Monday November 23rd, 2009
 |  |
 |
Fruits, Vegetables Added to WIC Program
from Associated Press
Poor women and their children will see fruits, vegetables and whole
grains but less dairy and egg products in the Women, Infants and
Children program, under a change the Agriculture Department plans to
adopt Thursday.
Topics:
Related Shop Items
I feel that it is wonderful that they will offer produce and whole grains to women who are on WIC because nutrition is of utmost importance. I must correct you though on your assumption that women qualifying for WIC are poor. That is a very misleading sterotype to so carelessly throw around. According to Merriam Webster's dictionary, this is the meaning of the word poor:
1 a: lacking material possessions b: of, relating to, or characterized by poverty2 a: less than adequate : meager b: small in worth3: exciting pity <you poor thing> , etcetera...
Just because a woman qualifies, that does not mean that she falls into the category of poverty. In fact, according to http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/howtoapply/incomeguidelines.htm a family can be at 185% of the poverty level and still qualify. That means that a family of 3 can make up to $31,765.00 and still qualify. The poverty level, according to the 2005 HHS Poverty Guidelines, a family of three would have to make $16,090 or below to fall into the category of poverty. Therefore, your hasty generalization is not only incorrect, but offensive and hurtful as well.
There are indeed families where one parent is a student and the other supports the family or single parent families (etcetera) who qualify, and by no means are they in poverty but they could still benefit from the opportunity to provide better nutrition to their family because as all health conscous consumers know, it is expensive to buy the healthy foods, including fresh produce and whole grains.
To conlude, I certainly do think that it is great that these options will be made available, although unfortunate that they will limit the dairy, BUT before one makes the assumption that someone is "poor", maybe they should double check the facts.
@oddessey3780
That line came directly from the article. Take up your offense to the Associated Press. Your definition of "poor" is really narrow.
I did actually write the Associated Press as well. And the defininition of poor is not "my" definition. I did not write the Merriam Webster Dictionary, thank you. If you actually read what I wrote and understood the huge difference between the qualification to the WIC program and the what is considered poverty, then you too would see, that this is a hasty generalization. Just because a woman qualifies for WIC, does not mean that she is poor. I found this offensive. I qualify for WIC but by no means am I in poverty, or poor. I am a student and a stay at home mom. I do not work. I cannot work, and do all of this. WIC is a great thing for someone like me, who has a limited income. BUT I AM NOT POOR! Just because money is tight, that does not mean that I am poor.
And, lastly... about you saying that "my" definition was narrow... I would say that Merriam Webster has a great deal of credibility in their definitions. So, take that up with them.