Eating for cheap - really cheap

Oct 17, 2012 10:19

Today while browsing my various feeds, I stumbled across the welfare food challenge. It's a campaign run by Raise the Rates, a BC-based community organization trying to get welfare rates increased. The idea behind the challenge is to spend no more than $26 on food for one week, as this is the amount allocated for food by the BC government ( Read more... )

philosophical, food, money, link, politics

Leave a comment

Comments 7

misskitty_79 October 17 2012, 22:59:01 UTC
So making these people on these programs start from nothing, while understandable, is also disingenuous. And it's setting people up for failure if they have to buy all their staples the first week. The bill for that is gonna be huge, even if you're not counting things like salt and pepper and condiments, which last a really long time.

I think, if I were allowed to calculated the per serving cost of things I already own, I might do it, but I live alone & I already have a full pantry & my actual budget doesn't allow me to go out & buy doubles of stuff in my pantry. As for the "no outside/free food" rule? I can't afford not to do that, because I pay for my staff meals outta my paycheque & throwing that away is ridiculous.

I would definitely use coupons though & I'm pretty sure I'd do well too. :)

Reply

eveglass October 18 2012, 03:35:48 UTC
Exactly. I think a really interesting challenge, which I've also seen around the internet is, "How long would you last if you could eat ONLY the things that are currently in your kitchen?" I wouldn't necessarily do it myself, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

Reply


foi_nefaste October 17 2012, 23:19:08 UTC
I don't think I could do it very easily now, but I did do it in university (when I had 25$/week for groceries, and that was IT.) I ate a lot of lentil or chickpea curry (dried beans are cheap and easy to cook with), spaghetti sauce and pasta, and chicken (you buy the thighs on sale in bulk, a bag of vegetables, and you make bread. You've got meat+veggies for dinner, you make stock from the bones and then make soup, and if you make bread you can use the rest of the meat as sandwiches for a few days. That's 5 days of food for about 15$, or, at least, it was at the time). Also, fake fried rice (into the rice cooker goes whatever leftover meat is available, rice, broth or bouillon, whatever veggies are available, a bit of rice vinegar, a few spoonfuls of sesame oil, and some soy sauce. Done. Tasty and dirt cheap ( ... )

Reply


petronia October 18 2012, 05:16:15 UTC
A lot of the issue with food costs for poor people is access, IIRC -- things come out cheaper if you can afford to buy (and carry home!) in bulk, and if you live in areas with lots of stores you can comparison shop, and if you're not working double shifts and have to eat from convenience stores and fast food because you don't have time.

I can live on $26 a week, not happily but healthily -- the trick is to figure out which vegetables are in season, and buy tofu at bulk Chinese prices. White rice and pasta make you hungrier, tofu gives you protein. Not an option for those with soy allergies, though.

Reply

petronia October 18 2012, 05:23:47 UTC
For instance, I got ten massive leeks for $5 at Jean-Talon on Sunday. One $1.50 tub of tofu lasts 3 full meals if you eat nothing but. $2 will get you enough beef or pork bones for a week's worth of stock. And eggs are about $3 a dozen, which is enough for a week's worth of breakfast. The tiny grocery on my block regularly has pre-packaged fruit and vegetables near expiry for $1. I may even be able to splurge on a $4 bottle of soy sauce to make things less bland. :P

Reply

petronia October 18 2012, 05:28:33 UTC
On the other hand, for all I know the average cost of food is higher in BC! (Can't imagine tofu is more expensive, though.)

Reply

eveglass October 18 2012, 11:51:21 UTC
True. The other corollary is that you both need to know how to cook and need to have time to do so, neither of which is necessarily true if you are on welfare or a member of the working poor.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up