I'm Simply Asking Why
By Jim Bauer
@porwest (112804)
United States
October 25, 2025 8:54am CST
This post is not intended to make a statement, but rather to pose a question and note an observance. There are big differences between those things, of course, and so the aim is to discuss and ponder the possible why.
Because this is not something I just observed yesterday. This is something I have always observed.
Shopping carts at the grocery store.
9 times out of 10, and fairly consistently, one can predict how someone will be paying for their groceries based on how full their cart is. No, that's not an opinion. It's true.
It can be predicted.
If the cart is heaping and overflowing, the person at the register will almost always be paying with a card issued by the government through a food assistance program. If the cart is less full, the person will be paying with their own money.
It begs the question, how does the government actually determine benefits? What averages does it use and from what data? Because if people who do not qualify for benefits who can afford their own groceries buy less, and survive quite nicely, how is it determined that people who cannot pay need more?
One can also observe the types of items they buy. Fish, beef, particularly shellfish and steak. Those are "special" items in the cart of someone who can afford their own food, but staples in a cart filled by someone using government funding.
Why do you think this is? Like I said, this is not to make a statement. It's to get people really thinking about the way the system works and why there is an obvious imbalance.
On top of that, do the ones who are paying the grocery bills for others have the right to question this and ask for an explanation?
I think we do. So, what say you. I want to pick your brain on this.
12 people like this
12 responses
@BarBaraPrz (51812)
• St. Catharines, Ontario
25 Oct
I'm sorry, I don't live on your planet so have never come across this.
5 people like this
@BarBaraPrz (51812)
• St. Catharines, Ontario
25 Oct
@porwest In Canada, people who are on Welfare or Disability get a cheque that is supposed to cover all expenses: food, housing, heat, water, electricity... usually not near enough to afford necessities, never mind "special" things. Even if they go to a food bank, they're lucky to get peanut butter, cereal, pasta, canned peas... no steak.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
25 Oct
@BarBaraPrz It made me curious, so I looked into some data and the programs offered in Canada, and it appears families can receive up to $1,951 a month, and as you stated, in a lump sum rather than fettered out into specific use requirements. That's around $23,412 a year.
By contrast, the average welfare recipient across all 50 states in the U.S. receive annual benefits across all programs of about $28,500 a year. Although in nine states it's more like $35,000 a year
To put this into perspective, the median cost of living in the U.S. is $2,516 a month, or about $30,192, while in Canda it's $2,611 per month or $31,332 a year.
Using the U.S. median, isn't it interesting to learn that what welfare recipients are paid the equivalent of a 40 hour a week job paying $13.70. Considering this "wage" is not taxed, the benefit is even greater than someone actually working and making $13.70 an hour.
In fact, I was curious and so I did the math and found that in order for someone to take home $13.70 an hour after taxes they would have to be making $17.56 an hour before taxes.
So...in conclusion, a person on welfare in the United States makes $17.56 an hour essentially without working a day.
I have no idea about the tax system in Canada to do the math there, but I do know taxes are generally higher in Canada due to all of the other social programs they have such as universal health care.
1 person likes this
@snowy22315 (208802)
• United States
25 Oct
I have not observed this personally, but I do know one former mylot member seemed like got an extraodinary amount of money per month for one person on food assistance programs. I would find it hard to spend that much money if I tried..but some people really depend on these programs..especially now in this state with all the layoffs. A state of emergency has been declared as SNAP will likely not be paying in November. The Food banks are really well stocked in this state and have quite a network but I think they will have a huge influx at least that is what I am hearing on the news.
3 people like this
@noni1959 (13035)
• United States
25 Oct
@porwest I wonder how some are determined as well. I read a woman will not get her$1100 a month worth and I was floored. I know groceries are hard but that is a lot. I know another family who is only getting $300 a month. Two are disabled and not getting their disability yet. I don't get food stamps but sometimes find cheap steaks for $4.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
@noni1959 It's hard telling, especially considering it's not really a federal program, so benefits vary statre to state, as do requirements and benefits parameters. I do know when you add up benefits across all areas of benefits, between food stamps, rental assistance, energy assistance and other programs, the average welfare recipient receives almost $30,000 a year in total benefits, equivalent to a job that would pay $13.70 an hour on a full-time 40 hour work week. When you consider that $13.70 is before tax, welfare recipients actually receive $17.56 an hour without working a single day.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
25 Oct
From what I have heard from most people on food assistance is that they really have to work at it to use up all the money, which therein lies part of the question I posed. How are benefits determined? And why do the benefits appear to exceed what people buy with their own money?
As for the dependence, I get it. Some people do need these benefits, and I fully support that. At the same time, what they receive should at least be proportionate with what people have to buy themselves with their own money, especially considering the ones filling their carts are the ones not getting the benefits, technically.
I don't mind someone eating on my dime. But damn, why does it seem like they might actually be eating BETTER than me? lol
As for SNAP, and the government shutdown overall, that's the fault of the Democrats. If they don't budge, it's on them if people starve.
And by the way, they won't. Food pantries are ubiquitous and people will find a way one way or the other. They figured out how to get the benefits, which can be a complicated process...so I am sure they will also find a way to eat.
2 people like this
@xstitcher (39015)
• Petaluma, California
26 Oct
I use an EBT card, and I don't have "heaping" grocery carts when I check out. 
1 person likes this
@xstitcher (39015)
• Petaluma, California
26 Oct
@porwest You don't know my sitiuation. I've been looking for a job, among many other things. I'm grateful for that EBT card, and the $160 I get for groceries every month. I don't think you can heap everyone with an EBT card in the same boat--or, shopping cart.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
@xstitcher #1, I don't think you read my post, #2, I don't think you read my comment, and #3, I think you missed my point.
I am NOT saying, nor have I EVER said the system should not be there to help people when they need it. I said it should NOT be there as a lifetime benefit and there NEEDS to be an expiration date, guidelines, strict rules, and at some point if you can't meet those guidelines...
You should no longer receive benefits regardless of the circumstances.
THAT said, I have ALSO said that some people ARE disabled or in a position that they ACTUALLY DO require lifetime assistance, and those people SHOULD have access to these programs and benefits.
I never once suggested it should be a one size fits all thing. It needs to be a case-by-case analysis. But we also have to evaluate the difference between circumstances that are real, and ones that are nothing more than excuses and cries of woe-is-me.
At the end of the day, keep in mind I am one of the people paying for these benefits. If you are paying taxes at some point, so are you. I have a right, and so do you, to know where the money is going and why, and to whom, and under what conditions the money is being given.
Look, here's the deal, if I have a job and become unemployed, I can receive unemployment benefits. But only for so long, and after that time is up it doesn't matter if I find another job or not...
My benefits are cut and I am on my own to figure things out without any help. Why should that be different for someone on welfare? There has to be an end game otherwise we're not helping anyone.
Most likely you will be someone who eventually gets off the system. But you are the exception to the rule. Not the norm, and that's the issue I am speaking to.
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
lol. I guarantee it is fuller than mine. Your comment may also be somewhat anecdotal. Either way, I think our system of welfare needs to have an expiration date for many people. Not all. But many. And case workers need to be there not only to verify that you qualify but need to also be working to make it so that your benefits end at some point.
It's like with our children. At some point we say to them, "It's time to grow up, be responsible, and take care of yourself." But of course, in achieving that goal, we hopefully give them the tools to figure it all out and grow and prosper. Case workers should be tasked with that very thing. Whether it be skill-building to help people get better jobs or money management coaching or some other thing...
It cannot and should not ever be a lifetime benefit for those who CAN work. And if the jobs one does do not support becoming unqualified, there's a time to encourage getting one that does. "I don't make enough" isn't a valid excuse and taxpayers should not be forced to make up the difference IMO.
@LadyDuck (502268)
• Italy
26 Oct
@porwest - I know that some really need a little help, but this should be momentary. Taxpayers cannot maintain people during all their life. This also cause a problem to those who seriously need help. As an example someone who had a terrible accident and cannot work anymore.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
I have long said, and it is controversial, and people tend to deem it as lacking compassion, but I think we need a "fly or die" system of welfare. In other words, you give LIMITED help, not a lifetime of support. You set parameters and guidelines, and you set ultimatums. Granted, some people truly ARE in need and some can't legitimately work. We can make exceptions for those people, so long as it is absolutely provable this is the case. But I think the objective should be to get people OFF the dole. Not simply coddle them with it as a lifetime benefit.
Not only does it create a long-term burden for taxpayers and doom the recipient to a lifetime of dependence and non-achievement, but the problem seems to extend to their children who also become future beneficiaries of the dole, just perpetuating the problem for generations.
The "fly or die" idea is one that comes from birds and their young. They kick them out of the nest at a certain point. Those who fly go on, and those who don't...
They have to accept the consequences of not flapping their wings hard enough.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
@LadyDuck Right. Exactly. I make note of the fact that some people REALLY need the help and DO have things that limit their ability to do certain things, like earn an income. I have no issue helping those people out. It's the ones who game the system and make it a career I take issue with AND the system that mostly allows this to go on.
1 person likes this
@noni1959 (13035)
• United States
25 Oct
That is an interesting observation. My son would argue with you. He never pays less than $300 each trip to Walmart or Costco, with the last being to Costco at over $500. He is a cash paying customer. I don't get food stamps and depends on my budget level, mine can be two bags only or a cart full. I hate shopping so try to budget where I only go once a month except occasional fresh stuff. My daughter doesn't get food stamps either but they shop big full carts. What is in our carts can depend on the time of month, what is left at home and may make some think we don't get many vegetables or good food, but in reality, we are trying to add to what we already have. I had a friend years ago who worked but needed food stamp assistance. She got $50 worth and stretched it with her wages. She bought good food and vegetables but always looked for a treat on sale like cookies. The poor deserve something sometimes too. Some on assistance paid their taxes and wound up in need themselves even if still working.
3 people like this
@noni1959 (13035)
• United States
26 Oct
@porwest I agree about lobster and ribeyes and those who take advantage like that grandmother who shouted that. It makes me believe that is a generational thing that needs to be addressed. Those should be on their own dime even with discounts.
A year ago, the local store had a huge day only sale on crab for $7! It was whole cooked crab freshly caught nearby and you can bet the poorer people scrambled to get one. One elderly lady was in tears as she grabbed the last one. I asked if she was OK and she said it will make her feel she is just as worthy as anyone else. I told her she is and offered to buy her the crab. She wasn't going to (pride), but I told her it would allow her to get something else. She ran and grabbed a discounted pack of zucchini and some grapes.
I've purchased half off steaks with extra discounts on my budget. Our store here gives an extra 10% senior discount on Thursdays. I guess my point is if you can get something more higher end for the same as ground beef, I think it's OK once in awhile.
There are many who have celiac disease, IBS, renal failure, heart conditions and more who get food stamps and they should not be told to eat the high process or foods that will cause more issues just because they are poor.
Myself, I can't eat pork. I wish I could since it's cheaper and love pork ribs, but it makes me sick for days. My mom could not eat potatoes unless her dialysis showed better results and then they had to double cook a tiny red potato for her.
I paid the same taxes. Many on food stamps still pay their taxes. Not all are like that grandmother. I'm wondering how she is getting them unless she has custody since single people don't get much.
@porwest (112804)
• United States
26 Oct
Purely anecdotal, and I certainly understand that people with their own money still eat and buy food. But 9 times out of 10, the observation I presented here still holds true. Not always. There are always exceptions. What I am saying is, I am very wealthy, and my cart looks much different, and there are a number of reasons for that. I don't have to be discretionary. I choose to be. And that's part of the point. I AM using my own money and so I take more care of it and am more considerate of what I buy and how much.
As for whether the poor deserve something is not up for debate. On who's dime is. If it's on my dime, I have a right to question things. I have a right to say, "You can only have this and the rest you have to pay for on your own."
You only deserve what you EARN to deserve.
I am also fully aware that many people on some form of welfare do work. But at the same time, there does come a time when the reality has to be, you get what you can afford to have. If you want to drive a Cadillac, you have to be able to afford that, otherwise you get to drive a Kia.
I'm fine paying for cereal, bread, eggs, milk, chicken, pork, and even certain cuts of beef. But when we start getting into lobster and ribeyes, this makes me feel taken advantage of because of the expense of these things, which actually takes food AWAY from who are supposed to be "hungry," by reducing the overall amount of goods they will actually get in terms of volume.
Contrary to how it sometimes appears, I do not have anything against the poor. I have something against a system that coddles them and KEEPS them poor...
At MY expense.
When I hear a grandmother at Walmart shout to her grandson, "Get whatever you want, it ain't my money," it gives me a glimpse into the attitude of the person on welfare and their lack of appreciation for any help taxpayers are forced to offer.
1 person likes this
@GardenGerty (169452)
• United States
26 Oct
Usually when I see full carts where I shop, it is not people who use food stamps or whatever. More often it is people who shop once a month.Maybe I shop at the wrong time of day? I get in line behind married couples who possibly entertain a lot. I guess I usually look at the quality of what is being purchased.Do they have fresh produce? Frozen? I am not saying that people on foodstamps never make poor choices, I am saying we all do. Believe me, I tried being a landlord, and also was forced into a shared residence with a tenant briefly, and those particular people would buy things that I could not dream of affording . . . sometimes junk food, sometimes exotic ingredients because they saw this recipe on a cooking show on cable. I would get so depressed feeding my kids and me cheapo hamburger. I grew up very poor, but with a dad who would have qualified for disability and would not ask for it. My mom took in ironing at times to stretch the budget. I have known families that did know every place in town to get food vouchers, and did it all the time. Dad showed me to always look for bargains at the store, and I often feel like the discount queen. We possibly would qualify for food stamps if I would bother to apply. Neither of us planned well during our prime working years and our Social Security is low. So, for your experience, in your location, this is a true observation, but it does not necessarily match mine. I live in an area where the community garden offers free surplus to any who will take it, and that leaves more money for meat. Like you, I wish I could pick and choose who benefits from my tax dollars, and I do not think soda or sports drinks should be food stamp able but I have seen both sides of the coin.
I shop with a small shopping cart, by choice.
I think some of what you are seeing is the product of generational poverty. They do not do better because they do not know better, and they feel the system owes them.So they take. But that is not everyone who gets food benefits, just what is noticeable.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
28 Oct
The bottom line for me is that some people make a career out of being needy and living off the system. It's those people I take issue with, not the ones who truly need the help. I would be one who would probably opt out of the system even if I needed to be on it, like your dad. The thing for me is, I NEED and WANT the incentive to be independent above all else, and simply taking the easy way out, to me, is a way to forego the necessity of working at it.
@kaylachan (84736)
• Daytona Beach, Florida
25 Oct
I'm one of those who recive a monthly alluance through my healthcare insurance for food, utilities etc. I can also use it on (in my opinion) over priced over-the-counter products. Not just medicine, but products like my husband's incontance care, which I'm thankful for as that's an out-of-pocket expense not covered by insurance. Many places aren't even aware he has a problem.
I would also like to point out, I am the exception oto the rule. George and I rarely if ever, buy things like steak or fish. In fact, when it comes to seafood, George and I aren't the biggest fans.
Now, I can't speak for every govornment-based assistance card, but I know how mine works.
Uniteded healthcare, my insurance provider, has a rolling inventory of products you're allowed to buy, with a list of acceptable prices and price ranges for so-called non-healthy options. If we shop at a listed store and scan the card, the card works in tandom with the pos. It cross checks everythingve we've scanned against their approved list, and will deduct the ammount from the card, and if something's not covered, or I don't have enough left, then I pay the difference out-of-pocket.
Again, I know this, because I can check products against their approved list with their built-in barcode scanner.
As for steak, or fish, while often more expincive, the govornment views them as healthier alternitives to pre-packaged over processed junk like chicken tenders or something like that. Because they are so pricy, if it is covered that person may only have enough to buy that item once, and if they're lucky, twice a month.
Since govornment assistance is issued by individual over 18, based on their income (not the income of the household), If a family had adult children living at home, they could use that person's card.
Employees aren't required to card, or varify who's using the assistance card. In a lot of cases, snap or some food stanp cards, don't even have a name printed on them.
@sallypup (69161)
• Centralia, Washington
26 Oct
This is news to me. I pay with my own money and I haven't bought steak or other animal product in a few years. You appear to be quite observant on what others put in their grocery carts and how much is going in those carts.
@JESSY3236 (22247)
• United States
28 Oct
That is not always true. I don't overfill my cart and I am on food stamps. I do buy fruits and salads with my food stamps. I don't drink soda anymore and I don't buy alot of junk food either. I do get tea and almond milk.
1 person likes this
@porwest (112804)
• United States
30 Oct
I can say, with absolute certainty, MOST food stamp recipients receive more in benefits than they actually need in food. The system is far too generous, and as I have said many times, the benefits should not be forever except in extreme cases.
We're not supposed to feed people for a lifetime. We're supposed to help them get fed until they figure out how to feed themselves, and if you leave people just a wee bit hungry...
They will have more incentive to figure that out.
@LindaOHio (222280)
• United States
26 Oct
I remember when my husband and I were both unemployed back in the 70s. We owned a car; so we couldn't get food stamps. That always irritated me because we paid our taxes and felt that we earned some assistance. I know what you're saying about the system. It's unbalanced.
1 person likes this
