is it ethical to ban food stamp recipients from using it to buy soda?

[haulthat]

To ban how people who are working to pay their own bills spend their own money, yes... I could see that being linked to fascism. Deciding how government funded programs can be used to support those who are not financially stable for whatever reason, how so? I disagree with a lot of people as far as eliminating these programs all together, or them being a waste of money because they believe its used by "lazy people who need to get a job" I think the programs can be very helpful to a lot of people and do more harm than good by far. That being said, restricting what government funding can be spent on due to nutritional value and/or nutritional harm, that just makes sense. We are the FATTEST country in the world. Many parents will outlive their children due to that fact alone, right now in America. The freedoms we have allow people to do that to themselves, but don't suggest the government should fund the problem.

Definition of FASCISM
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

I think that prohibiting using food stamps for purchasing liquor and cigarettes is one thing... but now soft drinks? Sorry it smells like fascism to me.

 

[Zayne]

ethics are arbitrary anyway and vary by era and culture

 

[B_VinylBoy]

That being said, restricting what government funding can be spent on due to nutritional value and/or nutritional harm, that just makes sense. We are the FATTEST country in the world. Many parents will outlive their children due to that fact alone, right now in America. The freedoms we have allow people to do that to themselves, but don't suggest the government should fund the problem.

So, you don't mind that FDA regulations have become so lapsed that they continue to allow companies in the food industry to inject their products with chemical fillers which have an adverse effect to a person's health over a lengthy period of time? You exonerate the government from allowing farmers to raise their livestock in sub-par conditions which could lead to unnecessary disease & bacteria breakouts like the recent Salmonella problem with eggs? Don't mind that the FDA actually allows a certain level of rodent droppings to fall into vats where they make food? It's perfectly fine to allow the prices for organic and healthier food to get so astronomically high that poor people can't actually afford it even with food stamps, never mind the supermarkets, who don't stock healthier products in the name of quick & easy profit, who jack up the prices of their goods with the intention of scaring off people with less money or even refuse EBT payments altogether? All of these things (and a lot more) should be addressed as to why Americans are fat, way before it becomes an issue of someone on food stamps choosing a bottle of soda over some a fruit drink or a glass of water during a meal. There's no sense telling people what they can't eat or drink if we don't hold the government and the food industry accountable for not providing more affordable & healthier solutions to begin with. This doesn't just affect the people on government assistance, this affects everyone of us.

BTW, Food Inc is a great documentary and a MAJOR eye opener if anyone wants to really talk about food and the health of America. More than 70% of food is purchased by companies like McDonald's and Wal-Mart. Because of their mass purchasing power and people's rabid consumption of their products, they essentially control how food is processed in this country. And with no real financial incentives for farmers to produce more organic and healthier foods, they all scramble to become the next group of people to sacrifice more of their farmland for corporate food services, horrible work conditions and pathetically low wages. And let's not get into how corn is converted to several different kinds of fillers & chemicals, how these things are injected into almost everything we purchase to eat or drink, and the lazy reasonings behind why it is used over things like wheat which is what we're supposed to be feeding much of our livestock. This is just the tip of the iceberg, yet here we are talking about how someone in the hood or a trailer park shouldn't be allowed to purchase a Fanta Orange?

How anyone thinks we're supposed to start regulating people's health at the Food Stamp level is way beyond me. IMO, there's too much to fix on the upper levels before anything like that could become remotely feasible.

 

[nudeyorker]

haulthat thanks for the definition however I simply stated my opinion based on the fact that the origins of a totalitarian philosophy of government that glorifies the state and nation and assigns to the state control over every aspect of national life is how I actually define it.
I understand everyones anger about how tax dollars are being spent and wasted. Why don't we stand up and do something about government spending and waste first rather than worry if someone has a cold glass of soda pop at the end of the day on our dime.

 

[Deno]

There are some things about food stamps that are very wrong indeed, First off why can you buy and energy drink with 4 times the caffeine of Coffee but you can not buy a cup of coffee. Why can you send your kids to the store and buy a shit load of candy but a person can not buy a pack of cough drops. You can buy a bag of rolls and a pack of hot dogs but you can not buy a hot dog on a bun from a roller grill. You know legally you can buy a prepared sandwich from a fridge unit but if you heat it in the store microwave then you can not. I don't see why taxpayers dollars a buying kids Doritos and soda for supper when we would not feed our kids that. I would say a better law to pass is not making them available at every corner and every convenience store where real food and groceries are not even available. Kids not only need fed they need fed nutrious and healthy food. If they can't do this then they should not be regulating what food is put in our kids mouths at school either.

 

[B_Marius567]

my ex GF get 40.00 a mouth in food stamp why will she wast on soda?

I send her SUBWAY CARDS so she can have some thing good to eat.

 

[SilverTrain]

First of all, let me make it clear that I have never paid a homeless guy down by the river for his food-stamp card, so that I could get a discount on groceries and he could get cash to buy weed and sweet, sweet booze.

But if I ever did so, I bet it would be fun to go to the grocery store and buy organic meat and dairy products (the only kind I will eat, because I believe antibiotics and other chemicals in conventional meat and dairy are bad for me). While there I would probably buy several bottles of rosé wine, because I really like that shit.

I imagine it would be hilarious when the people behind me in the checkout line started grumbling because they saw me whip out my food-stamp card to pay for a $5.50 gallon of organic milk (what the fools wouldn't know is that it would have only cost me about $3, because I would have paid the homeless dude 60 cents on the dollar for his food-stamp card!).

It's hard to conceive anything much funnier than that, but here's a contender: the person working the checkout line trying to figure out how to split the bill between the organic groceries (on the food-stamp card) and the cart full of wine (on me)! She'd probably have to ask me to swipe the card three or four times, until finally ringing her little bell to call the manager, who seven years ago attended a training session on how to deal with precisely this situation!

If I were the kind of person who would blatantly flaunt the law by trading cash for a homeless man's food-stamp card, and then use said card in such a shockingly antisocial manner, I bet the people in line behind me would really start moaning and groaning while they waited for the manager to come off his smoking break and zero out the register so that I could by my groceries and wine. I might even overhear one of them say, "Damn these freeloaders living off my tax dollars and the liberals who enable them! I'll show him -- I'll vote Republican!"

Strangely, in this bizarre alternative universe, I don't think I would feel any shame, embarrassment or stigma. I suppose I might stop to think about my fellow citizens and their tax dollars -- but then I would quickly remember that in no meaningful way had I impacted their tax "dollars." Because the entire food-stamp program only involves tax "fractions-of-pennies."

"If you don't like how your 'tax dollars' are being used," I might say to the people in line behind me, "perhaps you should protest the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which account for about a quarter of the federal budget and, after nearly a decade, have failed to even bring a third-world shithole under American control!"

And then when the store manager had done his job, I might just ask him to go get me a pack of American Spirits.

Lol, thanks for that! :biggrin1:

 

[helgaleena]

There are some things about food stamps that are very wrong indeed, First off why can you buy and energy drink with 4 times the caffeine of Coffee but you can not buy a cup of coffee. Why can you send your kids to the store and buy a shit load of candy but a person can not buy a pack of cough drops. You can buy a bag of rolls and a pack of hot dogs but you can not buy a hot dog on a bun from a roller grill. You know legally you can buy a prepared sandwich from a fridge unit but if you heat it in the store microwave then you can not. I don't see why taxpayers dollars a buying kids Doritos and soda for supper when we would not feed our kids that. I would say a better law to pass is not making them available at every corner and every convenience store where real food and groceries are not even available. Kids not only need fed they need fed nutrious and healthy food. If they can't do this then they should not be regulating what food is put in our kids mouths at school either.

Yes, Deno, this becomes a very important difference to those who do not have access to a kitchen. IMO the limits we put upon all the substances we use to maintain our bodies are subject to somewhat arbitrary logic, much as prescription versus nonprescription drugs are sorted by a bureaucratic system. We live in the USA and what
Food Stamps are good for is determined by the overarching culture of USA. Preconceptions of those who live in houses and have plumbing and electricity are there. It is not yet percolating into the public mentality that homeless people have not chosen to be that way. If only they would just crawl into the sewers and die off in a tidy fashion, eh?

 

[b.c.]

^Yep. ALL the ills of American society would just up and vanish: the joblessness, the issue of health care, inflation, pollution, crime, homelessness, STD's, drug and alcohol addictions...you name it... all would vanish if those "on the dole" would just die already.

How noble it is though, those who wish to step forward to insure the well being of those on the tak... er... on government assistance by monitoring the nutritional value of the food they ingest.

Why stop at soda, in fact. Ice cream too is an obscenely self gratifying extravagance. How dare families or even the kids of families on the dol... er.... on "food stamps" to even DREAM of wanting ice cream!! F**king infuriating, is it not?

And what about pizza?? Loaded with sodium, calories, fat... an abomination to be sure. Certainly welfare recipients should not expect to eat pizza!!

Eggs?? Let 'em have egg substitute, or only the whites, perhaps. Muffins?? Hell no!! Nor the tops of muffins either.

I've heard butter can be fairly hazardous to one's health also.... depending on how much. Maybe they can be limited... one stick per month.

Hmm...let's see what else... cookies? No. Crackers? Maybe the plain ones. Salt? Out. White bread? A definite no-no... wheat or rye only. Veggies? Yes. Greens? Yes. Fruit? Yes. Meat? Depends... chicken for sure, eh? Bacon, no. Sausages, no. Beef? Well, as long as it's not the "expensive stuff" (see: Lobster)...

 

[earllogjam]

Bullshit. You make it sound as if people apply for Food Stamps and if approved receive them like it's a gift. That's either insanely laughable, or spoken as if you really don't know how the program works. Food Stamps, Welfare and many other government run programs to help the poor are the very definition of an entitlement program... one that we're all entitled to if things get tough and we need it. Just because your tax dollars contribute less than .0001% of its funding doesn't mean that you have the right to tell people how they should conduct their lives under the program. Previous experience or membership doesn't dictate that either.

You're right, I've never been on Food Stamps and am not familiar with the program. You seem to know how the program works and what it takes to recieve Food Stamps. Maybe you can explain the process and limitations for the thread.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

You're right, I've never been on Food Stamps and am not familiar with the program. You seem to be know how the program works and what it takes to recieve Food Stamps. Maybe you can explain the process and limitations for the thread.

Well, I don't know everything about the program. All of my knowledge on the subject comes from my experiences growing up and various internet research. From what I've seen, the process to get on the program is the same but the limitations differ from state to state. Anyone wanting to receive Food Stamps legally has to go through an application process and meet certain requirements surrounding your income, size of family and employment status. People representing families with children or the elderly are more likely to get accepted and in most instances will receive a higher benefit than single people, and the maximum amount issued to those who qualify will differ as well. The best way to know about the application process is to do a Google search regarding eligibility in your own state. Here's info surrounding the program in New York.

 

[earllogjam]

Well, I don't know everything about the program. All of my knowledge on the subject comes from my experiences growing up and various internet research. From what I've seen, the process to get on the program is the same but the limitations differ from state to state. Anyone wanting to receive Food Stamps legally has to go through an application process and meet certain requirements surrounding your income, size of family and employment status. People representing families with children or the elderly are more likely to get accepted and in most instances will receive a higher benefit than single people, and the maximum amount issued to those who qualify will differ as well. The best way to know about the application process is to do a Google search regarding eligibility in your own state. Here's info surrounding the program in New York.

Thanks Vinyl. I imagine you don't get much per week to spend on food regardless, even if you have a large family as I see many on food stamps at a food bank where I volunteer sometimes. They use the stamps to supplement what they can get free at the food bank.

And you're right they do buy junk food with the stamps because it turns out that things like hot dogs and mac and cheeze in a box are cheaper and stretches their food budget despite it not beings very good for them. And soda, or orange sugar water is probably cheaper than milk.

 

[surferboy]

Thanks Vinyl. I imagine you don't get much per week to spend on food regardless, even if you have a large family as I see many on food stamps at a food bank where I volunteer sometimes. They use the stamps to supplement what they can get free at the food bank.

And you're right they do buy junk food with the stamps because it turns out that things like hot dogs and mac and cheeze in a box are cheaper and stretches their food budget despite it not beings very good for them. And soda, or orange sugar water is probably cheaper than milk.

from my experience, i've seen people literally have $800 - $1000 on their food card. hell, just tuesday, this woman with her little daughter had $826 left on her card after she spent at least $45 on oreos, doritos, soda, bread, and some other things that slip my mind atm. some were "normal" food, such as the bread and some lunch meats. but the majority was cookiers and chips and soda.

 

[haulthat]

Ummm W...T...F! Seriously? I can't believe some people... Lets begin.

(Refer to the underlined and clearly marked sections below to see what I was addressing.)

A,B, and C as listed below. I IN NO WAY mentioned any of those topics. For the sake of sticking to topic I chose not to go into an unrelated tangent. Are there many other issues, including those that you mentioned, that contribute to obesity and overall health issues in America? FUCK YES. Did I deny that or suggest that it should be ignored, overlooked, or accepted in any way shape or form? NO! The fact of the matter is that it is a huge and convoluted problem, to bring all of those aspects into a thread speaking about the ethics of food stamps seemed a little off topic, maybe create a new thread for that... its a good discussion, but its huge, complicated, and most of the people who are causing the problem wont read it or care.
D) Blame the supermarkets? Really? Supermarkets are a business, they cater to the demands of their clients. Supermarkets, like I dunno lets say Wallmart, make the decisions they do not to make a quick buck but because that is what the consumer demands. Many Americans CHOOSE unhealthy diets and lifestyles. Many Americans CHOOSE to buy the sugarier/greasier product even when given the choice between two equally priced options. Many Americans CHOOSE to buy pre-packaged crap instead of cooking. I am all for choice, I respect their decision, but blame them not the supermarket for selling WHAT SELLS. Whole Foods, without abandoning everything that got them where they are now, will never grow into a chain like Wallmart or Costco. They are huge not because they are evil geniuses trying to manipulate the public into killing themselves with crappy stuff.
E and F. Your logic is backwards, and misdirected. Taking on drastically changing the regulation of the food industry, once again, would require going into the politics in our country as far as businesses in general lobbying on when and how something like this would be possible. Worth while discussion? Yes, but same crap I said about the last other discussion being brought into this applies. In my opinion choosing wisely how a government funded program will allow its money to be spent, is not in effort to START regulating peoples health. Its a way to STOP allowing government funds to be used in ways that have a negative impact. Bottom line is they are directly providing those funds, its their responsibility to ensure they are having the desired effect. Cafeterias that have stopped serving crap in favor of healthier choices have suffered because kids brought their own shitty lunch to school in huge numbers. When its stupid, people will put their foot down and do WHAT THEY WANT... not whats right.
On the special note. This doesn't just affect the people on government assistance, this affects everyone of us. As strongly as I believe in healthy choices. I believe in the freedom we have in this country. People on government assistance are at the mercy of what assistance is offered, and what it was intended for (aside from people who find the loop holes, which some will). People who work their ass off, work period, or are rich and lucky can decide for themselves how to "regulate" their own health. At work I have been called the "water boy" for always carrying a jug of water around cause I mostly drink that. Been made fun of for always eating healthy crap when their ordering Burger King, even in some cases seen people start eating the stuff I do and stop a few weeks later because the shit they were used to eating is more fun. If my indirect influence got their attention, and not usually in a good way, the governments direct influence sure as hell would piss some people off. That is a huge war that will not be fought until its either there is no choice, or its too late.
You said in one of the underlined areas, supermarkets should offer "more affordable" healthy choices. More affordable in comparison to what they cost now, or what the shitty stuff costs now? Healthy choices will never be cheaper than bad ones, and that is a good thing. Cheaper than what they are now, that is up to Americans. In the end better costs more, there is no way around it. How much more yes can be effected by mass production. Mass product almost always takes a toll on quality, however, and costs a lot to invest in at the start. If we invest in mass production of healthier options before there is an active demand for it I have every confidence it will fail, and become an example as to why the food industry should stay away from anything leaning in that direction which would do more harm than good.
I am the proud owner of Food Inc, its a brilliant film. As is Super Size Me. Reality is, it may be an eye opener for people who are already looking towards that type of thinking. It won't do a damn thing for people who aren't actively concerned with their health. They have no interest, aren't open to that way of thinking, and it is a DOCUMENTARY. Even a documentary about Sex in the Ancient World doesn't get much attention because people without a decent head on their shoulders run from the thought of... thinking? I dunno ask them.
Bottom line. I think your flat out wrong about what I said, AND I think your a little bit annoying for suggesting I in any way said thing I didn't. There is reading between the lines, then there is completely writing over them with your assumptions. Way to jump the gun there.
:wtf1: fftopic: :rocketwhore:

So, you A)don't mind that FDA regulations have become so lapsed that they continue to allow companies in the food industry to inject their products with chemical fillers which have an adverse effect to a person's health over a lengthy period of time? B)You exonerate the government from allowing farmers to raise their livestock in sub-par conditions which could lead to unnecessary disease & bacteria breakouts like the recent Salmonella problem with eggs? C) Don't mind that the FDA actually allows a certain level of rodent droppings to fall into vats where they make food? It's perfectly fine to allow the prices for organic and healthier food to get so astronomically high that poor people can't actually afford it even with food stamps, never mind the D)supermarkets, who don't stock healthier products in the name of quick & easy profit, who jack up the prices of their goods with the intention of scaring off people with less money or even refuse EBT payments altogether? All of these things (and a lot more) should be addressed as to why Americans are fat, way E)before it becomes an issue of someone on food stamps choosing a bottle of soda over some a fruit drink or a glass of water during a meal. There's no sense telling people what they can't eat or drink if we don't hold the government and the food industry accountable for not providing more affordable & healthier solutions to begin with. (((SPECIAL NOTE: This doesn't just affect the people on government assistance, this affects everyone of us.)))

BTW, Food Inc is a great documentary and a MAJOR eye opener if anyone wants to really talk about food and the health of America. More than 70% of food is purchased by companies like McDonald's and Wal-Mart. Because of their mass purchasing power and people's rabid consumption of their products, they essentially control how food is processed in this country. And with no real financial incentives for farmers to produce more organic and healthier foods, they all scramble to become the next group of people to sacrifice more of their farmland for corporate food services, horrible work conditions and pathetically low wages. And let's not get into how corn is converted to several different kinds of fillers & chemicals, how these things are injected into almost everything we purchase to eat or drink, and the lazy reasonings behind why it is used over things like wheat which is what we're supposed to be feeding much of our livestock. This is just the tip of the iceberg, yet here we are talking about how someone in the hood or a trailer park shouldn't be allowed to purchase a Fanta Orange?

F)How anyone thinks we're supposed to start regulating people's health at the Food Stamp level is way beyond me. IMO, there's too much to fix on the upper levels before anything like that could become remotely feasible.

 

[BadBoyCanada]

Philosophically I dislike the idea of telling people what they can buy with their food stamps -- if I were in charge, I would probably just give the poor actual money and let them make their own decisions.

But when parents are feeding shit to their kids, that's a different situation.

There's 2 parts to my thought process.
Some of the people on social assistance (SA) are mentally challenged. Either through mental illness or developmental disability. Giving those individuals cash (or even food stamps) may be more responsibility than they can handle.

I'm more in favor of government subsidized housing for those who need it, but in a communal environment. In Canada anyway, SA is given as a cheque and people have to go out and care for themselves (freedom). However, most end up in shit holes, rely on soup kitchens and have very poor eating habits. Many are teen mom's who don't have the skills to raise a pet rock! There is also a cycle where the children of SA recipients are ending up on SA, and so the community grows exponentially. I feel by bringing these families under the same roof, the government can set-up central programs easier. It also allows them set up central food buying to ensure addicts (and the children of) are fed properly. Internet, cable, phones can be offered easier if the community is centralized. Programs to encourage education, whatever, are easier to put on if the community is centralized.

The current system is broke and it's time to look at other alternatives.

 

[surferboy]

The current system is broke and it's time to look at other alternatives.

no doubt about it. i'm gonna assume you're canadian, from the fact you brought it up. how does SA work in canada? is it as easily abused as it is in the states? then again, you guys have better social programs than we ever will.

semi-off-topic: unfortunately, most americans see social programs, like universal healthcare, bad. they have rallies (glenn beck, i'm glaring at you) and they have signs and whatnot (blatantly racist signs towards obama) yet, they don't realize that some, if not most of them, are some kind of social program. medicaid, medicare, social security, food stamps. all those are socialist programs. yet, in their blinding hypocrisy, they just don't see it. but, i digress. ok peoples, back to the topic on hand!

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Ummm W...T...F! Seriously? I can't believe some people... Lets begin.

Yes... let us start!

A,B, and C as listed below. I IN NO WAY mentioned any of those topics. For the sake of sticking to topic I chose not to go into an unrelated tangent. Are there many other issues, including those that you mentioned, that contribute to obesity and overall health issues in America? FUCK YES. Did I deny that or suggest that it should be ignored, overlooked, or accepted in any way shape or form? NO! The fact of the matter is that it is a huge and convoluted problem, to bring all of those aspects into a thread speaking about the ethics of food stamps seemed a little off topic, maybe create a new thread for that... its a good discussion, but its huge, complicated, and most of the people who are causing the problem wont read it or care.

And that is the problem.
If one of the main reasons for adding soda to a list of prohibited items for Food Stamp purchases is about health and nutrition, then it's only fair to make that a viable discussion as well as the supposed "ethical" reasons for doing it. There's no sense for anyone to be flexing their morality around here without as many facts as possible that relate to the subject matter. If they, in turn, decide that their morals are more important and skip over all the facts then that really tells us something.

D) Blame the supermarkets? Really?

You heard me. And I gave plenty of reasons why. Let's see why you think this is so crazy.

Supermarkets are a business, they cater to the demands of their clients. Supermarkets, like I dunno lets say Wallmart, make the decisions they do not to make a quick buck but because that is what the consumer demands.

LOL... you honestly think that companies like Wal-Mart, which is one of the three largest buyers of any food product in America, aren't in the game to make quick bucks? They're one of the main reasons why the food we're purchasing these days is injected with chemicals, hormones and other various toxic fillers that are making Americans sick. Not only that, but they also destroy small businesses in the process such as other neighborhood & localized farmer's markets. They create and purchase items at huge volumes (more than most of us could ever fathom), allowing them to severely undercut competition that may have healthier choices. And because the average American needs the occasional bargain to make ends meet, most will always run to the place where they can get it cheaper especially if they're not aware of the process. That's what happens when people don't read or don't care to find out what's really going on, but would rather push their morals around.

Trying to say that it's only because food is a "consumer demand", when in reality it's one of many human necessities that is also overly exploited for profit in this country, is extremely short sighted.

Many Americans CHOOSE unhealthy diets and lifestyles. Many Americans CHOOSE to buy the sugarier/greasier product even when given the choice between two equally priced options. Many Americans CHOOSE to buy pre-packaged crap instead of cooking.

That's because for many Americans, the healthier option isn't a choice due to price, time constraints, etc... It's not just because the mass majority of people are addicted to a Big Mac & Twinkies. When an adult only has 30 minutes for lunch and the only nearby options to their job is a KFC and a Pizza Hut, how can they seek out healthier options without jeopardizing their employment? And please, don't dismiss the issue and bring up the subject about making food at home because that just allows me to repeat the problems Americans face today with most supermarkets.

I am all for choice, I respect their decision, but blame them not the supermarket for selling WHAT SELLS.

There's plenty of fault on both sides to spread around. The corporate food giants are definitely fueling the problem/

Whole Foods, without abandoning everything that got them where they are now, will never grow into a chain like Wallmart or Costco.

So what? Please don't tell me that you associate the quality of an item by the size of a company who creates and sells it? Another reason why we have a huge problem with food in this country is because companies like Wal-Mart and Costco have to purchase for quantity and NOT quality to meet the needs of their customer base.

They are huge not because they are evil geniuses trying to manipulate the public into killing themselves with crappy stuff.

They're huge because the company is run by wealthy, greedy people who really have no concept of conducting a business beyond making excessive profit. Just like the pharmaceutical & insurance industries, they have no problem peddling a sub-par product to their masses as long as they can sell it for a gain. With their current amassment of power in the food industry, it wouldn't be hard for companies like Wal-Mart or McDonald's to focus on quality and make sure their processing plants are producing healthier products that are reasonably priced. If it really was about meeting consumer demands the FDA would hold these companies to stricter regulations to ensure this, instead of constantly lowering the standards to allow things like a certain amount of rodent dropping to fall into vats of processed meats. But that won't happen because all of the key players in the industry are in bed together and are making vat loads of money. That may not be the definition of "evil" in your opinion, but in a thread where people strut their ethics around like peacocks I thought I should shine a light on what's really going on out there. That way, when you decide you can tell someone they should be banned for purchasing soda on a Food Stamp you'll understand why others (like myself) think it's a laughable premise.

Taking on drastically changing the regulation of the food industry, once again, would require going into the politics in our country as far as businesses in general lobbying on when and how something like this would be possible.

Actually, it wouldn't. As consumers, all we would have to do is drive past the Wal-Mart and go to Whole Foods (or a local, organic equivalent). Instead of taking your kids to McDonald's for a quick bite to eat after a movie, take them to a local restaurant where you see real chefs cooking with healthier food options. If enough people did this, it would effect the one thing Wal-Mart, Costco and all of the other supermarket giants care about... their profit margin. Alas, doing something like this is very difficult for many Americans for reasons that I already explained and it's not just because they're lazy or addicted to Little Debbie pastries.

In my opinion choosing wisely how a government funded program will allow its money to be spent, is not in effort to START regulating peoples health.

So why bring up health & nutrition as reasons for wanting to prohibit food stamp recipients from buying soda?

Bottom line is they are directly providing those funds, its their responsibility to ensure they are having the desired effect.

... a desired affect that is favorable to everyone involved. Not just the disgruntled taxpayer who disguises their money grubbing desires as morality and seeks out to impede on the choices and freedoms of others through something as mindless as purchasing soda with a Food Stamp.

Cafeterias that have stopped serving crap in favor of healthier choices have suffered because kids brought their own shitty lunch to school in huge numbers.

That's funny... I thought it was because parents and school councils bounded together in various districts to force them to adhere to higher standards. Because if we're talking about Food Stamp families, it's not like there's enough time for many of them to make a "shitty lunch" for their kids to take in a brown paper bag.

People on government assistance are at the mercy of what assistance is offered, and what it was intended for (aside from people who find the loop holes, which some will). People who work their ass off, work period, or are rich and lucky can decide for themselves how to "regulate" their own health.

Nice distortions, dude.
You act like someone who is on government assistance doesn't "work their ass off". You think all of them are just sitting at home, scratching their balls and waiting for the checks to come in. Why don't you look at the requirements needed to apply for Food Stamps and Welfare in your state and see that it's possible for someone to have employment and STILL need government assistance?

You said in one of the underlined areas, supermarkets should offer "more affordable" healthy choices. More affordable in comparison to what they cost now, or what the shitty stuff costs now? Healthy choices will never be cheaper than bad ones, and that is a good thing.

Seriously... did you really think about that before putting it to type? You're actually applauding the ideal that the better options are becoming harder to obtain by the very people you want to see eat healthier due to continually growing costs?

In the end better costs more, there is no way around it.

:wtf1:
No it doesn't. The price of an item does not always reflect the quality of it.

If we invest in mass production of healthier options before there is an active demand for it I have every confidence it will fail, and become an example as to why the food industry should stay away from anything leaning in that direction which would do more harm than good.

Such a disingenuous statement.
When there's more demand for healthier options? LOL!!! Seriously, go ask 1000 mothers right now would they like to see healthier and more affordable options at their supermarket to purchase for their families. I can assure you that the majority of them will not reject the idea due to lack of demand. Common sense applies here.

I think your flat out wrong about what I said, AND I think your a little bit annoying for suggesting I in any way said thing I didn't. There is reading between the lines, then there is completely writing over them with your assumptions. Way to jump the gun there.

Well considering how you choose to think around here, I don't think I have to worry too much about whether you think I'm right or wrong.

 

[D_Hammond Happydipper]

Is it Ethical to Ban Food Stamp Users From Buying Soda? | The Atlantic Wire

i believe it's totally fine to ban food stamp recipients from using their food stamps from buying soda. i work for walgreens (as man of the older posters here know) and i see it constantly. people use their food stamps to buy shit food.

imo, they should only be allowed to buy healthy foods with their stamps. what pisses me off the most, however, are the peoples you see with nice cars and jewelry, yet they're on food stamps and medicaid. but i digress.

so, how do you guys feel about this?

they probly bought them on stolen cc or defaulted credit cards/loans

It isn't in all states if I remember it right.

A google search with "fast food restaurants accepting food stamps brings up several hits. Add McDonald's and see add. results.

california allows this I think it's ridiculous....

you can even go High End dining on Tax payers dollar

 

[breeze]

I don't know if anyone here has seen mtv's " true life " shows. I don't think anyone really knows how representative they really are. On one show they followed three families without wage earners. One of these families featured a dad who's daughter was about to have a baby and was living with him. All he did was look for work. You could sense the incredible tension and stress. In the parking lot they both broke down.
And another show featured three families on the verge of homelessness. One of these families was a mother with her 17 old daughter. On the day they had to move out of their apartment the mother just sat in the bathroom and cried. This was in santa clara or otherwises known to the world as silicon valley probably the richest place the world has ever known. They lived in their car the first night and for one week survived on basically one box of pop tarts. Why they have didn't benefits or applied for benefits i don't know. They seemed to be just regular white middle class folks or were. They must have known the system. They belonged to a church. I've read on other boards that this is a difficult process and hard to get. They did finally did get help through their church. The idea that the poor are really secretly rich or aren't really as bad off as they seem is total nonsense.

 

[helgaleena]

from my experience, i've seen people literally have $800 - $1000 on their food card. hell, just tuesday, this woman with her little daughter had $826 left on her card after she spent at least $45 on oreos, doritos, soda, bread, and some other things that slip my mind atm. some were "normal" food, such as the bread and some lunch meats. but the majority was cookiers and chips and soda.

Someone with that much credit on their foodstamps card has a very large family. My own is quite small. You cannot make generalizations like you have, surfer, until you have better understanding of individuals and their particular situation. She brought one little daughter with her, but where are the five or six others she must feed with that card?