a program that gives a set amount for each recipient every two weeks, and they make a list and I do the shopping. It's less efficient financially, because I can't get bulk deals or shop sales really, but it ensures that they get just what they need and that there is no waste. Sometimes there's stuff on the list that seems unhealthy, like ice cream or frozen pizza, but for the most part they ask for healthy staples like eggs, milk, produce, oil, meat, etc. and everyone deserves a treat sometimes. They also have health issues and require low sodium or lactose free options, which would be less likely to be accommodated in a generic box of canned or shelf stable foods from a food bank.

[Imma]

@Malcat I've literally never heard of people preparing it with water if they have milk on hand! We did half/half milk/water growing up when we were running out of milk.

My coworkers and I all love oats so we were discussing our favourite recipes just today. Everyone prepares theirs with milk and I've learned about a few new toppings that I'd never considered! One coworker eats it with walnuts and honey. I just buy kilo bags of frozen red fruit and add a scoop to my bowl, as well as a scoop of seeds and nut mix.  Aside from dairy millk I also really like oat milk, not a fan of soy milk for oatmeal.

[RetiredAt63]

@Malcat I've literally never heard of people preparing it with water if they have milk on hand! We did half/half milk/water growing up when we were running out of milk.

My coworkers and I all love oats so we were discussing our favourite recipes just today. Everyone prepares theirs with milk and I've learned about a few new toppings that I'd never considered! One coworker eats it with walnuts and honey. I just buy kilo bags of frozen red fruit and add a scoop to my bowl, as well as a scoop of seeds and nut mix.  Aside from dairy millk I also really like oat milk, not a fan of soy milk for oatmeal.

We always used water.  Cooked it nice and thick so the milk didn't make it runny.

[Cassie]

Retired at 63, I always made and eat oatmeal the same as you. Locally we had many families living in motels so didn’t have anyway to cook and very often not even a small refrigerator. As a former social worker many people don’t understand all the obstacles some poor people face. Plus depending on their living situation obstacles will vary. Then food banks get criticized on how they spend the money. It’s a complicated situation.

[ixtap]

I always cooked oatmeal in a saucepan with milk. I pretty much stopped eating it after becoming lactose intolerant because the plant milks are either too sticky or don't have the right consistency (it should be like rice pudding).  I agree adding milk after cooking it with water would be too runny and wouldn't add much flavor.

I remember my nutrition teacher in college saying cereal isn't the worst thing for people who don't have much time/inclination to eat properly,  since it pretty much has a multivitamin crushed up in every serving. At least nobody will get pellagra. That's why they gave it to us at school.

In my Chemistry of Food, Drugs, and Health class our first experiment was to extract the metal shavings out of cereal. By "fortified" with iron they mean they dump a bunch of metal shavings into it, lol.

Seriously???

Yep, iron shavings.

Holy crap, I didn't know that!

This little head of mine is filled with these kind of useless facts.

We used to do this at home. Mom just mentioned it to her grandkids and they seemed a bit shocked.

[herbgeek]

I didn't assume the receipt was for an actual client- I assumed they were trying to show the middle class folks they wanted to donate a relatable example in order to get over the "$75 for a  week!  Are they feeding them filet mignon?" attitudes.  So they picked some relatable items that a middle class family would typically have (including some treats and show how $75 doesn't typically go that far.

[Sanitary Stache]

Regarding oatmeal, I cook it thick in water and mix it with cream of wheat, we eat rolled oats because they are available from a local farm.  Then I offer the kids "toppings".  My middle child takes milk, an egg, nutritional yeast, jelly, maple syrup and peanut butter (usually either peanut butter or an egg and I sometimes pretend we don't have jelly if he wants maple syrup too).

I agree that receipt is bad food shelf PR, but I also believe that most people have an over abundance of ignorance when it comes to food.  For instance, iron shavings in cereal or the life of a $3.69/lb chicken.

[Metalcat]

I didn't assume the receipt was for an actual client- I assumed they were trying to show the middle class folks they wanted to donate a relatable example in order to get over the "$75 for a  week!  Are they feeding them filet mignon?" attitudes.  So they picked some relatable items that a middle class family would typically have (including some treats and show how $75 doesn't typically go that far.

huh...good point

[glacio09]

I didn't assume the receipt was for an actual client- I assumed they were trying to show the middle class folks they wanted to donate a relatable example in order to get over the "$75 for a  week!  Are they feeding them filet mignon?" attitudes.  So they picked some relatable items that a middle class family would typically have (including some treats and show how $75 doesn't typically go that far.

Yep that's how I read it. Especially since it's in Manhattan and they are appealing to people who probably don't do much cooking on their own and have never had to do a week's shopping, never mind for four people.