Food Banks Suddenly See a Spike in Donations After Coming Close to Closing

Most of you who follow the news carefully probably remember the dire stories of food banks in America being short of donations last year. At the time, it was all attributed to people of all financial stripes hurting financially and being unable to give as much food as they did in the past. As it progressively worsened to the point where some food banks were coming close to shutting down, most of us thought the worst and no doubt thought that 2009 would see food banks disappear just when families needed them more than ever. Now, at the time of this writing when we're theoretically at the lowest ebb of America's economic crisis, food banks are suddenly reporting a huge spike in donations--just in the nick of time. What was it that suddenly made food banks get an increase when so many people are sitting on if not losing their hard-earned money?

Perhaps it's just pure desperation that moves people to give the food out of their cupboards when they probably need it themselves. Or, it could just be those who aren't hurting financially (and, yes, there's more than we think) getting an epiphany or scolded for not doing something earlier. As gluttonous as it sounds, this country still has a lot of people out there who have superfluous money, eat too much food, and ultimately waste both.

I won't get too personal, but I've seen the above example myself during a time when you wouldn't even dream such a thing could be possible. I'm talking about throwing out good food because someone bought too much of it when it could have been given to a food bank instead. Of course, the counter-reply would be that they can't give food to a food bank if it's been half-eaten or was sitting around too long. Those points are well taken, even though the true point is that those same people buying too much food could have given the excess they didn't need to a food bank before the food was half-eaten or started spoiling.

Yes, those who managed to profit mightily from the Bush tax cuts the last few years are still around and aren't really as bad as the previously-mentioned example. But you have to wonder how many there were at this time last year when the food banks were about ready to give up in exasperation because of food shortages. The deductive reasoning behind it was that even the Bush tax cut welfare recipients were hurting once the stock market tanked and people starting hemorrhaging money.

The more likely reason is that they were just sitting on their money out of fear of a major disaster coming. Yet it's that recurrent mystery of things being worse in 2009 than even last year and seeing a spirit to finally give happening all at once. If the people giving food currently are those wealthy people who sat on their money last year, what moved them to give so heartily all of a sudden? Is it really a sacrifice for them or are we looking at this backwards and it's really other people of smaller incomes bringing deeper sacrifices by cutting their own food intake in half just to help those in dire need?
_____

Food banks obviously don't want to give away what income brackets are giving the most in food donations. When you see such a dramatic shift within a year, though, it'd be interesting to know the statistics just as a revealing snapshot of society in America. It's obvious that people of all incomes used to give to food banks ever since the idea was implemented in 1967 by John van Hengel. The assumption has been, however, that those of more modest incomes who know what it's like to struggle are the ones who give more than any other. While we have to admit that there's no proof one way or the other, the increase in the food banks this year proves that there's always someone there to help when times get close to a Great Depression.

If it was the wealthy out there who stepped up, then perhaps they were given the suggestion to help others or face the wrath of guilt that no millionaire or billionaire wants to feel. Even Bill Gates was moved to start giving away his billions to help the world--albeit by the most persuadable of the persuadables: His wife. For most people, physical evidence of people suffering from hunger (or worse) is enough to move them to start giving. Should this have been an epiphany for the wealthy out there who hadn't donated much to food banks before, it'll destroy any aspect to pundits playing up class warfare in America.

In the event we find out through statistical findings that it's the middle class and poor providing food that they probably need themselves, then we have a more serious problem going on. Chances are that it's a mixture of both who brought the totals up, but with the knowledge that those who know what it's like to suffer being ones to sacrifice for the sake of helping other people.

Then we have that all-new category: The former wealthy family or individuals who lost a lot of their money through the Bernie Madoff macro swindle, dips in the stock market or via losing a high-paying job they thought was secure. Our answer may be this new income bracket where the people involved learned valuable lessons in the last year about cutting back and having to do with less without freaking out over it. They may still have just enough income (or perhaps on food stamps) to manage a decent supply of groceries and still have some to give away. These people are the new faces of America who don't have to be persuaded by anybody to know what it's like to face a danger of not having enough food in the household.

Should we consider this new culture a blessing to stop the push toward class warfare, then so be it. In theory, the balance of it all may just keep the food banks in better shape and with more meaning behind those trips to the food bank to drop off presumably healthy food...

Source:

http://statesmanjournal.com/article/20090503/UPDATE/90503034

An article I wrote in 2008 detailing the threat of food banks closing down:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/763799/origins_of_the_food_bank_and_the_current.html?cat=47