Food Stamp Soft Drink Ban?

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Maniac Craniac, Apr 30, 2011.

Loading...
  1. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/30/us/politics/30food.html?hp

    I decided to drop this here because I have a feeling that many of you may have an interesting perspective on this issue. Personally, I think using food stamps for junk food is abuse of the system. If you want soda (or ice cream and cake), you should do it on your own dime. Harsh? :AR15firing:
     
  2. OutsideTheBox

    OutsideTheBox New Member

    It depends yogurt is actually good for you, sugar free ice cream has milk in it so is a dairy product but I agree on soda and lots of other things now considered food like Little Debbie Cakes and Ho Ho's. I do get food stamps when I qualify and I can stretch every dollar buying good food cereals, canned goods, yes yogurt and some sugar free ice cream and use coupons alot or hit up sales. You can eat well with some careful planning and effort. But part of that is avoiding wasting money on things that are not food in any real sense potato chips and the like. I would redo the items based on nutritional value and where they fit on the pyramid cutting out the sweets at the top for sure.
     
  3. Hadashi no Gen

    Hadashi no Gen New Member

    If a person can not buy beer and cigarettes with food stamps, they should also not be able to buy things like soft drinks, potato chips, etc. I am an alum of my state's foodstamp program, and it makes me really sad when I see people using their EBT cards to buy junk food, especially for their children. At the same time... not only are healthy options available, but you can use foodstamps at farmers markets, food co-ops, CSAs, and other places where you can get fresh healthy food for FREE.

    Banning soft drinks with food stamps is a good start on reforming this policy. Of course people should not be forced to eat anything... but if anyone really wants to buy soda pop, it should be from personal money instead of state/tax payer funds. If you think about it, carbonated beverages are really "luxury items." As in, they are for enjoyment and have no nutritional value.

    I don't think that buying soft drinks, or any other non-healthy food, with food stamps is abuse. I think it boils down to a lack of education in how to eat healthy in our society (and maybe some apathy). Not abuse though... people eat what they think they are supposed to eat. Foodstamp users want to get the most for their money... so obviously people will buy things like soft drinks, instead of healthy juice, since it is perceived to be cheaper. Where I live, every local farmers' market, food co-op, and even some CSAs take EBT... but many people who use foodstamps choose not to buy food there because they perceive the environment as catering to a higher class. So instead, they shop at Price Chopper... where the food is the same price and some times more expensive.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2011
  4. TEKMAN

    TEKMAN Semper Fi!

    No wonder Giant did not accept for my purchase.
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Not only this, but corn subsidies should be ended to curtail the flow of cheap high fructose corn syrup. Agricultural subsidies mean that we actually pay extra to ensure our food is less healthy. It's ridiculous!

    -=Steve=-
     
  6. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    I think people on food stamps should have to buy food that includes things like: chicken, white/brown rice, reduced or non fat milk, healthy cereals, veggies, etc. Then they should have to take classes on how to cook healthy.

    I have seen people migrate here from other countries including Vietnam and Mexico. Many (not all) don't have much when they get here, but they buy bulk burlap sacks of white rice, steam it, and throw a very small amount of meat/veggies in to stretch the food. Usually, they tend to be healthier while eating well.

    Many of the low income citizens suffer from costly health problems, which we as taxpayers pay for. On the other side, many low income folks buy whatever is cheapest to make their money stretch. Non healthy food is usually cheaper than healthy food. I can understand this.

    As a moderate Dem, I think we should have social programs for the disabled and elderly. As a taxpayer, I do think we have the right to impose certain conditions on what recipients receive. I also think we need to get tougher on able bodied folks who pop out all kinds of children to remain on welfare. Just my opinion.

    Have a great weekend!!!!!!!! Just had my car hand waxed, looks great.

    Abner :)
     
  7. Shawn Ambrose

    Shawn Ambrose New Member

    I have no problem with this proposed policy. When you accept the government's money (which in effect, what food stamps are), you are bound by the government's rules.

    According to the FoodShare Wisconsin home page:

    "FoodShare Wisconsin helps low-income families and individuals to buy nutritious food."

    Soft drinks don't fall in that category. Personally, I'd like to see food stamps morph into an extended WIC program. WIC has a limited food basket which eligible families can buy:

    Benefits received by WIC participants

    Why not a similar program for food stamps?

    Shawn
     
  8. mattbrent

    mattbrent Well-Known Member

    If people are worried about having enough to spend on food, consider Angel Food Ministries. My wife and I started participating in this program last summer. They have some good stuff. While we do not use food stamps, AFM does accept them.

    -Matt
     
  9. Hadashi no Gen

    Hadashi no Gen New Member

    Yes, ordering in bulk is always helpful.
     
  10. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    I think this is just another high-handed attempt by the government to save people from themselves.
     
  11. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    I agree with Ted and with the policy. I'm all for LESS government in my business. However, like Shawn mentioned, when you accept a handout, it's not unreasonable for you to comply with certain stipulations.
    There is MUCH, much, debate over health and nutrition - specifically healthy by whose standards? Whose pyramid? Vegan or vegetarian? Meat or fish? Organic or treated? Fresh or frozen? Genetically modified or heirloom? Cooked from scratch or convenience? If cooked, then how? By whom? What about the agriculture and the govt endorsement of agri-programs? These are just a few of the issues that would cloud the level of micromanagement involved in picking the "best" food for those in need. I don't think it's necessary to be that detailed. (for example, I'd suggest that the Angel Ministry basket is not a great deal for a number of reasons)

    Simply saying soda (and alcohol) are not approved under the program, is an easy implementation to make without a lot of over-thinking. I don't think you could make an argument for including soda unless it was a choice issue, certainly no one believes that soda contributes to the health of ones diet.
     
  12. eilla05

    eilla05 New Member

    I think that if these people think that soda alone is the biggest contributor to obesity that they are stupid and have no clue about obesity. Obesity is caused by people making bad choices about the food/beverages they put into their bodies.

    How about instead of worrying about putting a ban on soda with food stamps we require each recipient to undertake an extensive nutrition class follow by a real life demonstration of how your shopping dollars can be used to purchase healthy good for you food? and with cooking classes? People buy soda and other junk food because its easy and what they know. Seriously if soda is the culprit I would bow down and kiss their a$$... soda is not the problem it is just an easy target... we should be focused more on teaching low-income families about nutrition.

    Having said all this I do agree with someone who posted above that offers guidelines and only certain foods to families who are on food stamps such as the WIC program does. Even with this though I feel that families should have a "blow" budget because even those who eat the best still have treats such as soda and junk food.
     
  13. AUTiger00

    AUTiger00 New Member

    They can have a "blow" budget when they are buying their own food. Until then everything except necessities should be banned.
     
  14. Hadashi no Gen

    Hadashi no Gen New Member

    Where's my crack money?
     
  15. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    He he he!!!!!!!!!!!

    Abner :)
     
  16. AUTiger00

    AUTiger00 New Member

    +1 Laughing at my desk.
     
  17. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Wow. You win the internet forever with that one.
     
  18. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Right, but I will reemphasize my opinion on the matter. If someone is on public assistance, which I understand is at times a necessity for a large amount of very hard working, innocent people, then it should not include luxuries or waste, which directly translates into waste of tax money. I have no problem with making sure that children get enough vegetables and protein, but I'd much rather not be contributing to their consumption of Cheetos and Pepsi. If they have any money left over from their personal budget fine, buy the items on your own dime, like everyone else. We buy luxuries with our excess, while WIC and food stamps are there for people who are desperate to take care of just the essentials.
     
  19. Hadashi no Gen

    Hadashi no Gen New Member

    Does Al Gore know about this?!
     
  20. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    How do you make the smiley that is shooting his gun?
     

Share This Page