Instead of the perfectly-fine “expired” food going to the dumpster, feed people. Help the community.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The people I have helped with at food banks were not at risk of literal starving they were at risk of eating the same 3 things all the time. Most of us take it for granted having a mind that works like this. Go buy ingredients and follow a recipe, try new ones, some diversity in diet. Instead of just buying endless jars of peanutbutter and crackers.

      My local one is working on more mealkit type solutions. Here is everything you need and a paper recipe.

      Kinda makes me sad. More food stamp money is probably not going to fix that problem, not sure what can be done. Maybe social workers setting up basic cooking classes?

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Every grocery store running a food bank and distributing food to the hungry is equally unrealistic. If we’re throwing out absurd solutions to horrifying problems, it would be better to address the root cause rather than the symptoms.

      • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Having proper social care is not part of a perfect world. it is also quite easily achievable. The US is deliberately starving its poor and adressinf this as the main issue is more effective than creating laws to regularize food banks.

    • SeabassDan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I always wondered about this after an experiment we did in school many many years ago where we were asked how far back we had to go to be able to prevent society’s current problems, everything from poverty to class warfare to polarized politics. It always seemed to boil down to an overpopulation problem. Granted, it was just a school experiment, but basically Thanos was right since you can’t really double resources but you can have too many people.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        People were poorer when they were less of us.

        I always am wary of a solution to every problem or a cause behind all effects because I don’t see it ever being the case. Civilization is emergent not intentional, it would be shocking if it didn’t she problems.

  • EvolvedTurtle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Actually I work at Walmart and the expired food that’s still reasonable to eat we donate

    Still a shit ton of edibles food ends up trashed tho Everything that we can’t freeze p much

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m happy to hear your store does some donating. This is what we’re aiming for as a first step :)

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well its true here in Colorado at least. They get Tax breaks for donating to charity and it doesn’t need to be money

      • Pieisawesome@lemmy.worldB
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Second harvest is a charity that specializes in exactly this.

        They pick up food from grocery stores and distribute it.

        There are chapters of second harvest across north america

          • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am not a lawyer, yadda yadda, but best before dates are only the manufacturer saying “this will taste like advertised up until this date”. It’s still perfectly fine to eat, usually for a good while. So I think you’d be fine if you just sufficiently made people aware that the best by date has passed, and that they should use common sense before consuming.

            It’s probably a different story for things with an actual expiration date

      • icedterminal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Really just depends on the store and where you are. Stores can get tax breaks for it.

        The local Safeway offers it to charity, compost or livestock feed for the farms nearby. All you have to do is head inside and ask.

    • SilverFlame@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I worked produce in a supermarket for a little while. Our expired food was sent out to be used as animal feed. Not as good as charity but still a fine use for expired food.

    • Seudo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Per capita the US wastes more food than any other country… I just made that up but sounds about right.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ok, I guess? I think golf resorts should stop filling their swimming pools with insulin. That sounds about right.

  • LimitedDuck@septic.win
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This would be a good thing, though I think it’s trickier than it appears:

    • How arbitrary are “best before” and “expires on” labels and how do they differ from food to food?
    • How do the labels themselves differ from each other and how to do they differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction?
    • Could acknowledging that “expired” food is still good cause expiry dates to just be extended? How far could they be extended before food actually is dangerous past the label?
    • How does liability work when someone gets sick from “expired” food? Does it change when it’s part of a structured donation system?
    • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I work in retail. Stuff already goes to food banks. The dates on those products are usually the sell by date, and quite arbitrary. They’re mostly for quality sake, rather than “not safe to consume” sake. Like a loaf of bread may not be as moist and soft as it was when it was fresh, but it’s perfectly fine to eat. Companies want you to be able to buy a product and expect consistent quality. But if you’re hungry and in need, stale Oreos are better than no cookies at all.

    • neptune@dmv.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, to the last bullet, we have good Samaritan laws. We could totally pass a law that says “grocery stores can and should provide reasonably safe, leftover food to poor people and will not be punished if those reasonable actions result in bad things happening”. You are allowed to just wail on an unconscious dudes chest for minutes until paramedics arrive and then not be sued for the three cracked ribs.

      But cmon. We all know that grocery stores know that once people realize expired food is generally safe a) people will buy less food and b) people will show up to get free expired food and buy less food.

      Scarcity is a necessity under capitalism. Movie theaters aren’t going to release blooper reels for free. They add them to the credits or put them in the editors cut release. A luxury clothing brand isn’t going to sell seconds, they will destroy or rework material that isn’t sellable.

        • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Capitalism, which provides such an excess of food that we’re throwing it out, is the problem? True, when the shelves are bare and no-one has food this won’t be a problem anymore.

          But it’s not exactly a step forward is it?

          • Sloth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are completly right. It’s not capitalism’s fault that companies would rather destroy essentials to save a few bucks rather than give it to those who need them. No, obviously the poor people just need to stop being poor. That’ll solve global hunger without cutting into the profits of those poor CEOs.

          • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t understand your meaning of your comment. Not having capitalism means bare shelves in the future? How?

  • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s exactly what they do already for 99% of the food. Not everything is donatable, but the vast majority of it is. They get tax relief back, so they have financially incentive to do so.

    • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I worked at a grocery store as a supervisor for a few years and 80% of food was thrown away rather than donated. They still donated a fair bit of food to the local food bank weekly, but the vast majority just got thrown out. Anecdotal obviously.

      • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like how we both supplied anecdotal evidence, but they’re agreeing with you more just because of the conclusion they want to come to

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      99%? Is there any data to back that up? I see incredible amounts of waste just where I am. I can’t imagine a number even close to 99 is true.

      It depends on who you poll as well. If you only talk to stores that do it and ignore the ones that don’t, your averages are going to be misinformed data skewed too high. I dunno.

      99 is an unreasonable number so I don’t believe you.

      • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I can tell you 99% is what I donated out of everything I got rid of. I donated well over $1k+ a day, it was a big store. Rest went to pig farms or whatever it went lol. Believe what you want to believe, just remember you don’t really have any contrary evidence either, and obviously I’m giving anecdotal evidence.

  • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They already do that, dude.

    What do you think they do with all that stuff? They don’t toss it out, that’s stupid. You know how expensive it is to pay for a garbage truck to come pick up the trash compactor dumpsters they have and replace it with another? Why pay to throw stuff out when they can get tax credit for donating that stuff.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    So putting myself into an asshole NIMBY’s shoes: I bet a lot of people don’t want to admit that they would prefer not to rub shoulders with people who needed foodbanks. And that is likely a major reason why a store wouldn’t do this.

    Also you’d need to staff it and if the food is free, that’s an expense. Also the store space could be used for other merchandise so you’re paying for a bigger footprint and to light, heat, cool, and clean it. I’ve been to some food banks and rarely are they in nice modern buildings.

    I agree that it should happen instead of food being wasted. Those are just the reasons it wouldn’t happen in a commercial store. I think a better idea would be to strictly regulate what food is allowed to be thrown out vs mandatory donating with huge fines for intentional contamination or waste.

    • SirNuke@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you talk to people about homelessness, they will readily admit they just don’t want to see it. If go to any cheaper grocery store you definitely are rubbing shoulders with people who use foodbanks. Food insecurity doesn’t go away just because you have a roof over your head.

      The rub is a foodbank in a grocery store will attract the more visible “unreliable access to showers” type of user, which would be unacceptable.

      • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I get that, but then those “undesirsbles” can be directed to help. At first yea, lots of grimy people could show up. With time as those people get help, you’ll see less and less. Change takes time. This change would be like removing a dam. A crazy surge of water, but then it calms to be the beautiful river it can be :)

        • cloudy1999@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          One benefit of colocating the food bank with the grocery store is that shoppers could make direct contributions to the food bank. Instead of those questionable ‘donate $1 to such and such’ prompts at payment, one could purchase an extra can of food and discreetly drop it off after checkout. Seeing the beneficiaries in person is confidence the grocery store isn’t just making a money grab.

          Since most of us have to buy groceries, it would also provide shoppers a convenient opportunity to practice compassion. Sometimes a bad day can be turned around by doing something good.

        • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          but then those “undesirsbles” can be directed to help.

          You think the reason they are undesirable is because they need help? They WANT to be undesirable. They reject society and choose to make bad decisions. You can’t help people like that.

          • spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The people who utilize food banks are not the addicted population you are most likely imagining. It’s everyday people who have a home, but not enough money left over for adequate sustenance.

            Also, go volunteer at a soup kitchen wherever you live. You’ll see a lot more people who look closer to you than to the people you are describing, I guarantee it.

            There will always be the exception of course, but most people who need and will use food banks are not parading themselves out on the streets flaunting their homelessness.

    • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing is people don’t realize who needs food banks. They may not be aware their kids best friend, their coworker, etc. may be in need.

    • ladybug@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Putting my NIMBY hat on as well to add. There’s another component that if people realize they can get their groceries for free at their local store, why would they go to the side that asks you to pay? Obviously this would be a net positive as more people in need will have access, but there will be some not-in-need who will take advantage. Grocery stores tend to have thin margins, so this may make a formerly profitable store unprofitable, which may reduce quality or shutter stores.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The same reason why most people don’t go to homeless shelters to get a bowl of free soup. Most of us understand that free food is for people who need free food.

      • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Putting hypothetical profits before human needs is a problem. I’m not saying you don’t have an argument. Just commenting that that is what is being said.

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      NIMBY away. Those are all great reasons. They all revolve around the store keeping its money though. The point is that they use their money to help their community and not their golden horde.

      Change makes people angry, but time softens the view and people will adapt.

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is why I feel good churches need to be supported as they are normally the ones bankrolling this kind of thing, anything that human being requires to survive should be provided free of charge in my opinion. The fact that we still want to make a buck off of human suffering is a failure of humanity as a species

    • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m a member of a church that runs a large food pantry. Even with lots of donations, grants, and steeply discounted food, it still takes a lot of money, resources, and manpower (volunteers) to make it happen. Our client count is at an all time high and steadily growing. A food pantry is not a “business” you really want to see grow but I’m glad it’s there for people who need it.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s basically what I’m saying, we should not need food banks, but it is good that they are there for those who need them.

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Churches in concept are amazing. They are a place for people to gather and learn about morals and ethics and such, to bond with the community. And then there is(maybe) free food after service where you can eat and chat with other people.

      And the other services they can provide, like food banking, homeless help, counseling, community space, being a safe space, a refuge with resources. I’m glad there are some institutions doing it. I hope they are the snowball that triggers the avalanche, but so many churches are money vacuums draining their communities :(

      I would love to see more churches climb to the top and better their commuities. I choose to be hopeful. One step at a time :)

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think you failed to understand what churches do…

        True Mega Churches tend to be nothing but griffs, but you should try the old school brick and mortar, pews made of wood, kind.

        In fact religious groups in general typically are the ones getting the most done on charity work.

        Edit: Wait, no you understood, I’m just weird

        • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What did I fail to understand? I said some churches are doing the work of charity and that I hope the many churches that don’t (the griffs) will follow the example.

            • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Quite late, but I personally like it when my apology is recognized, so I’m here to say no worries at all. We communicated and sorted it out 🤘

  • chemicalprophet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure you understand how capitalism works. Anywho, wanna be an anarcho-syndicalist with me?

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh I understand capitalism. I want to break it down. This can be one of the steps. I will totally discuss your views of you want. The government can eat a rock.