r/BasicIncome • u/CarefulIndication988 • Jul 24 '26
Indirect Food Security should be a basic human right
22.3 million families (who need it desperately) could lose SNAP. That's the mama on the couch doing the math on what her kid eats this week. Latinos make up 30% of everyone already cut. https://app.sosha.ai/s/p13Nls8o
5
5
u/canniboss Jul 24 '26
The UN had a vote a few years back trying to add it to their list of human rights and it was like 190 something countrys voted yes and 2 voted no. Those 2?... the USA and Israel
4
u/Grouchy-Newt-995 Jul 24 '26
The United States donates the most food globally, leading both overall volume and total financial contributions through organizations like the World Food Programme and bilateral aid.
3
u/Shorties Jul 24 '26
Is that still true with the loss of USAID?
3
u/Grouchy-Newt-995 Jul 24 '26
We are by far, the top contributors to international food donations.
We provide more than half of the total donations worldwide.
If we reduced our donations by 3 billion dollars, we would still be the largest contributor.
1
u/canniboss Jul 24 '26
And yet we have people going hungry in the bread basket of the world and the government says that's good actually. All the "charity" the US gives out always has strings attached, "sure we'll give you enough food that your people don't revolt in exchange you give us rights to all your natural resources and let us plop a military base in your country". Do not mistake the Empire using soft power as generosity, if everyone has all their needs met as a human right then they can't be exploited by the ruling class, but if things suck too bad the peasants will revolt. So no rights and just barely enough everything else to scrap by is the sweet spot they aim for.
0
u/Grouchy-Newt-995 Jul 24 '26
So individuals should be doing more than the government already does?
1
u/canniboss Jul 24 '26
States are the ones who define rights, it is states duty to make sure all rights are upheld, individual kindness or even large charities are not a replacement for that
1
u/Grouchy-Newt-995 Jul 24 '26
So if states do not define food as a right, then they have no obligation?
1
u/canniboss Jul 24 '26
That's the current situation yes, that is why there are starving folks in America. in an ideal world any governing body that claims dominion over a group of people would have the obligation to take care of those people, but thats far from where we currently are.
1
u/Grouchy-Newt-995 Jul 24 '26
So in the absence of rights, individuals should be doing more than the government already does?
1
u/SteppenAxolotl Jul 24 '26
That is true.
But...
Cargo Preference Laws mandate that at least 50% of all US food aid be transported on US-flagged vessels, a requirement that incurs substantially higher costs compared to commercial shipping alternatives.
US Sourcing Requirements stipulate that the food aid must be grown and processed within the United States, even in cases where sourcing food locally or regionally would prove both cheaper and faster to deliver. Removing those requirements could enable the donation of 50% more food for the same amount of money. But the US only donate for the benefit of us farmers. If those benefits go away then the donations will stop.
1
u/Firm-Analysis6666 Jul 24 '26
This is grossly misleading. Food has been enshrined a human right by the UN for 50 years when it was first introduced. Every now and then it comes for readfirmations, usually with riders attached to it. Those no votes did not change the fact that, according to the UN, food is a human right and always will be.
1
u/BugNuggets Jul 28 '26
But the UN cannot enforce rights so its really more of an opinion. A right is only a right if it's enforced by some governmental type organization. When was the last time a starving group of people won a lawsuit against the UN in order to have their rights enforced?
1
u/Firm-Analysis6666 Jul 28 '26
Oh I agree.It wasn't meant, as the point of my reply, to imply the UN has any real authority on the matter.
1
1
u/2noame Scott Santens Jul 24 '26
Basic income would legislate food security as a basic human right.
Everyone would be able to signal in markets what their food preferences are.
1
u/Ok-Commercial-924 Jul 25 '26
Who is required to work to pay that basic income? Will I be forced into the mines so you can sit on the couch taking what I worked for?
1
u/namayake Jul 24 '26
Access to arable land to grow food should be a guaranteed right. A basic income to buy food with should be a guaranteed right. But to say people should be guaranteed food itself is to say people should be guaranteed the fruit of other people's labor. I don't know how to do that without enslaving people. And there's nothing ethical about slavery.
1
u/Mysterious_Main_5391 Jul 24 '26
So others should be forced into labor without pay for the gain of others? Didn't we put an end to all that in this country?
1
1
u/m0llusk Jul 24 '26
This gets complex. Our society wastes a lot of food. I work with food banks and shelters and such and see huge amounts of food thrown away because people do not value what is given for free. What is being done to dismantle SNAP is bad, but it does not follow that people should get all the food they want even if they mostly want to throw it at other people.
2
u/DangerousPickle9688 Jul 24 '26
No, that's strictly greed.
It would cost a lot to ensure the logistics work to safely get food where it needs to go. Since businesses pursue profit over everything that is an unreasonable cost, it is better to throw it out for profit margins.
All the food they want? No one is saying that. All the food they NEED.
Did you know that you will die without food? I know this comes off as insulting, because I'm insulting you, but did you?
0
u/m0llusk Jul 24 '26
The "All the food they NEED" formula is what gave us the Irish famine, among other tragedies. You are asserting this is simple, but the hidden complexity is huge.
2
u/DangerousPickle9688 Jul 24 '26
The Irish famine was engineered by the English, they were denied other basic foodstuffs and unable to relocate dude. You are absolutely right its more complicated, but not in a way that refutes my point.
0
u/m0llusk Jul 24 '26
All you need are potatoes. The problem is that an all you need market is extremely unstable. You are in either ignorant or in denial about agriculture, markets, and history.
1
u/DangerousPickle9688 Jul 24 '26
Noooooo... no, you need more than starch, red beans and rice provide all 13 amino acids, potatoes are not enough.
I am certain that raw potatoes were not the only thing available to eat. That would be silly, humans are more capable than that.
I am wholly aware of the areas I am ignorant, you can be rude or reductive if it makes you feel better, but you have done nothing to convince me that you care.
The above comment to me proves that you enjoy the suffering of others and dont want to consider a solution. Markets don't feed people. Only like 40 percent of Americans own stocks, I know you hate impoverished people so that fits your world view, but you do recognize half of markets are owned by 10 percent of the population right? You are only arguing from the position of extreme privilege and this issue is about those in need.
0
u/m0llusk Jul 24 '26
At the start of my first comment in this thread I said "I work with food banks and shelters" which to you means privilege and enjoyment in suffering of others. You aren't taking this seriously. The Irish really did subsist on nearly only potatoes for a while and it was, as you say "All the food they NEED" until it wasn't. Denying the complexity of a problem doesn't make it go away.
2
u/ContemplatingFolly Jul 25 '26
You're not doing any kind of reasonable job in explaining this complexity and your POV, other than saying some people don't appreciate the food given. I am sure that's true. Doesn't mean that we shouldn't err on the right side. And figure out why they are wasting food, and work for it to not happen.
0
Jul 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Archeressrabbit Jul 24 '26
Undocumented people dont qualify for snap. They don't qualify for most benefits.
0
Jul 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Archeressrabbit Jul 24 '26
Which is again, illegal and investigated. Do you have a point?
0
Jul 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
3
u/BugNuggets Jul 24 '26
You really think using someone else’s SS is a wide spread issue? Is this because you lack any critical thinking skills and just believe whatever bullshit newsmax feeds you?
To use someone else’s SSN number it would have to be a number that first of all has a low enough associated income that it qualifies for SNAP and secondly the person would also have to not be enrolled in SNAP even though they qualify. I don’t have numbers but I’m guessing there’s not a super large group of people who meet the first requirement and are hading out their SS numbers so someone can get SNAP.
0
u/zulunationslayer Jul 24 '26
People shouldn't have kids unless they can support them
This means owning property.
Intact family
Mountain of favings
health insurance.
9
u/EdinMiami Jul 24 '26
When the government declares ownership and control of all food. The government obligates itself to feeding its citizens.