People in Need Don't Need Mac & Cheese

Food drives still sending the message that charity means giving the bare minimum. 

In researching another posting, I ran across this ad on the web site of the Arizona Republic newspaper for a summer food drive.  Here's what's for dinner:

Items needed: canned beans, tuna, canned vegetables, macaroni                 and cheese, peanut butter, jelly, dry pasta, rice, boxed cereal,                 ramen noodles

And in an article covering the food drive we are told:

A $1 cash donation will show support with a Bashas’ icon on the store wall. A $25 cash donation will fill an average food box with enough food to feed a family of four for about a week. So whether it’s cash or a canned donation, every donation will be put to good use.

What do the sponsors of these drives think people eat?  Most food drives have a "most needed" list (like this flyer) that includes a lot more suggestions with protein, canned fruit, powdered milk, a mention of personal items like toothpaste & soap, and even coffee (which Americans enjoy regardless of their economic status). 

And what gives with the continued suggestion of a $1 gift at grocery check out?  Grocery stores now have a choice of $25 gift cards at check out for everything from food to DVDs, but the "suggested gift" for the poor at the checkout stand is still $1, $2, or $5. 

The $25 cash donation is a better idea, but the suggestion that it will feed a family of four for a week in the USA in 2006 is a bit of a stretch. 

The agencies benefitting from the food drive include the local Diocesan Council of St. Vincent de Paul (EIN 86-0096789 Form 990), which is a surprisingly large organization with income of about $30 million (about $14 million in-kind) and a staff of 200.  Their mission includes advocacy for the poor, so perhaps they could start to educate the food drive people about what it really costs to feed a family and what people (even poor people) really want and need to eat. 

Comments

[ティンバーランド]

ティンバーランド１２日に判明した政府の社会保障分野の一体改革素案（骨子案）は、来年の法案提出を検討してきた受診時定額負担制度の見送りを容認するなど、負担増を先送りしようとする民主党の主張に大幅に譲歩する内容となった。公務員の特権に切り込むことが期待された被用者年金一元化でも、公務員の優遇措置の存続に道を開く文言が盛り込まれた。「公平な負担」を旗印とした社会保障改革の看板は大きくゆがみつつある。

　ティンバーランド骨子案は、病院を訪れるたびに患者が１００円を上乗せして支払う受診時定額負担制度について「（導入見送りを掲げた）民主党ワーキングチームの報告を踏まえる」と記した。７０～７４歳の窓口負担の２割への引き上げでは「平成２４年度の対応については調整」と、その後の引き上げに含みを残したが、党側の猛反発で撤回に追いやられるのは確実な情勢だ。