First SNAP Ban on Candy and Soda Set To Become Law

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Isn't that what minimum wage laws do?

Almost no adult makes minimum wage and if you do, you went wrong somewhere in life.

 

[progressive hunter]

LOL! I'll bite:

Paternalistic actions implemented against a class of people solely because of their financial status.
It takes a little piece of the poor person's freedom away..and creates a subtle social difference.

I remember never taking free lunches as a kid..because of the stigma of handing in a specially colored ticket that designated me as being one of the poor kids...so perhaps I take it personally.

Choice is freedom...and it is not up to the Govt. to police people's food purchases.

THEY Have no finacial status,, theyre broke and asking others to pay their bills,,

 

[toobfreak]

Nobody is forcing them to live off of the public dole.

Sure there is if they are disabled and have no choice or alternative other than food stamps.

They can spend their own money on whatever they want.

Their own money is still government money.

If they want to use my money, it comes with conditions.

But it isn't YOUR money. It is the government's money. Everything the government does is with money they collect from taxation. If "your" money comes with conditions to restrict the living of poor and sick people, then where are the conditions on them spending billions and trillions all around the world on everything from spending $59 million to house illegal aliens in luxury hotels, about two thirds of which went to allowing illegals to buy any food they chose to eat including pizza, cola and junk food, to the Air Force spending $1,300 for each reheatable coffee cup aboard one of its aircraft. The Air Force spent $32,000 replacing 25 cups!

Where were your conditions on any of this? It all used "your" money.

Bottom line, in effect, what is being argued here is that illegals who deliberately came here have more rights than American citizens who became sick and disabled through no fault of their own.

 

[scruffy]

Almost no adult makes minimum wage and if you do, you went wrong somewhere in life.

I'm going to have to make minimum wage for 1 year and 6 months when my social security kicks in.

After that I can make as much as I want.

Weird-ass law. (Don't ask me, I didn't write it).

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Which is probably some form of AFDC or SSI, right?

So the unintended consequence will be more cash spent on sweets..and less on frills like the electric bill?

If you by sweets instead of paying your electric bill you deserve to be in the dark.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Your two pennies in tax given to the poor isn't enough for you to determine what people should eat or drink.

Actually it is.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Where's the fun in welfare if we can't lord it over the less fortunate?

We cant run a country on feelings. Your enabling only hurts the poor. But you feel good about yourself don’t you.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Should have never gotten like it is. What happened to giving them food itself, instead of a card?

Same as always. Democrats needed the votes.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Clearly the candy and soda industries are against this. But why do Democrats want candy and soda in Democrats diets?

Democrats want cradle to grave dependency on them.

 

[toobfreak]

They can buy soda and candy with their own money.

If you are on Welfare, you have no money of your own.

But not with taxpayer money. We don’t need to fund unhealthy habits.

So basically, you are endorsing a fascist state. Illegal aliens now have more rights than an American just because he got sick or disabled. But since all of us use taxpayer money one way or other, directly or indirectly, you just endorsed the state banning YOU from all unhealthy habits you might need, want or enjoy. Got it.

Just don't bitch then when your own policies catch up to bite you in the ass. It is easy to rationalize when it is someone else, huh? You use taxpayer money--- are you ready to give up pizza, hotdogs, hamburgers, potato chips and beer?

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Rice and beans.

They can have milk meat vegetables and fruit also. It really is all the body needs.

 

[Lisa558]

If you are on Welfare, you have no money of your own.


So basically, you are endorsing a fascist state. Illegal aliens now have more rights than an American just because he got sick or disabled. But since all of us use taxpayer money one way or other, directly or indirectly, you just endorsed the state banning YOU from all unhealthy habits you might need, want or enjoy. Got it.

Just don't bitch then when your own policies catch up to bite you in the ass. It is easy to rationalize when it is someone else, huh? You use taxpayer money--- are you ready to give up pizza, hotdogs, hamburgers, potato chips and beer?

I eat those things very infrequently since they’re not healthy, but when I do, I use my own money. Not food stamps someone else paid for.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

MAGA Nanny State​

No. Welfare is the nanny state.

 

[toobfreak]

I eat those things very infrequently since they’re not healthy, but when I do, I use my own money. Not food stamps someone else paid for.

Totally irrelevant. The question is whether the government should be in the business on picking who can eat freely what they choose and telling others what they cannot have?

Can you point to the appropriate section of the Constitution?

The point is that I'm not talking about some welfare kid hogging in candy all day, I'm talking about a disabled person forced onto food stamps, which cannot cook and needs packaged food to live on and cola at night to help with pain being indiscriminately cut off and told they are not allowed their only pleasure in life of having a little sweet desert?

It is funny how even the most stalwart conservatives, faced with the idea of free will in a nation based on free will, immediately falls back on fascism to deny free will to others--- because they are using "their" money.

Meanwhile, whatever their benefit is per month, $200 or whatever, if they buy $200 of fresh food or buy $200 of cola and candy bars, either way, it is still $200 and won't save the taxpayer one dime. All it will do is punish the sick, disabled and poor from having the free will of making their own choices in how they eat and live.

Meanwhile, we put up illegals in luxury hotels and given then 60 million dollars to buy and eat any way they want.

Nice to know you afford more rights and liberty upon illegals than you do American citizens.

 

[Lisa558]

Totally irrelevant. The question is whether the government should be in the business on picking who can eat freely what they choose and telling others what they cannot have?

Can you point to the appropriate section of the Constitution?

The point is that I'm not talking about some welfare kid hogging in candy all day, I'm talking about a disabled person forced onto food stamps, which cannot cook and needs packaged food to live on and cola at night to help with pain being indiscriminately cut off and told they are not allowed their only pleasure in life of having a little sweet desert?

It is funny how even the most stalwart conservatives, faced with the idea of free will in a nation based on free will, immediately falls back on fascism to deny free will to others--- because they are using "their" money.

Meanwhile, whatever their benefit is per month, $200 or whatever, if they buy $200 of fresh food or buy $200 of cola and candy bars, either way, it is still $200 and won't save the taxpayer one dime. All it will do is punish the sick, disabled and poor from having the free will of making their own choices in how they eat and live.

Meanwhile, we put up illegals in luxury hotel;s and given then 60 million dollars to buy and eat anyway they want.

Nice tyo know you afford more rights and liberty upon illegals than you do American citizens.

1) They already limit certain purchases, such as alcohol.

2) The government also is not prohibiting welfare people from buying soda. They are just prohibiting them from using other people’s money to do so.

3) Not sure why you accuse me of granting more benefits to illegals. I don’t think they should get one red cent.

4) You have changed entirely….not just your position but your messaging. I think some liberal hacked your account.

 

[toobfreak]

1) They already limit certain purchases, such as alcohol.

Irrelevant. And I might point out that welfare people have 100 ways of still getting booze and getting around the law. But every bad law starts with good intentions, and yes, there are some people who would spend every last dime they have on liqueur and drink themselves silly. So IMO, there should simply be a LIMIT on how much alcohol a person buys. But more to the point, as little money welfare people get, I don't see how they can afford to buy much liqueur anyway.

2) The government also is not prohibiting welfare people from buying soda. They are just prohibiting them from using other people’s money to do so.

So if that is all the money they have, they are prohibiting sick, poor and disabled people from buying a Coke. Soon after, it will be all sweetened drinks.

Once done, it will be the next step to simply ban snacks, junk food, sweets and stuff from everyone. Big Brother is going to make you eat healthy or die.

They opened the Pandora's box and you walked right in thinking it would only apply to those "other" people!

 

[OldFlame]

LOL! I'll bite:

Paternalistic actions implemented against a class of people solely because of their financial status.
It takes a little piece of the poor person's freedom away..and creates a subtle social difference.

I remember never taking free lunches as a kid..because of the stigma of handing in a specially colored ticket that designated me as being one of the poor kids...so perhaps I take it personally.

Choice is freedom...and it is not up to the Govt. to police people's food purchases.

Then maybe they should choose to try to better themselves so that they don't have to rely on fellow citizens to feed them? The program is intended to provide them with nutritional food, candy and soda are not nutritious.

 

[OldFlame]

Where's the fun in welfare if we can't lord it over the less fortunate?

You're so right, we should just get rid of welfare altogether.

 

[dblack]

You're so right, we should just get rid of welfare altogether.

Agreed. But until we do that, let's not use it as an excuse to meddle.

 

[Orangecat]

LOL! I'll bite:

Paternalistic actions implemented against a class of people solely because of their financial status.

Paying for someone's food is a paternalistic action.