If you "legitimately" want efficiency then you support just giving people $250 outright in cash, not locking it behind food stamps. How inefficient is it to giv

If you "legitimately" want efficiency then you support just giving people $250 outright in cash, not locking it behind food stamps. How inefficient is it to give people 250 that theyre locked to spending on only one aspect of their lives? I would posit, having done it myself, that you could easily feed yourself and probably at least 2 people on half that. If the people are left with 125 that they can ONLY use on food, of course they'll use it for junk - at least that gives them some value at least as far as life enjoyment even if it's bad for them. Give them cash and I would bet they'd put it to much better use on bills, outstanding debts, laundry, etc.