I think the core of the issue is "level of luxury", for lack of better phrase. In the spectrum of "richness" (not to equate with income) people range between "c

I think the core of the issue is "level of luxury", for lack of better phrase. In the spectrum of "richness" (not to equate with income) people range between "cannot afford proper food" and "can afford anything". The debate centers around where on that scale you put "needs government assistance" and "food deliveries". If you put the former above the latter, then it sounds merely as discretionary expenditure. However, if you put the latter above the former, then this becomes "luxury on government money". Essentially "are food deliveries to be considered luxury, beyond the level of government assistance?". This type of debate pops up quite often when attributable public expenditure is considered.