Hunger? No. Now it is called suffering from 'food insecurity'

[Kadie]

Report: Fewer People in U.S. Are Hungry
By LIBBY QUAID, AP Food and Farm Writer

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 09 44 AM


(11-15) 09:44 PST WASHINGTON (AP) --


snip...
Last year, 35 million people suffered food insecurity, meaning they didn't have enough money or resources to get food. The number was 38 million in 2004.

The department had waited until after Election Day to issue the annual report, prompting accusations from Democrats that the Bush administration was playing politics with hunger.

Despite the positive news, the report is still drawing criticism, this time because analysts decided not to use the word "hunger" to describe how hungry people are.

"Changing the term and watering it down doesn't change the fact that 35 million Americans are in a constant struggle to put enough food on the table and to ward off hunger," said Jim Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center, an anti-hunger group.

snip...
The report found:

_ There were more people with very low food security — those who are worst off. The number was 10.8 million, up from 10.7 million in 2004.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2006/11/15/national/w094420S20.DTL

[sui generis]

1. technically speaking

If you aren't sure whether you will be able to put adequate food on the table you are food insecure.

You can be well fed and food insecure.

I think attacking the term is a disservice - it's intended to be a broader economic description of risk rather than an emotional "gut level" appeal to our empathy.

You might consider that truly malnourished and/or "hungry" people are a subset of the economically food insecure, but not the other way around.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. Yes. That's where my family is right now. Cupboard is full but

husband has worked very little in the past few weeks. :( What little money we have will go to bills not groceries.

[Lisa]

29. my prof wants me to start studying food insecurity

He challenged me to take a quiz which he'd developed for a class next year -- and I realized that I'm covered by this term. (addressing a point raised later in this thread ... I know it sounds like Georgie's administration's "Healthy Forests" type of newspeak, but it didn't originate with the Bushies -- I remember hearing about it much earlier, in the 1990s.) I may not be "hungry" or "malnourished" and I'm not showing any signs of vitamin deficiences, etc. -- but apparently things like having to compromise on the amount and quality of food because you're stretching to meet the next paycheck, is a sign of food insecurity. Even people in upper-middle-income households can experience it. As you say, sui generis -- "you can be well fed and food insecure". Defining it this way shows the problem is larger than expected. (Just as if we define illiteracy as only affecting those who absolutely cannot read in any language, we'd miss out on a lot of the population who are having difficulties.)
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050503/d050503b.htm

More than 1 out of 10 people in Canada are in these kinds of situations, and my prof says that this is something with serious economic and social repercussions, but it's concealed for a bunch of reasons (such as the availability of cheap low-quality foodstuffs like "Kraft Dinner" that ease hunger but are just empty calories) which lull policymakers into thinking that there is no problem.

Indeed, attempting to minimize the problem by only considering extreme cases, has been used by some politicans to cut social services. They claim that if households using food banks, soup kitchens, dumpster diving, and catching food in the wild are not "starving" -- "it's their choice to do that" and therefore everything is fine. Blame is put on people (implicitly, who are "not like the rest of us") having "poor money management skills" or being "ignorant about making decent meals" (one neo-con Ontario premier used to brag about how his family subsisted on bologna when he was growing up, even though his dad told the press that this was untrue!).

[SmokingJacket]

2. Hm. "Food insecurity" may sound vague but it's acutally more

specific. It means "people who have trouble knowing where their next meal is coming from," even if they aren't actually experiencing hunger. People who cobble together meals from soup kitchens and .49 mac and cheese might not be technically hungry, but they are food-insecure in that getting enough food is a major deal.

I can see wanting to use the harder-hitting term, but the "food insecure" is a bigger tent and includes more people who need help.

[SoCalDem]

4. But WHY are they "food insecure"? That's the elephant in the room

They are "insecure" because they have no M O N E Y ... and if employed, have incomes that cannot support housing AND food..

It's sad to think that roughly 10% of the population of the "richest country on earth" are scrambling to find their next meals.

That says a lot about who we really are..

Rich people will set up "foundations & charities" to "help"......but why not just pay these folks enough so they can feed and house their families without all the groveling on one side, and over-stretched arms from patting themselves on the back for all the good they do, on the other side.

As long as we live in a society that has "masters" giving handouts to the "worthy", this will always be the case.

people are expected to "help themselves", but if they cannot earn enough to outpace the increases in costs (handed down by..guess who?), they can never get ahead..or stay even.

[bobbolink]

6. Ohhhh, the questions you ask....

But, but, but... it makes people feel so much more righteous to put a can in the food bank collection, rather than to take action to see that people have enoug $$$ to get their *own* cans!

"When I helped poor people, I was called a saint. When I asked why they were poor, I was called a Communist." Archbishop Romero

[sui generis]

9. the fact is you have to do both

also people don't feel righteous about giving food to the food banks. Most people don't give anything to the food pantries, or to organizations that help find people jobs.

That's belittling the effort of the food givers - few enough people give food anyway, making the few who do feel guilty about it isn't right.

Come on, have a heart! I would add that people should give food all year round though. Buy an extra couple of cans or bags of pasta or rice or flour or sugar every shopping trip and take them in once a month, 12 months a year. Do it at the seasons. Do it when you remember. Do it just once. That's more than never. It really helps the people who need it.

[bobbolink]

13. Me, Have a heart? You're more than welcome to trade place with me

anytime.

When you've been in my shoes, and belittled for having to ask for odds and ends of food at a food bank, instead of having the money to get what I need and want for myself, then you can lecture me.

[sui generis]

16. I didn't lecture you

but you called people who give to food banks righteous, which was assinine.

If we're all pulling together, then don't belittle any of us.

And I will lecture you. Go to a food bank for food. That's what's on the menu there.

There are other social services for other needs.

[bobbolink]

22. The verbal sneering is toxic.

bye now...

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Big Sky Boy]

20. I have been in your shoes

A million years ago, when I was in junior high school, my father was unemployed and we qualified for the state run school lunch program. I had to stand on line in front of the office with the rest of the other poor kids and wait for someone to give me a ticket for that day. Everyone walking by knew who we were and why we were there.

A little humiliating? Yes.

Would I do it again? Yes. There is no shame in accepting help when you know you need it.

I've seen the nasty looks from self-righteous people when they see other people using food stamps at the check-out line. There are rude people everywhere.

I understand that having money to go shopping like everyone else is a more dignified solution and I believe the original point of this thread was that the government should be working for a real working wage for all Americans so everyone can do that.

But please, don't diminish the generosity of people who give to food banks and other charities because some of the people who administer those programs are a little surly.

[bobbolink]

23. Thanks for understanding the humiliating part.

Yes, that's a strong component.

But, that wasn't exactly what I was getting at.

Poor people, it's assumed, have a lot more time to put things together than other people. That simply isn't true. And, taking bits and pieces from a food bank, and trying to create a meal from it is often very taxing, and sometimes just impossible.

Then, there's the fact that we all have different eating traditions (some like mexican food, some can't stand it, etc.), and when you're down and out, a bit of comfort with your eating is important.

Then, there's the nutrition. Because food in food banks mostly has to be stored on shelves, etc., the food is of necessity not fresh, and often just not very nutritious. A lot of empty calories there.

People should all have the necessities of life without having to beg. Housing, adequate food and nutrition, warmth, fresh water, etc. We live in such a rich society, there's no need to dole out necessities in this way, and it's time for people to start thinking in those terms. That isn't a putdown of those who give, but an invitation to start thinking differently about it.

And, yes, some give out of concern, but a lot is because it's expected, and they don't think about the people on the receiving end, and how better to meet those needs.

It's time.

Thanks for your reply.

[sui generis]

25. well your comments to me earlier

certainly sounded like a putdown.

Nobody is here is disagreeing with you on any of these points. That is why in my first comment I said we need to do all of the above.

Depending on your financial needs in Texas at least, we have United Way Greater Community Council of Dallas which is a gateway to hundreds of organizations that do exactly what you've lined out.

Furthermore, food stamps, WIC, and other income-based grocer discounting exists here in Dallas at least that do allow people to make more of their own choices.

And some people also give cash to the food banks in addition to food, because shopping for food and driving around to deliver to the food banks is also time consuming.

That's why I keep saying we're all in this together. Some of us pay back, some of us pay forward and some of us just do our best to help.

[bobbolink]

26. Sometimes people also use a food bank for other reasons...

Say, for instance they need new shoes, and there's no way to get money for that. Or glasses, or....

So, instead of buying groceries, they try to make use of whatever they can find at the food bank, and spend their small amount of cash instead for something else they need.

It's really a sad way to have to budget.

I'm sorry if you felt like you were being put down. I thought the quotation I included said what I really think: "When I helped the poor people, I was called a saint. When I asked why they were poor, I was called a communist." What I'm saying is that it's time for people to look deeper at the issue of poverty in this country, and do things differently.

What I'm noticing is that there is so much harshness on DU, and it's getting to me, and especially in the topic of poverty. I've been met with some real ugliness here, and very rarely does someone chime in to counteract it.

So, I'm deciding it's time to pull back from interacting here, and just connect with the few from DU who I've come to know. It's just too much toxicity here, and too many seem to enjoy it that way.

Best to you..

[sui generis]

27. bobbo this garden has many flowers in it

and a few toxic weeds; don't forget to see the flowers.

My experience on DU is that most people here are like most everyone else in America: 1 - 3 paychecks away from disaster, and sometimes no paycheck away. There really aren't many people in the world who can lord what they have over other people and when they do, if it's for the purpose of bragging, it's usually irrelevant to the conversation.

See the flowers - ignore the weeds for now.

:hi:

[Megahurtz]

28. How I have been there.......

and instead people should practice giving their donations directly to the people that need it,
instead of patting themselves on the back because they give it to a Non-Profit that "does not help individuals" (yes that's a fact) and very often the "Non-Proft" (lol!) instead pockets most of it for themselves.
Then the people that give to those Non-Profits feel twice as good about themselves
just because they get a tax-writeoff. :eyes:

It seems like people that have never been there, have absolutley no clue what true poverty is like.

Lucky them. :eyes:

[sui generis]

31. the world is full of should-be's

and what-is's.

It's also full of assumptions - a lot of poor people believe nobody but they have ever been there.

There is nothing wrong with a tax writeoff. I absolutely agree about some non-profits, but many are 100% volunteer, or only pay for office space.

If everyone only gave directly a lot fewer people would give. That's a "what is". BTW I have "been there" and I know more than most people here, even the ones who are sitting home in a warm house feeling food insecure while they pontificate. This isn't a contest - but it does require mutual respect, not derision.

[The2ndWheel]

8. Oddly enough, agriculture creates hunger/food insecurity

Agriculture creates class. Before agriculture, if you were hungry, everyone was hungry. Today, you don't have to lift a finger other than to call the waiter over, and you'll eat more than the person actually pulling the food from the ground. Or, the person killing the captive animal. We have more machines doing that today though, so the problem of hunger will only be more desensitized.

[Leopolds Ghost]

17. A Great Movie about this -- "Darwin's Nightmare"

(about starvation, neocolonialism, and the rise of industrial fishing in sub-saharan Africa)

[DaveJ]

11. Food is a low priority to industries which compete over our money...

That's what corporations do. They all compete for the financial pie. Housing, healthcare, utilities, fuel, they all charge as much as they can get away with and in this wonderful free market system there is no concern for how that affects the individual. That's because we are supposed to rent DVDs and listen to music that make us dream of feeling rich and secure.

[Parche]

5. Hunger

"Hunger, frightens and hurts, and it has many faces, and every man must sometimes face the terror of one of them. Wouldn't it seem that a misery known and understood by all men would lead Man not to deception and murder, but to faith, and hope, and love ?"

[trof]

7. How about 'calorie challenged'?

Yes.
That's MUCH nicer.
;-)

[Totally Committed]

10. And yet, from today's Boston Globe:

Report: Hunger has more than doubled in low-income areas

Between 2002 and 2005, hunger more than doubled in lowincome communities across Massachusetts because of poverty and the high cost of living, a local advocacy group told state lawmakers yesterday.

>snip

Poor families are not earning enough to handle both increased heating and food costs, and they economize by skipping meals or buying inexpensive foods that are filling, but high in sugar and fat, said Ellen Parker, executive director of Project Bread.

The group called for a statewide Campaign to End Hunger with a collaboration of businesses, healthcare providers, governments, and schools. It also urged legislators to provide nutritional breakfasts to 35,000 more students and to make it easier for families to get food stamps.

>snip

State Representative Cory Atkins , who serves on the Joint Committee on Children and Families, said that in the next legislative session, the issue of hunger "will not go unattended. I'm appalled," Atkins said. "First of all, in Massachusetts, in the United states of America, this should be a zero-tolerance issue. We have the resources to make sure that every child in this Commonwealth is fed."

Entire Story:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/11/15/report_hunger_has_more_than_doubled_in_low_income_areas/

Hunger, "Food Insecurity"... whatever. We need to find a way to make it GO AWAY! No family, and especially no child... oh, what the hell... no PERSON in this country should be hungry. Despite what Bush has done to us, we are still a country of abundance and we should find a way to be generous with that abundance, to share with those who are in need.

Makes me angry that it's almost 2007, and America is STILL a country where hunger is an issue.

TC

[butterfly77]

12. This is what happens in the republicons ...

good economy...

[Ian David]

14. Eventually, many of the food insecure become become cardiac-function deprived. n/t

[mindfulNJ]

15. If this administration

put HALF the effort into solving problems that they do into putting Faux news- friendly labels on everything, maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we are in.

[area51]

21. Well said. (n/t)

[Leopolds Ghost]

18. They have to call it "Food Insecurity" in order to get the report on Bush's desk.

All he cares about is Security, so they made it sound like our food production system is insecure. Genius!

Ve must haff TOTAL VOOD SECURITY!!!!!!!

(Reminds me of a place called Total Audio Visual Systems,
I always imagine a guy with an Austrian accent when I see that)

[Lisa]

30. if they said "you, and some people you know, may have food insecurity"

... he might actually read it. (Everything has to be about him, of course.)

If 4% of people in high-income Canadian households are food insecure, it's not too farfetched to speculate that there is a similar pattern in the US.
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050503/d050503b.htm

[Beacho]

19. The Potemkin Village

Dance, you filthy peasants, dance!

[Kelly Rupert]

32. Our food is insecure? I think it's time for a preemptive strike

on food breeding and training grounds. Let's roll, people.

(Seriously, this is possibly the stupidest euphamism ever.)

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

33. Too much FOOD insecurity can lead to HEALTH insecurity

and result in LIFE insecurity.