Good analysis. I’m continually annoyed by those public service radio ads. They’ve always seemed phony to me too. They act as if there’s a war on hunger in this country, but we haven’t quite won it, and need donations to do so. Actually this asking for donations for food is part of the system. It’s been going on for decades. I suppose doing that is better than just taking more money from people through taxes, though. People can contribute voluntarily and feel that they’re doing a good deed. There’s plenty of food in America, though.
I’m technically classified as poor myself, merely because I retired early on very little income. I have a paid-for house, paid-for car, computer, big-screen tv, and savings, though, and don’t use food stamps or access food banks. I just live frugally. I’ve had savings since I was a poor kid, and collecting discarded bottles for the two-cent deposit to buy candy bars and 50-cent paperbacks. I never made the effort to become rich, but never really suffered any lasting hardships either.
I favor food banks for others because well-intentioned persons who just aren’t very prudent (and a few who are, as others have pointed out) may occasionally find themselves without any money. (And, again, with a few it may be chronic.) They’re irresponsible, but with many persons willing to contribute money for food, there’s no need for them to go hungry or have to beg for food. I just wish I didn’t have to hear the ads. :-)
Yet they are related, as stated, 'Huber finds that the Feeding America spots are distributed via the Ad Council, which the US Department of Agriculture is a major Ad Council client of. And "By feeding the false perception of rampant child hunger, the Ad Council is aiding and abetting the eternal bureaucratic demand for more studies, more personnel, greater influence and bigger budgets."