If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WIBA 1310 Madison)   Wisconsin to force food stamps recipients to spend money on fruits and vegetables. And probably cheese since it's Wisconsin   (wiba.com) divider line 376
    More: Interesting, Wisconsin, Wisconsin State Assembly, junk foods, party-line vote, food stamps  
•       •       •

6880 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Apr 2013 at 10:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



376 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-01 12:27:24 AM
KarmicDisaster: Since Republicans are doing this, there is probably some reason

Social engineering: Republicans love social engineering.  When they're the conductors.
 
2013-05-01 12:30:22 AM

Peki: The problem is that by punishing the parents you punish the kids. You're okay with starving children? On your conscience, buddy.


When you come to the debate with open warning that you dont expect people should bear any responsibility for their actions, including actions which have social consequence, then you're a lost cause.

I am not okay with starving kids, hence my post which you obviously completely ignored - but if said person demands society take care of their children, that is fine.  Society then must take care of the children in the way it sees fit.  This includesmaking sure the parents cant load them up with junk food and cheap crap.
 
2013-05-01 12:31:03 AM

hasty ambush: Infernalist: Great Janitor: Well, if the government is feeding you, don't they get a say in what you eat?

Sure, but they have to compensate for the price difference between 'cheap essentials' like rice, beans and milk and eggs and bread and lunch meats....and the higher prices of things like fresh fruits and veggies.  Because they'll quickly run out of benefits before the end of the month if they don't compensate for the higher prices of those healthy foods.

Nonsense as many have already posted veggies and fruit are not all that expensive, particularly if you are not buying the over priced organic stuff. I know carrots, bananas, strawberries etc are relatively cheap where I live and the store brand canned fruits and veggies are cheap also. The too expensive argument does not fly


So let me guess, you live in a state like Oregon, right? Because I used to live there, and it  was cheap. When I moved out to Nevada, though, I discovered very quickly that the  opposite is true. It's completely dependent on where you live...and on the fact that most junk food is made from heavily subsidized crops like corn and milk, and by heavily subsidized megacorporations, which drives price way down. You can eat for a week on two boxes of instant flavored oatmeal. You can't eat for a week on fourteen apples.
 
2013-05-01 12:32:24 AM

o5iiawah: They choose not to eat it because it takes time to prepare when they get it home from the store and before they cook it.


So how about a living wage and mandated work limits so everyone has the time to do it?

o5iiawah: There's a gigantic market of people in urban areas who consume food.


And at least in my city, drive to the suburbs to get it.  The city was basically begging for a grocery to be downtown, only got one (now two) a couple years ago, and even they're quite small.  And of course the high crime areas only have glorified gas stations.  And plenty of poorly planned suburbs that don't have much of anything close by.

o5iiawah: If people all of a sudden demanded fresh fruits and vegetables, stores would stock it and prices would go down as more product can be delivered on the same truck that comes regardless


There are billions of people in the world demanding fresh fruits and vegetables and aren't getting it.
 
2013-05-01 12:33:43 AM

o5iiawah: fusillade762: This from the party that wants to make abortion illegal and contraception harder to get

50 years and 5 republican presidents have gone by since RvW yet it is still the law of the land.  Your schtick is tired.


You're being willfully ignorant if you've missed all the "Death by a thousand" cuts being attempted on abortion at the state level.

Oh, and which GOP nominee in the last election cycle wanted to ban contraception?  Hell one of them actually prescribes it regularly it in his medical profession.

How quickly you forget.

Here's Santorum, a father of seven, during a 2011 interview with the CaffeinatedThoughts.com blog (emphasis mine):

"One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, 'Well, that's okay. Contraception's okay.' It's not okay because it's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."


And he also wants abortion banned:

Santorum: Favors amending the Constitution to ban abortion. He says that human life begins at conception and doctors who perform abortions should be charged as criminals. In his book, he compared women who have abortions to 19th-century slaveholders, writing that "unlike abortion today, in most states even the slaveholder did not have the unlimited right to kill his slave." In the past, Santorum supported allowing abortions in cases of rape or incest, but he now says no to those exceptions.

And just about every GOP candidate voiced their opposition to requiring insurance to pay for contraception. You think that's going to make it EASIER to get?
 
2013-05-01 12:33:54 AM

Musikslayer: KarmicDisaster: Since Republicans are doing this, there is probably some reason. This won't save taxpayers a dime, since people will still get the same amount of aid but will just spend it on other stuff, so cost savings is not the reason. I think that the real reason is the Republican desire to "punish" people that they don't like, just like their parents punished them.

I think  you're on to something, but I suspect a different motive: When the Governor of Florida wanted drug testing, it turned out that his wife owned drug testing facilities. I suspect the same motives here. Eventually, there will be an attempt to limit the purchases to one or two particular brands i.e. "Koch Brothers new Mango Cherry foodstuffs". Even better: have distribution centers, where people pick up their "approved" food. I'm sure quite a few people are salivating over that thought, a contract like that would be worth billions.


I support this initiative and I also don't particularly mind Michelle Obama's eat healthy crusade (to the extent that it seeks to influence public opinion rather than mandate law) but just to stir the pot here - why is that when she and other Dems propose these initiatives and regulate school lunches etc, they're saving America from the scourge of poor health and obesity, but when Republicans do it they're punishing people they don't like?

I could see some valid points being made here. Inviting them. Just saying that on the face of it, it's inconsistent partisan finger-pointing. When the people with THIS letter behind their names do it, yay!! When the people with the other letter behind their names do it.....crime against humanity. Of course, don't for a minute think I'm saying that both sides don't engage in this hear-what-they-want-hear logic. I'm just being sympathetic to the Republicans here because I would say that in this case the burden of proof is on the Dems as far as opposing eat-healthy measures on the part of the state.
 
2013-05-01 12:34:12 AM

PsiChick: nd on the fact that most junk food is made from heavily subsidized crops like corn and milk, and by heavily subsidized megacorporations, which drives price way down


Sounds like you just made the argument for ending corn/sugar/dairy subsidies. The Libertarian movement welcomes you.
 
2013-05-01 12:34:20 AM

o5iiawah: There were a lot of people in the neighborhood like that too and they came up with creative solutions like growing food in the neighborhood, organizing a co-op to get food delivered or even taking turns carpooling to the store.


Growing food requires additional water (remember, we're talking tight budgets here), space (gotta live in a house to have a decent garden that will yield enough to make a dent in your groceries), and time. Can you get decent yields without buying any kind of soil amendment or pest control? There are some additional costs. Coops here don't take food stamps, and carpooling.. . . I'm imagining 4 adults getting groceries for 4 families; it's an amusing visual, but I'll let you explain how that one could feasibly work.

Love the name calling, btw. Classy way to make your point.

Ranger Rover: I don't work in our benefits department, but I know my office has one to help clients like you get the benefits they need. I just tried to search for one for you, and there are a few in Los Angeles County, but this seems like a good place to start: http://www.nlsla.org/programs/practices/administrative-lawLink is to the NLSLA's "Administrative Law Unit," which would be the practice area most likely to help clients navigate benefits claims issues.


That looks. . . like it might actually help. Bookmarked. Ty!
 
2013-05-01 12:37:15 AM

o5iiawah: PsiChick: nd on the fact that most junk food is made from heavily subsidized crops like corn and milk, and by heavily subsidized megacorporations, which drives price way down

Sounds like you just made the argument for ending corn/sugar/dairy subsidies. The Libertarian movement welcomes you.


Well, yes, most people with a basic understanding of how our economy works want those subsidies to end, but since that's not going to happen in the realm of ever, it's a bad idea to force people to buy more expensive food without covering the extra expense.
 
2013-05-01 12:37:25 AM

Mija: Any Pie Left: Cheese and any dairy are good for people, you get calcium and vitamin D, at least. As a snack food, it could be better than say, candy and cookies.

Lactose intolerant people can't have dairy.


Yeah they can.  There is just some digestive unpleasantness associated with it.
 
2013-05-01 12:37:29 AM

o5iiawah: I am not okay with starving kids but if said person demands society take care of their children, that is fine. Society then must take care of the children in the way it sees fit. This includesmaking sure the parents cant load them up with junk food and cheap crap.


I haven't been behind everything you've said in this thread, but I'm behind this.
 
Euk
2013-05-01 12:38:56 AM
I guess they assume that all poor people all have access to working kitchens, pots, pans, plates, working sinks and the various things someone living the life above the poverty level takes for granted. You know, if the poor have it so great, why would anyone ever work?

Maybe if they just pulled up on their bootstraps hard, they'd be able to cook without access to some or all of that stuff. Maybe improvise a nice cooking area using a broken shopping cart and some copies of phone book no one uses anymore.
 
2013-05-01 12:39:29 AM

TheDirtyNacho: Fruits and veggies aren't that expensive and a banana goes a lot further nutritionally than say, a bag o' chips.

That said, these foods can be hard to come by for some people without transportation, so it should be paired with addressing the lack of quality food in impoverished areas.


Put a bag of chips next to a banana, come back two weeks later, and tell me which one is still edible.
 
2013-05-01 12:40:17 AM
if they can see EBT (or whatever) is being spent disproportionately on foods that are not healthy (or downright unhealthy), wouldn't it make sense that measures should be taken to ensure every dollar of assistance isn't followed by x100 in healthcare to treat heart disease and other problems stemming from a bad diet?

people that defend tax dollars going to kfc and taco bell don't make much sense to me.
some of them will claim that poor people don't have access to grocery stores, but i see them walk past the supermarket on the way to get junk food.

the biggest idiots will say i don't want my money paying for a heart attack because i hate poor people.
my family could not afford junk food when i was a kid. we probably ate out less than 3 times a year. bob's big boy on somebody's birthday....
 
2013-05-01 12:41:22 AM

Euk: I guess they assume that all poor people all have access to working kitchens, pots, pans, plates, working sinks and the various things someone living the life above the poverty level takes for granted. You know, if the poor have it so great, why would anyone ever work?

Maybe if they just pulled up on their bootstraps hard, they'd be able to cook without access to some or all of that stuff. Maybe improvise a nice cooking area using a broken shopping cart and some copies of phone book no one uses anymore.


I am pretty sure that Argumentum ad Appalachiam is a fallacy
 
2013-05-01 12:41:45 AM

TV's Vinnie: Krumet: You take Caesar's coin, you play by Caesar's rules.

Untilllll............

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 560x339]


"Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government...Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

18 USC § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government

Get in the jail.
 
2013-05-01 12:41:47 AM
It really amazes me that what Saudi Arabia is to oil, the United States is to food. We can literally produce more food than the population can possibly eat. We could basically give it away to poor people. And yet we treat it like its the last precious commodity we have because we'll be damned if poor people ever get anything for free without first humiliating them in the most awful ways.

Sad really.
 
2013-05-01 12:43:55 AM
Who do i report the stores scamming to? Theres a very widespread chain of grocery stores here that price things differently in different neighborhoods, which is fine i guess, from what i buy at least, the one i used to go to in the mexican neighborhood, avacados and tomatoes and peppers and cilantro were half the price compared to the store a few miles away in an upper middle class white neighborhood, and that one charges through the nose for trendier stuff like good olive oil and panko breadcrumbs. Why is a box of kikomans panko $1.59 at one and $3.99 at the other!??

Anyway, thats not the issue, where i moved now theres 2 close by, one in a white neighborhood which i HATE the layout of, its asinine, the cold section is in the middle of the store, theres no efficient route. The other one is in a black neighborhood and in addition to the store always being a mess ive noticed staple items, especially those with WIC stickers are priced higher than the other stores of the same chain in the area. I dont know how they get away with that. I mean really why is the same store brand 8oz brick of cheese going to be $2.24 at one store and $2.99 at one literally less than three miles away?

I think im done shopping that chain altogether, Woodmans and Trader Joes ftw.
 
2013-05-01 12:44:45 AM

Peki: That looks. . . like it might actually help. Bookmarked. Ty!


Not a problem. Glad to help, and hope it works out.

Even if you're not technically within their service area or income cut-off (and those are strictly applied, of necessity), in my experience with my own similar office, a call to their intake department (typically the main line listed) will get you at least some advice-and-counsel (a process for advising an otherwise unqualified candidate usually with a letter containing information) or at the very least direct you to an alternate organization that CAN help. Good luck!
 
2013-05-01 12:45:49 AM

12349876: So how about a living wage and mandated work limits so everyone has the time to do it?


That would involve a society where people are based on need, rather than productivity.  ergo a parent of two has more of a need than a single guy in college and should be paid more regardless of who is more productive.  That would never work.

fusillade762: How quickly you forget.


I didn't forget anything.  I know Santorum is against Contraception.  he can beat the drum all he wants in Church but as president he'd have no executive authority to ban it even if he felt he had the political capital to do so.  Your problem is you think an individual's personal feelings = what they would put into law.

fusillade762: And just about every GOP candidate voiced their opposition to requiring insurance to pay for contraception. You think that's going to make it EASIER to get?


Why should an insurance company be forced to provide birth control to a 34 year old woman who doens't want it? furthermore, what is preventing an individual who does want coverage to seek a provider that offers it?  You think that if someone isn't being given something for free, that they are being denied access to it.  Nobody was going to send shock troopers into Walgreens or CVS and start executing women who had birth control prescriptions.  Stop with the loony fear mongering asshattery.

fusillade762: You're being willfully ignorant if you've missed all the "Death by a thousand" cuts being attempted on abortion at the state level.


All of which are legal under RvW.  Safe, Legal and Rare is now Any time, anywhere, for any reason and at taxpayer expense.  Anything less, is an affront to women's rights.

12349876: And at least in my city, drive to the suburbs to get it.  The city was basically begging for a grocery to be downtown, only got one (now two) a couple years ago, and even they're quite small.  And of course the high crime areas only have glorified gas stations.  And plenty of poorly planned suburbs that don't have much of anything close by.


So it all comes down to how much do you value your health and your nutrition.  When an individual makes the choice to hit the drive through instead of whole foods, I'm not sure what you expect society to do about that.

12349876: There are billions of people in the world demanding fresh fruits and vegetables and aren't getting it.


and those billions live in countries which lack the infrastructure and government stability required for a market to exist.
 
2013-05-01 12:45:53 AM

o5iiawah: I am not okay with starving kids, hence my post which you obviously completely ignored - but if said person demands society take care of their children, that is fine.  Society then must take care of the children in the way it sees fit.  This includesmaking sure the parents cant load them up with junk food and cheap crap.


Hmm. You seem to think I think it's unreasonable to have limits on what parents can spend money on. I don't. I mentioned upthread about how I wasn't surprised, wasn't upset, just curious, when the store wouldn't let me buy a Monster with my food stamps. They shouldn't have. I'm totally OK with that.

But the thing is these regulations get shoved through without any attention as to wtf is actually going on in the real world. "People are fat, so they must not know how to eat smart" fades away when you realize that there may be institutional barriers to get the food that you are so helpfully steering them towards. "Get exercise" is part of a healthy lifestyle, but worthless to someone who doesn't have the energy to lift a finger after working 7 days a week.

There's the help that you see fit to give, and then there's help that actually helps. This is why I don't ask for handouts from people at my church; it would only be temporary, and wouldn't help me in the long run. Instead, I asked to plant a garden, to help not only me but everyone in the congregation.
 
2013-05-01 12:46:12 AM

theMightyRegeya: kombat_unit: It's nice to see Fark's pro veg moderates (or whatever leftists are called now) condemn plan because a most unsavoury repub brought the change.

You do realize it's the notion that they'll probably get the same amount of money, and that it has to be spent on more expensive food now, right?

Right?

Ah, forget it.  We could look to Detroit, MI, where they've been using vacant lots to build community gardens in the absence of decent grocery stores, but hey, people hear "community" and think "communist".  Because rolling up your sleeves and working as a team is un-American.  Just ask Rudy  Giuliani.


How is saying that you have to spend the majority of your food stamp money on meats, veggies, fruits and breads and less on junk food going to cost more money?  No where did it say the fruits and vegetables had to be fresh, frozen or canned appears to be fine.  Nothing against day old bread, nothing against store brand or even against where the food has to be bought.  So those on food stamps in Wisconsin could shop at the 99 cent store for their fruits and vegetables.  All this bill says is that if you are on food stamps, we want you to eat food with real nutrition and shiat like candy bars and soda.  And to be honest, I don't see an issue with this.  It's like when I was a kid and my parents would fix dinner and I'd make a comment about not being in the mood for what was being cooked, and my parents would say "We buy the food, we decide dinner.  Don't like it, buy your own food."  It's the same here.  The government pays for your food, the government gets a say in how much candy, sodas and junk food you can buy.  Don't like it?  Well, no one is actually forcing you to get food stamps.

Those who are against this happening have assumed that it has to be fresh only and more expensive.  Those words that appear in TFA.  Go to TFA and do a control-f and type in the word 'fresh'.  It doesn't appear in the article.  I'm wondering if there would be this much hate from it if it was a Democrat who suggested it?  Didn't Michelle Obama say something about wanting healthier meals for children, less junk food?  Here a Republican suggested that for those who eat food paid for by the state, and people have issue with it?  If it reduces obesity and diabetes in the poorer areas (the ones who really can't afford healthcare), why is this an issue?  I say expand this into Welfare as well.
 
2013-05-01 12:46:53 AM
Somehow people can take buses all over the place and get Coke, pretzels, Doritos, gum and candy, and that's OK.  Yet asking them to make the same trip, but get frozen carrots, peas, milk, some cans of beans and a small bag of flour is a hardship.

NOWHERE in that bill does it say the food has to be 'fresh'. It just has to have 'high nutritional value'.

And I'll be damned if I can understand how asking people to eat better is an attack on the poor.
 
2013-05-01 12:48:05 AM
lcdn.cooksillustrated.com
You onion haters be trippin'
 
2013-05-01 12:48:32 AM
I've been in line behind people using the food stamps, the old script type, harder to tell theses days. Shrimp, lobster tail , ribeyes, you name it I saw it. Then I'd put my items on the conveyor in disgust at what my $9/hour got me. Some onions, hamburger, hamburger helper, anything else I saw to add to hamburger helper, beans, hotdogs, you get the idea. This was the 90's but I did do 2 months of food stamps in the 80's. I had a lot of roommates, gave the whole pack of script to the girl in charge (she cooked yes but she WAS in charge) and it went towards....real food not shiat. I see no problem with this policy, spend it like you need it, I did.
 
2013-05-01 12:50:25 AM

o5iiawah: Bathia_Mapes: convenience store

Again, show me some numbers on people who eat almost exclusively from convenience stores.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
 
2013-05-01 12:50:49 AM

Intoxoman: I've been in line behind people using the food stamps, the old script type, harder to tell theses days. Shrimp, lobster tail , ribeyes, you name it I saw it. Then I'd put my items on the conveyor in disgust at what my $9/hour got me. Some onions, hamburger, hamburger helper, anything else I saw to add to hamburger helper, beans, hotdogs, you get the idea. This was the 90's but I did do 2 months of food stamps in the 80's. I had a lot of roommates, gave the whole pack of script to the girl in charge (she cooked yes but she WAS in charge) and it went towards....real food not shiat. I see no problem with this policy, spend it like you need it, I did.


man that'd piss me off if I saw that. Glad we put up that electrified fence to keep the poors out of the hood
 
2013-05-01 12:55:21 AM
We need some clarification on Skrimp eligibility under the new guidelines.
 
2013-05-01 12:55:35 AM

Peki: Love the name calling, btw. Classy way to make your point


I only name call when it gets brought first.  You fired the first snarky salvo calling me some heartless bastard who has no idea how the other half lives.  Not only are you misinformed but you arent as smart as you think you are.

Peki: Growing food requires additional water


Rain barrel systems are unbelievably cheap

Peki: Can you get decent yields without buying any kind of soil amendment or pest control?


yes my parents grow more avocados, tomatoes, green pepper, red pepper and string beans in a 15x15 garden than they know what to do with.

Peki: I'm imagining 4 adults getting groceries for 4 families; it's an amusing visual, but I'll let you explain how that one could feasibly work.


its called what we did for 10 years that I grew up.  But you grew up in the burbs to an upper middle class family so you wouldn't know how us salty folk got by.

Euk: I guess they assume that all poor people all have access to working kitchens, pots, pans, plates, working sinks and the various things someone living the life above the poverty level takes for granted. You know, if the poor have it so great, why would anyone ever work?


Wait, who doesn't have access to pots and pans?  are some people really trying to make this argument?
 
2013-05-01 12:57:25 AM

Cyno01: o5iiawah: Bathia_Mapes: convenience store

Again, show me some numbers on people who eat almost exclusively from convenience stores.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert


Don't you be linkin' no facts!

/This thread inspired me to drunkenly get off my ass and attempt to cook something.
 
2013-05-01 01:00:31 AM

Peki: Hmm. You seem to think I think it's unreasonable to have limits on what parents can spend money on. I don't. I mentioned upthread about how I wasn't surprised, wasn't upset, just curious, when the store wouldn't let me buy a Monster with my food stamps. They shouldn't have. I'm totally OK with that.


the terms of the bill would exclude food items bereft of nutritional value from qualifying for the SNAP plan.  You think Monster energy shouldn't be on there. I agree with this.  I agree with everything this law says.  because a republican is introducing the plan means liberals like you are butthurt about it.

Ranger Rover: I haven't been behind everything you've said in this thread, but I'm behind this.


It doens't stop there.  Nanny cities like NY and SF that decided to operate extensive public health clinics quickly found that they also have a vested interest in people's health to keep costs down.  I dont care one way or the other since if a city wants to establish public health it is their right to do so but the people who live there shouldn't be surprised when the salt disappears from the restaurant table, you cant get a 16oz soda and smokes are $10/pack
 
2013-05-01 01:02:19 AM

o5iiawah: You fired the first snarky salvo calling me some heartless bastard who has no idea how the other half lives.


Ctrl-F "heartless bastard". I only said that you're the one who has to live with your conscience. If you're totally okay with how you feel about the issue, then your response should have been, "And I'll sleep just fine, thank you."

o5iiawah: Rain barrel systems are unbelievably cheap


Difficulty: Requires rain, storage facilities.

o5iiawah: its called what we did for 10 years that I grew up.  But you grew up in the burbs to an upper middle class family so you wouldn't know how us salty folk got by.


Nope, don't, but I'd be willing to bet there are a lot more poor (pure numbers) out here in the burbs than were in your area.

o5iiawah: Wait, who doesn't have access to pots and pans?  are some people really trying to make this argument?


I live in a house, have no access to a kitchen, and bathroom access is. . .touchy.

/have to tiptoe around a meth/heroin addicted SIL who believes the bathroom is hers whenever she wants, and she'll break windows and mirrors if she doesn't get it, and the MIL is a moral vegan who banned me from the kitchen for daring to cook chicken
//yeah, I know my situation is a bit unusual, but there it is, nonetheless
///I'd trade my first-world problems for a couple of the third-world ones
 
2013-05-01 01:02:22 AM

Summercat: Cyno01: o5iiawah: Bathia_Mapes: convenience store

Again, show me some numbers on people who eat almost exclusively from convenience stores.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert

Don't you be linkin' no facts!

/This thread inspired me to drunkenly get off my ass and attempt to cook something.


not much in the way of facts in that Wiki article about where these places are

http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas/go- to -the-atlas.aspx#.UYChwcpkgWd
 
2013-05-01 01:02:47 AM
What i would like to know is how the propose to enforce this?  any electronic tracking method is going to be a nightmare and expensive to both the state and the grocery stores.
 
2013-05-01 01:04:16 AM
o5iiawah:

Wait, who doesn't have access to pots and pans?  are some people really trying to make this argument?

My brother's friend lived in a tiny apartment w/ no kitchen whatsoever for a year or so. He had a mini fridge and a microwave. He ate out every night.
 
2013-05-01 01:05:40 AM

grimlock1972: What i would like to know is how the propose to enforce this?  any electronic tracking method is going to be a nightmare and expensive to both the state and the grocery stores.


I learned in a thread about a similar topic a few weeks ago that one of our fellow farkers actually worked on the database where the UPC (and other) info is stored and matched to the category, brand, etc of the food. Apparently it's very easy to do with EBT cards
 
2013-05-01 01:05:42 AM

Cyno01: o5iiawah: Bathia_Mapes: convenience store

Again, show me some numbers on people who eat almost exclusively from convenience stores.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert


As long as Wikipedia is the foremost authority on life, the universe and everything, read their bullet points on access defined.

2 of the 3 are already being addressed thanks to SNAP and nutritional awareness programs, the other, relates to how far a store is from an individual - which begs the question:

Since we have decided that these food deserts are a problem, what is the plan for ensuring that a person who has no car, no money and no idea how to make smart choices on how to feed himself, has proper food?
 
2013-05-01 01:06:33 AM

Trocadero: o5iiawah:

Wait, who doesn't have access to pots and pans?  are some people really trying to make this argument?

My brother's friend lived in a tiny apartment w/ no kitchen whatsoever for a year or so. He had a mini fridge and a microwave. He ate out every night.


take him camping for a week.
 
2013-05-01 01:08:30 AM

o5iiawah: because a republican is introducing the plan means liberals like you are butthurt about it.


Ctrl-F "Republican". Does not appear in any of my posts. I simply want food stamps to actually help people without stupid regulations from people who have no idea wtf they are talking about, don't care if it's a rich Democrat or a poor Republican.

Huh. A liberal who doesn't want the government over-regulating something just because. Your mind a little blown over there?
 
2013-05-01 01:09:36 AM

Void_Beavis: It really amazes me that what Saudi Arabia is to oil, the United States is to food. We can literally produce more food than the population can possibly eat. We could basically give it away to poor people. And yet we treat it like its the last precious commodity we have because we'll be damned if poor people ever get anything for free without first humiliating them in the most awful ways.

Sad really.


It is sad,  but it's also hopelessly, helplessly unavoidable and inextricably intertwined with aspects of the American personality that aren't all bad, like freedom, independence, and healthy distrust of government. Food is the fruit of labor, and handing out the fruit of another labor's for free to any taker is antithetical to American values. That's not to say some compromise isn't available and that strides shouldn't be taken toward it, but I think saying something like "we grow enough food here to feed everyone for free" is like saying "world peace should happen."

Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't lose any sleep over this generally. The other day I was watching an old episode of Chopped and something hit me and I just sat there marveling at the fact that I live in a world where people are starving and dying because of the lack of basic sustenance, and in that same world other people are sitting on thrones criticizing the lack of red onions in a dish that was "too dry" but otherwise would have been saved by the onions. And doing it with the most serious, entrusted-with-a-noble-duty looks on their faces. It's amazing, it really is.

But I think what it comes down it is the concept of aggregate evil. I hate to Godwin this thread up, but it seems unlikely to me, for example, that the Holocaust was solely the product of a conscious decision on the part of the whole to be super evil and kill all of the Jews. Of course, there were a crazy few up at the top, but in the day-to-day, it came down to the actions of discrete individuals who were not accounting for the actions of others in the sum total of the evil that was perpetrated. With starvation in the world today, it's not like there is group of people sitting in Washington rubbing their hands together and asking how best they can kill poor people. It's a subsidy here, giving into a lobbyist there, a tax law here, a statutory modification to the welfare scheme there. And each discrete element is the product of a political system about which there are plenty of good things to say. So, it's a tough balancing act. But I think we have to acknowledge that as much of a virtue as providing free food to people upon request may be, there is a baby that we might be throwing out with the bathwater.
 
2013-05-01 01:11:22 AM

ausfahrk: TV's Vinnie: Krumet: You take Caesar's coin, you play by Caesar's rules.

Untilllll............

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 560x339]

"Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government...Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

18 USC § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government

Get in the jail.

news.onepoll.com 
It! iS! NOT! oV-ER-ThROw! It!! PeST! cON-TrOLL!
 
2013-05-01 01:11:36 AM

ausfahrk: TV's Vinnie: Krumet: You take Caesar's coin, you play by Caesar's rules.

Untilllll............

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 560x339]

"Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government...Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

18 USC § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government

Get in the jail.

 
It! iS! NOT! oV-ER-ThROw! It!! PeST! cON-TrOLL!
 
2013-05-01 01:14:05 AM

Intoxoman: I've been in line behind people using the food stamps, the old script type, harder to tell theses days. Shrimp, lobster tail , ribeyes, you name it I saw it. Then I'd put my items on the conveyor in disgust at what my $9/hour got me. Some onions, hamburger, hamburger helper, anything else I saw to add to hamburger helper, beans, hotdogs, you get the idea. This was the 90's but I did do 2 months of food stamps in the 80's. I had a lot of roommates, gave the whole pack of script to the girl in charge (she cooked yes but she WAS in charge) and it went towards....real food not shiat. I see no problem with this policy, spend it like you need it, I did.


...And, that's precisely why it's a piss poor idea to politicize the diets of food stamp recipients.

They pull a package of oreos out of their shopping cart, and the busybody behind them screams "OMG JUNK FOOD! THE POORS NEED TO EAT BETTER!"

They pull out a package of shrimp, and the next busybody screams, "OMG FINE FOODS! THE POORS ARE EATING TOO WELL!"

Only in America can we as a society give so little to the poor, and be such self-righteous overbearing pricks about it...
 
2013-05-01 01:16:24 AM

o5iiawah: 12349876: Good for you.  You don't fit into my qualifiers.  Not everyone lives 1/4 mile from the grocery.  Not everyone has good direct public transportation from their house to the grocery.  But keep pretending everyone is as fortunate as you are.

ok, so who are these people who fit your qualifiers.  Give me a percentage of the population who is starving because for some reason, we can get power, light plumbing and SNAP to their house but there's no food stores anywhere.

Believe you me, if I could live out in the boonies, away from buses, trains and everything else, i would.  Nothing beats county fruit/veggie stands or even your own garden.  Seems the further you live from a food store, the better access you have to fruits and veggies.  Growing up in Sticks, FL that was always my experience anyways...


Google food desert and learn something. Grocery stores don't stay open in poor neighborhoods typically, and for someone without a car even in a city known for good public transit going two miles to the store can end up taking over thirty minutes each way on a bus each way, limits the amount of food that can be purchased in a trip significantly, and will cost about five dollars here.

So two trips to the store per week, just in bus fares, can end up being $40 per month.

There are real reasons that this is an issue. I'm glad for you that you haven't been in those shoes, but you might want to read up on the topic a little more.
 
2013-05-01 01:17:09 AM

Cyno01: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert


The map on USDA.gov is an absolute joke. There's areas near where i live in PA that arent rich by any stretch but have adequate road and transit access to stores, markets, big box retailers - you name it.  Hell, they list a food desert as being within 1 mile of the largest mall in the USA, which in the same complex is a Wal-Mart, CostCo, target and a Wegmans.  Furthermore, there's areas of Bucks County that are miles of country road from the nearest store and arent listed as a desert.  might as well call it Pensyltucky...

Peki: Huh. A liberal who doesn't want the government over-regulating something just because. Your mind a little blown over there?


If you're going to expect the state pick up the tab for feeding kids, paying medical bills, and providing nutritional assistance to families, dont be surprised when they want to pass laws concerning what they want people to be eating.
 
2013-05-01 01:18:16 AM
There are a few reasons people on foodstamps buy lousy food- one is it's cheap.  Another is it tastes good.  A third is poor people don't always have proper kitchens (I lived in a $50 a week hotel once.  I had a cube fridge and a sink).  There is also an educational component.

You could subsidize healthier food.  You could subsidize public food preparation areas (there are lots of ways to do this, even something as simple as changing how we tax land could help- right now a landlord has to balance improving housing against higher tax liabilities, changing taxes to tax land more than the buildings on them might mean more kitchens).  You could offer free cooking classes for healthy food in poor neighborhoods.  You could fund food pantries with healthy food.  You could give tax breaks for supermarkets to build in poor neighborhoods.  You could give coupons for healthy food with your receipt when people check out at the supermarket.  Most of these things are low cost.  You could give them cash incentives to meet certain health goals (like losing weight- some insurance plans already do this because it saves money in the long run.  Some of them are even revenue neutral.  None of them treat poor people like children or make them want to eat the rich.

Eat the rich.
 
2013-05-01 01:18:18 AM
What you easily distracted morans fail to understand is that implementing any type of policing of food stamps will cost way more than it will ever save.  People trade food for 50 cents on the dollar now ffs.

Just give poor people food. Even junk food.

Meanwhile, the wealthy guy down the street just paid some guy a six figure salary to figure out how to dodge paying his fair share of taxes.
 
2013-05-01 01:18:43 AM
Why don't we just cut out the middle man. Standardized bags of food, nutritionally balanced and calorically sufficient. Modified versions for Kosher, Hallal, diabetic, gluten, etc. You pick up your food allotment at the government food distribution center. Government buys in bulk, saves money, creates jobs at the distribution centers. Heck, subcontract them to Kroger, Publix and Stop & Shop so they don't complain about lost food stamp business. You want extra? There's a park that needs to be weeded, or a meals on wheels that needs weekend volunteers. This is public assistance, it's not supposed to be fun, or easier than working for your dinner.
 
2013-05-01 01:19:40 AM
if states want recipients to receive best value they should survey the family and have a package delivered to them weekly. bulk purchasing would = more value for the money. delivery would help those who can't easily get around. no stamps = junkies aren't selling them for change on the dollar.
 
2013-05-01 01:22:53 AM

Infernalist: Sure, but they have to compensate for the price difference between 'cheap essentials' like rice, beans and milk and eggs and bread and lunch meats....and the higher prices of things like fresh fruits and veggies. Because they'll quickly run out of benefits before the end of the month if they don't compensate for the higher prices of those healthy foods.


Know how I know you didn't read TFA? The headline only mentions fruits and vegetables, but the article talks about whole foods in general -- recipients must "spend at least two-thirds of their monthly benefits on items such as milk, bread and vegetables."
 
Displayed 50 of 376 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report