No, I realize full well that this is what many people do. I am just saying that me being socially responsible for them when they choose to do it is quite unreasonable.

To me, saying I have a social responsibility to not let people who have less starve to death, or go malnourished makes sense. Saying I have a social responsibility to make their lives more convenient is a completely different argument.

Given economic and governmental realities - it is unfortunately quite possible right now that people be poor even though they are working and/or willing to work. This situation may not be their choice. How and what they eat, and how much attention they pay to their diet is however their choice. It is entirely up to them whether they spend $15 on cheap TV dinners and scarf until they think they are full - or take that $15 and buy a bag of rice, some less expensive cuts of/or types of meat and a couple heads of broccoli.

Plus some people even count generic/store brands as "unacceptable", when is most cases there is no real difference, in fact I prefer store brands for some things.

I have had times in my life where my food budget was similar to some of those people mentioned. I also have a very very high metabolism and need more calories than most people just to maintain weight. However, I never applied for food stamps. I did however put some thought into what I was doing. I figure if I can do it, on my own dime... then there is no reason that other people cannot also do it... especially if they are also on my dime. The bottom line is I am not expecting anything from anyone else, that I do not expect from myself.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)