3 ms·

But aren’t you buying those practical items through multiple middle men? Each pocketed something so it costs more? Doesn’t seem efficient. Even if you know the

But aren’t you buying those practical items through multiple middle men? Each pocketed something so it costs more? Doesn’t seem efficient. Even if you know the supply can only be donated and not paid to execs.

chongli 7y ago
Yeah exactly. It may be the case that 100% of the canned goods you donate to the food bank finds its way into the hands of those who need it. It may also be the case that those canned goods have a lot of costs you're paying all throughout the supply chain. A can of chunky soup may cost $2 but what are you getting for that? Pennies worth of potatoes, carrots, and meat, fractions of a cent worth of spices, seasonings, salt, and other preservatives.
- Waterluvian 7y ago
  None of that matters at a local scale. Your local church running a food bank to support your neighbourhood wants practical grocery items that feed families in a dignified way.
  - xnyan 7y ago
    Almost everyone who has canned food paid cash or equivalent for that canned food (most banks don't accept home-canned) which means they spent money on those cans. Unless you can buy a can for less than the shelter, its always better to give them the money you would have spent on the can, period. Even if you can buy it for less (you probably can't buy food for significantly less than a food shelter considering the discounts and relationships they have with vendors) money is still probably the better choice. Why is it always better? Cans are all downside compared to cash. They take up space, they deprecate, they may not be what the shelter needs. Shelters accept food for 2 reasons. 1) Many people see giving food as more "moral" or better than money because they believe the recipient does not deserve anything more than food and getting dented cans of corn is better than nothing. 2) Some people get offended if the shelter will not accept your donation so in interests of keeping donors happy. TLDR; shelters take ragu sauce and canned creamed corn b/c that's what they can get, but it's about catering to social norms not supporting the needy.

chongli 7y ago

Yeah exactly. It may be the case that 100% of the canned goods you donate to the food bank finds its way into the hands of those who need it. It may also be the case that those canned goods have a lot of costs you're paying all throughout the supply chain. A can of chunky soup may cost $2 but what are you getting for that? Pennies worth of potatoes, carrots, and meat, fractions of a cent worth of spices, seasonings, salt, and other preservatives.

Waterluvian 7y ago
None of that matters at a local scale. Your local church running a food bank to support your neighbourhood wants practical grocery items that feed families in a dignified way.
- xnyan 7y ago
  Almost everyone who has canned food paid cash or equivalent for that canned food (most banks don't accept home-canned) which means they spent money on those cans. Unless you can buy a can for less than the shelter, its always better to give them the money you would have spent on the can, period. Even if you can buy it for less (you probably can't buy food for significantly less than a food shelter considering the discounts and relationships they have with vendors) money is still probably the better choice. Why is it always better? Cans are all downside compared to cash. They take up space, they deprecate, they may not be what the shelter needs. Shelters accept food for 2 reasons. 1) Many people see giving food as more "moral" or better than money because they believe the recipient does not deserve anything more than food and getting dented cans of corn is better than nothing. 2) Some people get offended if the shelter will not accept your donation so in interests of keeping donors happy. TLDR; shelters take ragu sauce and canned creamed corn b/c that's what they can get, but it's about catering to social norms not supporting the needy.