Food stamps or junk food stamps?

[syrenn]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

It's a hard thing to regulate. There should be limits though. After all, it's us taxpayers who will end up footing the bill when these idiots end up in the hospital with coronary disease. When they end up at the dentist because their teeth are rotting out of their head. That's why these people on welfare and food stamps should be required to actually WORK for their benefits. Community service!.....Pick up trash, whatever......Allowing them to just sit on their lazy asses stuffing their faces with pork rinds and washing it down with Dr. Pepper before chucking a moonpie down their craw is friggin' ridiculous. I say regulate it all. They want to buy a 12 pack o' Dr. P, fine. But don't let 'em buy 4 cases. If they want to buy a bag o' rinds, fine. Don't let 'em buy 5.

 

[loosecannon]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

agreed. But better to eliminate the stamps altogether and just distribute unprocessed foods like beans and rice and lard.

"Government lard" sounds so *$&^@#$!

 

[Luissa]

Did you know that food stamps have the best return when wanting to stimulate the economy?

 

[manifold]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

Funny, I'm not aware of one single law that restricts what I'm allowed to eat... unless you're talking about psilocybin mushrooms.

 

[Paulie]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

The problem is that it's just a specific amount of money allotted to the individual. It will still cost taxpayers the same amount of money whether they spend it on junk, or on necessities.

And then you have the slippery slope issue of constituting 'necessity' and who should have that authority. You're delving into dictating people's lives now, and that's hardly conservative, ideologically speaking.

Someone's opinion that junk food will ultimately lead to bad health and extra medical expenses is just an opinion. There is more to health than just diet, and exercise happens to be just as important, and FREE.

A healthy exercise regiment can easily balance out a less than healthy diet, so that's a poor justification for regulating the purchasing.

 

[Luissa]

In findings echoed by other economists and studies, he said the study shows the fastest way to infuse money into the economy is through expanding the food-stamp program. For every dollar spent on that program $1.73 is generated throughout the economy, he said.

Food stamps offer best stimulus - study - Jan. 29, 2008


I think cutting foodstamps would do more damage.

 

[boedicca]

Did you know that food stamps have the best return when wanting to stimulate the economy?

Really? Does this mean if we spent the entire $800B Stimulus package on Cheese Puffs and M&Ms that unemployment would be in the 5%s?

That's not what I think of when the gubmint says "Shovel Ready", but in some aspects, tis fittin'.

 

[Paulie]

Really? Does this mean if we spent the entire $800B Stimulus package on Cheese Puffs and M&Ms that unemployment would be in the 5%s?

No, but if it was organic vegetables and non-hormone processed meats and dairy, and tofu, and gluten-free food it would have literally brought us to full employment and staggering GDP growth.

 

[Luissa]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

The problem is that it's just a specific amount of money allotted to the individual. It will still cost taxpayers the same amount of money whether they spend it on junk, or on necessities.

And then you have the slippery slope issue of constituting 'necessity' and who should have that authority. You're delving into dictating people's lives now, and that's hardly conservative, ideologically speaking.

Someone's opinion that junk food will ultimately lead to bad health and extra medical expenses is just an opinion. There is more to health than just diet, and exercise happens to be just as important, and FREE.

A healthy exercise regiment can easily balance out a less than healthy diet, so that's a poor justification for regulating the purchasing.

I think I am going to go with the government staying out of what we buy.

 

[boedicca]

Are food stamps "food" stamps or all you can eat junk food stamps?

Considering that the government is now telling us what we can and cant eat, should or shouldn't eat, should be be limiting foods that you can and cant purchase with food stamps?

We are banning sodas from schools and city property because they are bad for your health. We are telling corporations what they can and cant sell. I.E. McD's happy meals having to many calories and fat and forcing company's to get rid of trans fats in food.

My question is should the food stamp program allow "junk" food to be purchased on tax payers dollars? Should soda, chips, candy, pre-made cookies and cakes now be disallowed?

I was always under the impression that the food stamps program was to provide the necessities. I would consider soda, candy and junk/snack food as luxuries.

As tempting as it is to add yet more social engineering to something that is already social engineering, a better solution is to get rid of food stamps altogether. We already have income transfer programs via various welfare programs. It those levels are inadequate, then just adjust the payments and get rid of another bureaucratic structure.

 

[AllieBaba]

I never realized how much foodstamps do stimulate the economy until I talked to store owners about it.

They are a huge benefit.

Food stamps is one liberal program that I really do endorse. I'm sorry, but it really does help people and I can't imagine what would happen if we eliminated it now that so many are so dependent upon it.I can live with the idea of people having to pay for their own medical care or go without...but the thought of people STARVING because there's no program to feed them isn't something I can justify. We've got the program already, let's keep it and cut money elsewhere.

I used to feel very strongly that it is wrong to try to exert control over people's spending habits with regards to food....but my supervisor actually changed my mind when she pointed out "we do it with medical" and when she pointed out that everybody else in the world has to adjust their intake to accomodate their budget, and fs recipients should be no different.

 

[Luissa]

Did you know that food stamps have the best return when wanting to stimulate the economy?

Really? Does this mean if we spent the entire $800B Stimulus package on Cheese Puffs and M&Ms that unemployment would be in the 5%s?

That's not what I think of when the gubmint says "Shovel Ready", but in some aspects, tis fittin'.

Did I say that? But I bet if we did, it probably would have helped. You have to have people to make M&Ms. You also have to people to stock the M&M's, then you have to have a checker to ring up the M&Ms.

I also think I clearly said we shouldn't cut foodstamps, not that we should give everyone and their dog foodstamps.

 

[manifold]

Narcotics aside (such as mushrooms and pot brownies), I'm still waiting for someone to provide me with an example of a law that restricts what I am allowed to eat.

 

[AllieBaba]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

 

[Luissa]

I work for a family that gets $250 in foodstamps. And they do buy chips and pop, but they also buy items that you would probably approve of.

 

[boedicca]

Did you know that food stamps have the best return when wanting to stimulate the economy?

Really? Does this mean if we spent the entire $800B Stimulus package on Cheese Puffs and M&Ms that unemployment would be in the 5%s?

That's not what I think of when the gubmint says "Shovel Ready", but in some aspects, tis fittin'.

Did I say that? But I bet if we did, it probably would have helped. You have to have people to make M&Ms. You also have to people to stock the M&M's, then you have to have a checker to ring up the M&Ms.

I also think I clearly said we shouldn't cut foodstamps, not that we should give everyone and their dog foodstamps.

I'd like to see the empirical proof that food stamps have the greatest multiplier on the economy of any possible fiscal or tax policy change.

 

[loosecannon]

I think I am going to go with the government staying out of what we buy.

...with your own damned money. But when you are literally buying food with their money you buy what's on their menu.

 

[Sarah G]

Did you know that food stamps have the best return when wanting to stimulate the economy?

Yes!

These people just care about feeling superior to the poor though. Sad really.

 

[Paulie]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

So then cut the fund allotments to recipients, and just provide them with the actual food.

But don't give me $500 and then tell me what I can and can't buy with it.

They give out allotments to people going to college, but they don't say "well, you can go to XYZ State College, but fuck you, you aren't going to Notre Dame".

If you offer direct food distribution instead, and designate certain things like rice, milk, bread, meats, etc, then you are regulating what people receive without dictating their decisions. People can either choose to accept it or not, but they haven't had any freedom curtailed.

I'd be ok with that. But then, the supermarkets would suffer and the lobbyists have certainly made sure that something like that won't happen.