USDA opposes ban on food stamps for Soda

According to the USDA, disallowing people on welfare from spending their food stamps on junk food lacks"potential viability and effectiveness."http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/20/feds-oppose-ban-on-food-s_n_932128.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec3_lnk2|88076

Of all the things the government wants to control, you would think they would want to control their own welfare program. Admittedly I have no seen the actual legislation behind Bloomburgs plan, but I see no reason why it would be "unviable". I imagine it has a lot to do with corporate lobbyists however...

Thoughts OT?

Fair enough, sounds like the only complaints would be from the corn lobby due to the HFCS they use to sweeten themmarkop2003

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

Good, this country is already increadibly fat and unhealthy.

Good, this country is already increadibly fat and unhealthy.

CaveJohnson1

I have always thought that food stamps should not be used for soda, candy, potato chips or other types of sweets like cookies or Ho-Hos. They should be used for nutritious foods and not just empty calories. The USDA is really screwed up with not wanting to reform the use of food stamps.

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

doesntcare

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

airshocker

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

doesntcare

[QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

ad1x2

I approve of those receiving welfare to submit to random drug testing as a condition of their receiving it. Want help, show the public you deserve it.

[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

WhiteKnight77

I approve of those receiving welfare to submit to random drug testing as a condition of their receiving it. Want help, show the public you deserve it.

People on food stamps have the right to get fat and have diabetes just like everyone else.

[QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

EntropyWins

[QUOTE="EntropyWins"][QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

doesntcare

We should end the food stamps program and open up more soup kitchens instead. It would be less costly.

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

[QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

EntropyWins

its their food stamps... they spend it on food, food of their choiceweezyfb

It's our money. We get a say.

[QUOTE="weezyfb"]its their food stamps... they spend it on food, food of their choiceairshocker

It's our money. We get a say.

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

All taxpayers can't get together and put up a list of what is acceptable and what isn't. So it would up to the government to decide what people can and can't eat, and i am no fan of that. weezyfb

I'm not a fan of government telling me what to do either, but in this case it's justified since they're receiving welfare.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="weezyfb"]its their food stamps... they spend it on food, food of their choiceweezyfb

It's our money. We get a say.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

linkin_guy109

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

airshocker

That would be a good idea if healthy food wasn't considerably more expensive than the junk food, especially in poverty stricken areas.

That would be a good idea if healthy food wasn't considerably more expensive than the junk food, especially in poverty stricken areas.

sSubZerOo

Indeed.

@ airschocker and starwarsj The USDA opposes a ban on food stamps for sodas, so they have decided it seemsweezyfb

I don't think food stamps is run through the USDA. I could be wrong, though.

The plan didn't make much sense to me, according to the article it'd ban any drink that "contains more than ten calories per 8 ounces."

Which basically means you'd be able to purchase drinks containing artificial sweeteners... but the health benefits of drinking them are disputable.
Testing on rats have shown that when drinking 'diet' drinks, the rats gained weight just the same.
There's even tests showing that it affects humans as well.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20050613/drink-more-diet-soda-gain-more-weight

So, basically they'd be telling people they can have something that might be just as poisonous as what they're already drinking.... so long as the bottle says 'diet'.

[QUOTE="weezyfb"]its their food stamps... they spend it on food, food of their choiceairshocker

It's our money. We get a say.

Our money? No, if that was the case then people would have their taxes going to what they wanted to support. "Oh I want all of my taxes to go to education and none to the military" or "Give my money to the military we need more guns". Once that money hits the government hands, you lose all say.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

sSubZerOo

That would be a good idea if healthy food wasn't considerably more expensive than the junk food, especially in poverty stricken areas.

Except for not actually being true, it is a tragedy.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="EntropyWins"]Yes drugs are a luxury only for the rich. EntropyWins

If someone can afford drugs, they can afford to buy their own family food. If they can't afford to buy food and are receiving food stamps, they damn sure should not be buying or using drugs.

no, you can decide what you want to eat. providing you're working to be a contributing member of society. but if you're mooching off the taxpayers, they have every right to decide for you.starwarsjunky

Fixed it for ya. The government gets it's funding from the taxpayers, hence those receiving welfare are mooching off of those who do work and pay federal taxes.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

coolbeans90

That would be a good idea if healthy food wasn't considerably more expensive than the junk food, especially in poverty stricken areas.

Except for not actually being true, it is a tragedy.

Yes it is.. :roll: Its a well documented problem and has been so for a decade.. Lower income places not only have less access to healthier foods, but the said junk food is in fact MUCH cheaper than the healthy option.. Than put in the transportation problems the poor have to deal with, and they are at a severe disadvantage compared to the rest of people.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

That would be a good idea if healthy food wasn't considerably more expensive than the junk food, especially in poverty stricken areas.

sSubZerOo

Except for not actually being true, it is a tragedy.

Yes it is.. :roll: Its a well documented problem and has been so for a decade.. Lower income places not only have less access to healthier foods, but the said junk food is in fact MUCH cheaper than the healthy option.. Than put in the transportation problems the poor have to deal with, and they are at a severe disadvantage compared to the rest of people.

Junk food (and especially fastfood) is f***ing expensive relative to cooking one's own food if they buy things that don't break bank -- period. Perhaps transportation is an issue, but that is a much more subtle problem than price.

[QUOTE="starwarsjunky"]no, you can decide what you want to eat. providing you're working to be a contributing member of society. but if you're mooching off the taxpayers, they have every right to decide for you.WhiteKnight77

Fixed it for ya. The government gets it's funding from the taxpayers, hence those receiving welfare are mooching off of those who do work and pay federal taxes.

Are you saying you don't believe in the dream and equal opportunity? These programs were meant for equal opportunity in giving the poor a certain standard of living while giving them options.. Just because some people abuse it doesn't suggest all of them do, nor do it suggest we should tear it down.. If anything the main problem are these programs are underfunded or poorly managed.. The Public education system is a prime example of this where poor inner city schools are dragging the country down in test scores due to being underfunded and often times overpopulated... The best outcome goal to be met is having these equal opportunity programs WORK instead of destroyed in which it helps bring up people to become successful and tax payers for the rest of their lives.. Its a win win scenerio that I don't see why any one would want to be against.. Especially when the United States catch phrase was built upon equal opportunity in which any one could pull themselves up from poverty.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Except for not actually being true, it is a tragedy.

coolbeans90

Yes it is.. :roll: Its a well documented problem and has been so for a decade.. Lower income places not only have less access to healthier foods, but the said junk food is in fact MUCH cheaper than the healthy option.. Than put in the transportation problems the poor have to deal with, and they are at a severe disadvantage compared to the rest of people.

Junk food (and especially fastfood) is f***ing expensive relative to cooking one's own food if they buy things that don't break bank -- period. Perhaps transportation is an issue, but that is a much more subtle problem than price.

We are not just talking about premade food, but the products in general.. In poor areas, there is less choices and what few choices there are there is a significant wealth gap.. You seem to be set in mind that its entirely based upon laziness of the people...

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Yes it is.. :roll: Its a well documented problem and has been so for a decade.. Lower income places not only have less access to healthier foods, but the said junk food is in fact MUCH cheaper than the healthy option.. Than put in the transportation problems the poor have to deal with, and they are at a severe disadvantage compared to the rest of people.

sSubZerOo

Junk food (and especially fastfood) is f***ing expensive relative to cooking one's own food if they buy things that don't break bank -- period. Perhaps transportation is an issue, but that is a much more subtle problem than price.

We are not just talking about premade food, but the products in general.. In poor areas, there is less choices and what few choices there are there is a significant wealth gap.. You seem to be set in mind that its entirely based upon laziness of the people...

Well, obviously organic food is going to cost more than normal products, for instance. But in terms of health benefits, the significant health gains are made by not eating a ton of processed food, for starters. I imagine that grocery stores sell similar items nationwide. I didn't mention anything regarding laziness, mate. Please, just stick to the arguments.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

I don't care. If people are on food stamps they need to be spending that money on mostly healthy alternatives.

linkin_guy109

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Fixed it for ya. The government gets it's funding from the taxpayers, hence those receiving welfare are mooching off of those who do work and pay federal taxes.

sSubZerOo

Are you saying you don't believe in the dream and equal opportunity? These programs were meant for equal opportunity in giving the poor a certain standard of living while giving them options.. Just because some people abuse it doesn't suggest all of them do, nor do it suggest we should tear it down.. If anything the main problem are these programs are underfunded or poorly managed.. The Public education system is a prime example of this where poor inner city schools are dragging the country down in test scores due to being underfunded and often times overpopulated... The best outcome goal to be met is having these equal opportunity programs WORK instead of destroyed in which it helps bring up people to become successful and tax payers for the rest of their lives.. Its a win win scenerio that I don't see why any one would want to be against.. Especially when the United States catch phrase was built upon equal opportunity in which any one could pull themselves up from poverty.

I have no qualms helping someone who is willing to help themselves and yes, that is what all those welfare programs are for. Now for those who do abuse the system, they need a wake up call and removed from the welfare rolls (those who use drugs is an example). I have had to use food stamps in the past due to not having a job, but as soon as I got a job, I would quit calling in to qualify for them. I can't stand having to ask others for help (pride) so would try find work as fast as possible. The longest I have been out of work is a year, but a mechanic without tools isn't hired very often so I did a career change. The company I went to work for even trained me for the work I was to do. To get food stamps, I had to do X hours a work for the county I live in (there is also an option of showing the places you went to look for work and applied for a job with). This is one way people can earn their food stamps and should be a requirement everywhere.

If someone is willing to make an effort, I don't mind helping them when they are down, but if they do not want to do what they need to succeed, then they do not deserve any help from you or me.

[QUOTE="markop2003"]Fair enough, sounds like the only complaints would be from the corn lobby due to the HFCS they use to sweeten themmajoras_wrath

[QUOTE="EntropyWins"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"] Oh come on now. Illicit recreational drugs an illegal and costly luxury that inherently decrease one's marketability and, sometimes, health and capacities. If the idea is to offer public support to help someone get back on their feet, I don't see how preconditioning that aid with non-use of an illegal substance that harms one's ability to get back on their feet should be out of the question.WhiteKnight77

If someone can afford drugs, they can afford to buy their own family food. If they can't afford to buy food and are receiving food stamps, they damn sure should not be buying or using drugs.

[QUOTE="EntropyWins"][QUOTE="doesntcare"]

i like how florida and 2 other states put drug testing for people on welfare

ad1x2

The plan didn't make much sense to me, according to the article it'd ban any drink that "contains more than ten calories per 8 ounces."

Which basically means you'd be able to purchase drinks containing artificial sweeteners... but the health benefits of drinking them are disputable.
Testing on rats have shown that when drinking 'diet' drinks, the rats gained weight just the same.
There's even tests showing that it affects humans as well.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20050613/drink-more-diet-soda-gain-more-weight

So, basically they'd be telling people they can have something that might be just as poisonous as what they're already drinking.... so long as the bottle says 'diet'.

Baconbits2004