Skip to main content

View Diary: Want More Stimulus? Expand the Food Stamp Program (111 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  we can make some judgments (0+ / 0-)

    It's not really that hard to determine that certain foods, if that they can be called are "junk.' Soda, for example, has virtually no nutritional value, is loaded with sugar or high fructose corn syrup, assuming it is not a diet soda and is generally bad for anyone, kid or adult, rich or poor. I think we can say that soda and chips are "junk" although there are things like chicken nuggets and fries which aren't as clear cut.

    •  Chips are not as clear cut either as you would (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FloridaSNMOM, kyril

      think-sure the basic deep-fried potato drenched in salt is about as close to empty calories as you can get, but there are now so many variations available for "chips" where do you draw that line? Will SNAP only pay for baked chips, or do they have to be baked, unsalted chips? What about some of those fancy veggie chips at Trader Joe's that really do have more than just empty calories? Ultimately, talking about restricting the kinds of food eligible for SNAP is still really moralizing and judging by the contents of the grocery basket without addressing the wider issues that fill that basket with food you don't approve of.

    •  So you're saying.. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, gnbhull, kyril, pale cold

      I shouldn't be able to buy soda for my child's birthday, or to prop up my son's blood sugar when he's crashing and needs a fast boost while we're walking the 3 miles to the grocery store with a convenience store on the way? Why do you get to judge what I buy? Why should my kids be denied the occasional bag of chips or soda just because we use food stamps? And no, I can't always buy those things with cash. Sometimes I have no cash, or the cash is reserved for bills or buying the small present to go with the cake and soda for the birthday.

      "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

      by FloridaSNMOM on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 07:17:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  we get to judge (0+ / 0-)

        because we are paying for it. Congress has the right to attach conditions when it appropriates funds.

        •  So then... (0+ / 0-)

          You think you should get to judge about who receives what medical care, what doctor's decisions are made about that care.... If someone gets medicare or medicaid, those decisions should be regulated as well right? How about people on section 8, do you get to judge what furniture they use in their house or how many visitors they can have a time? What about utility assistance, do you get to decide who they can call? What they can use the electricity for?

          Yes, CONGRESS gets to attach conditions, and they already have. No hot ready foods (like rotisserie chicken sold in grocery stores), no fast food... etc are already there as limits. Used to be you couldn't get deli or bakery items in my state, but they lifted those years ago.
           But no, you don't get to judge that my child can't have a bag of m&m's as a reward for being good for an all day shopping trip. You don't get to say what my child can have for their birthday celebration. And you don't get to tell my severely hypoglycemic son he can't have something to raise his blood sugar while he's digesting the protein and slow sugar he's eating as well so that he doesn't collapse on the 1 hour walk in 98 degree temps to the grocery store. Sorry.
          I paid taxes my whole working life as well into this system. My room mate still works and pays taxes into it, so do both my parents, my sisters, my numerous aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. So will my kids when they grow up. So no, you don't get to judge.

          "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

          by FloridaSNMOM on Wed Jul 18, 2012 at 08:45:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No (0+ / 0-)

            With taxpayer funds, I would agree that I do, for something as frivelous and unhealthy as a bag of M & Ms. If Congress were to restrict the purchase of candy with SNAP, I would have no problem with this. Childhood obesity is a major problem in this country as is diabetes. Candy contribues greatly to this problem. Why should we be subdisidizing anyone's bad health decisions?

            But no, you don't get to judge that my child can't have a bag of m&m's as a reward for being good for an all day shopping trip
            •  A problem with this... (0+ / 0-)

              NEITHER of my kids is remotely over weight. As a matter of fact, for years my daughter was under weight because she was born under weight and we struggled with weight gain. My son is severely hypoglycemic. He's at a good weight now, but again, he's skinny, always has been. You are assuming my kids are obese because I let them have candy. One pack of m&m's doesn't make anyone obese. You assume all my kids eat is junk food just because I'm on food stamps. You assume I can't make good decisions for my kids and that THEY can't make good decisions on what they eat because we are food stamps. That's YOU judging, not congress. My son, for example is 6 foot tall and weighs 160. My daughter is almost 5 foot tall and weighs 65 lbs. Both of them would take fruit or nuts over candy 80% of the time. Sometimes however, fruit isn't an option when my son's sugar drops, because the place we are at just doesn't sell it. Making him wait until we get to the bigger store will literally put him in a coma.

              This is why you don't get to judge. Congress can set limits, but I'll vote against those who would set unreasonable limits every time. You don't get to judge where your tax dollars go that specifically however any more than I do.

              "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

              by FloridaSNMOM on Wed Jul 18, 2012 at 09:02:10 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No (0+ / 0-)

                I am not making any assumptions about your kids, but this doesn't change the fact that childhood obesity is a problem, as well as adult obesity and that diabetes is rising as well. It doesn't change the fact that candy is a major contributor to both problems. Your kids may well be find, but that doesn't mean government funding should be used to subsidize a problem.

          •  We make these decisions every day (0+ / 0-)

            Through our elected officials:

            You think you should get to judge about who receives what medical care, what doctor's decisions are made about that care.... If someone gets medicare or medicaid, those decisions should be regulated as well right? How
            Both Medicare and Medicaid limit what procedures and medicines will be covered and how much, if anything, the taxpayers will pay. Private health insurance does this as well. You can argue about the fairness of this, but these types of judgments are made on a regular basis. So are decisions about what you can do in Section 8 Housing, for example.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site