Current Events > Trump administration wants to dictate what kind of food poor people eat

(+) Yeah! (+)

Vertania posted...

Then they go to their local DSS, get an exemption, and get a substitue food.

aka increasing bureaucracy
---

pegusus123456 posted...

aka increasing bureaucracy

While cutting wasteful spending. It's a fair trade.

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.
---

Vertania posted...

While cutting wasteful spending

I refer you to:

pegusus123456 posted...

Even if you agree with the idea that food stamps should be restricted to healthy food, you should still think this idea is moronic. In what universe does buying, shipping, stocking, and dispensing a monthly box of food to every single SNAP recipient end up costing the taxpayers less money? Where would you even keep/dispense this food? I've never heard of a nationalized food bank in this country. If there are, there sure aren't enough around for it to be convenient (or even possible) for every recipient to go there, so that'd probably necessitate buying/building new facilities.

And on a more political side, Republicans should be very, very worried if this idea goes through. It will most assuredly piss off ever single person on food stamps in the entire country.

---

AssultTank posted...

find a way to make healthier foods cheaper. The main reason other nations have lower obesity rates is often that unhealthy food is more expensive there, thus leading people to making better choices for food in an attempt to save money.
Often lower income Americans buy the junk food because it is easy to prepare, cheaper than the healthier alternatives, and is just what they have been eating all their lives because it is cheaper.

This I agree with 100%

Well, as long as it isn't just artificially making them cheaper by raising the prices on junk food to make the healthier food less expensive in comparison.
---

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/let-them-eat-cake-the-misguided-food-stamp-junk-food_us_58c81d09e4b022817b291777

pegusus123456 posted...

I refer you to:
pegusus123456 posted...

In what universe does buying, shipping, stocking, and dispensing a monthly box of food to every single SNAP recipient end up costing the taxpayers less money? Where would you even keep/dispense this food? I've never heard of a nationalized food bank in this country. If there are, there sure aren't enough around for it to be convenient (or even possible) for every recipient to go there, so that'd probably necessitate buying/building new facilities.

Did you even read the original post?:

The USDA believes that state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP recipients currently pay for food at retail stores thus reducing the overall cost of the SNAP program by $129 billion over the next 10 years.

idk about you, but I'd put a little more faith in the USDA's estimate than a random CEman's speculation. Whatever the specifics, I really doubt they'd make that estimate without taking those factors into account.

In case you missed the link, here's another thing to keep in mind:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/let-them-eat-cake-the-misguided-food-stamp-junk-food_us_58c81d09e4b022817b291777

If our legislators truly want to improve public health, limiting food stamp purchases is a pretty inefficient route.

How about protecting and improving low-income peoples environment and their access to affordable quality health care and housing? Or raising the minimum wage, fighting discrimination, and boosting food and drug safety regulation? Maybe legislators could work to strengthen Social Security and Medicare, rather than talking about cutting and privatizing these programs? Or extend the nations most effective anti-poverty program: the Earned Income Tax Credit.

All of these efforts would improve the health of low-income people and help them afford healthy food.

Instead, too many people spend time complaining about whats in poor peoples shopping carts, which is making it hard for us at Just Harvest to keep track is it that poor people are wasting their food stamps on junk food, or that theyre getting more steak and lobster than the rest of us?

Vertania posted...

Did you even read the original post?:

I did. I just also read the second half.

Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, a hunger advocacy group that also helps clients access food-assistance services, said the administration's plan left him baffled. "They have managed to propose nearly the impossible, taking over $200 billion worth of food from low-income Americans while increasing bureaucracy and reducing choices," Berg says.

He says SNAP is efficient because it is a "free market model" that lets recipients shop at stores for their benefits. The Trump administration's proposal, he said, "is a far more intrusive, Big Government answer. They think a bureaucrat in D.C. is better at picking out what your family needs than you are?"

Douglas Greenaway, president of the National WIC Association, echoed that sentiment. "Removing choice from SNAP flies in the face of encouraging personal responsibility," he said. He says "the budget seems to assume that participating in SNAP is a character flaw."

It isn't clear how billions of dollars' worth of food each year would be distributed to millions of SNAP recipients who live all over the country, including dense urban areas and sparsely populated rural regions. The budget says states will have "substantial flexibility in designing the food box delivery system through existing infrastructure, partnerships or commercial/retail delivery services."

Critics of the proposal said distributing that much food presents a logistical nightmare. "Among the problems, it's going to be costly and take money out of the [SNAP] program from the administrative side. It's going to stigmatize people when they have to go to certain places to pick up benefits," says Jim Weill, president of the nonprofit Food Research and Action Center.

Stacy Dean, vice president for food assistance policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, called the proposal "radical and risky." The idea that the government could save money by distributing food itself, she said, is "ill-informed at best."

---

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.

Please learn to answer questions instead of just flailing around trying to discredit the person asking them with garbage infowars pseudologic and slander
---

Redhats: we need smaller government!
Also redhats: we want to control everything you do and buy and think and read
Also redhats: LIHERALS
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.

Please learn to answer questions instead of just flailing around trying to discredit the person asking them with garbage infowars pseudologic and slander

Like I said, make a coherent argument and then I'll humor you. Nothing you've said so far relates to the matter of government assistance.
---

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.

15 feed a family for days are they just eating rice?
---

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.

Please learn to answer questions instead of just flailing around trying to discredit the person asking them with garbage infowars pseudologic and slander

Like I said, make a coherent argument and then I'll humor you. Nothing you've said so far relates to the matter of government assistance.

Apply the idea of government assistance to what I'm asking of you and explain a justification for doing so.
---

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I dont get why everybody doesnt do this.

With $15 worth of eggs, flour, and sugar, you can make an entire world of baked goods that are 1000x better than any packaged snack.
---

cjsdowg posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.

15 feed a family for days are they just eating rice?

yes, only rice.
---

cjsdowg posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.

15 feed a family for days are they just eating rice?

*Sees people complain about food options*

*Remembers eating Ramen for every meal because no money*

Yeah I don't see the issue.
---

southcoast09 posted...

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I don?t get why everybody doesn?t do this.

"I don't get why some people don't do things that not everyone wants to do"
---

SageHarpuia posted...

cjsdowg posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.

15 feed a family for days are they just eating rice?

*Sees people complain about food options*

*Remembers eating Ramen for every meal because no money*

Yeah I don't see the issue.

Seriously. Some people act like theyll wither up and die if they dont have three meals per day. Lunch is 100% not necessary and I lived for years eating one meal per day. Ive eaten so many cans of $1.58 Campbells chicken and rice soup. Why dont these people do that??
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.

Please learn to answer questions instead of just flailing around trying to discredit the person asking them with garbage infowars pseudologic and slander

Like I said, make a coherent argument and then I'll humor you. Nothing you've said so far relates to the matter of government assistance.

Apply the idea of government assistance to what I'm asking of you and explain a justification for doing so.

I still don't understand what you're asking of me because you can't make one fucking post that makes any sense,
---

Red hats are just mean for the lack of a better word. They see a poor person enjoying something small and seek to find a way to crush them.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I don?t get why everybody doesn?t do this.

"I don't get why some people don't do things that not everyone wants to do"

Quick and convenient isnt an option when youre begging the taxpayers to put food on your table. You earn those things.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

cjsdowg posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Flour, sugar, meat, salt, milk, eggs, bread. Thats what people need to survive. You may actually have to do some *gasp* work in the kitchen, but you wont go broke and grow fat from eating ready-made snack dinners and washing it down with namebrand soda.

Its very concerning how obese our lower class is. Does that even make sense?? They CHOOSE to use their snap money to buy the microwaveable snacks and its NOT cheaper. They refuse to actually cook. You can make $15 feed a family for days if you actually bother to cook something rather than buy $50 of microwaveable pizzas and sugary cereal.

15 feed a family for days are they just eating rice?

*Sees people complain about food options*

*Remembers eating Ramen for every meal because no money*

Yeah I don't see the issue.

Sigh.
---

Poor people don't have the rights to consume what they want. They should be eating what we allow them to eat, garbage-quality food! Don't be poor, I guess. Hahaha
---

Lathissamus posted...

Poor people don't have the rights to consume what they want. They should be eating what we allow them to eat, garbage-quality food! Don't be poor, I guess. Hahaha

Or, rather dont expect prime rib when youre begging the government to pick up the bill.
---

This is pretty evil even by Trump standards. So when's he going to enact The First Purge

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The government aims to "make" them eat healthy, in your own chosen words, so let's discuss things we are "made" to do. We'll start with you, as I already requested, so you can go ahead and answer.

Please learn to post in a coherent manner before trying to make an already pitiful argument.

Please learn to answer questions instead of just flailing around trying to discredit the person asking them with garbage infowars pseudologic and slander

Like I said, make a coherent argument and then I'll humor you. Nothing you've said so far relates to the matter of government assistance.

Apply the idea of government assistance to what I'm asking of you and explain a justification for doing so.

I still don't understand what you're asking of me because you can't make one fucking post that makes any sense,

That's on you. I led you to water and it seems like trying to have you drink it would result in drowning. That wouldn't be fair, so if you still don't get it, you never will.
---

Lathissamus posted...

Poor people don't have the rights to consume what they want. They should be eating what we allow them to eat, garbage-quality food! Don't be poor, I guess. Hahaha

Maybe if you stuff that strawman full enough, it will just burst on its own.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Lathissamus posted...

Poor people don't have the rights to consume what they want. They should be eating what we allow them to eat, garbage-quality food! Don't be poor, I guess. Hahaha

Or, rather dont expect prime rib when youre begging the government to pick up the bill.

Why are you thinking that food that is better than shit automatically makes it a $35 steak? Contrary to your anecdotal analogy, not everyone receiving benefits are buying top-of-the-line meats and groceries.

SageHarpuia posted...

Lathissamus posted...

Poor people don't have the rights to consume what they want. They should be eating what we allow them to eat, garbage-quality food! Don't be poor, I guess. Hahaha

Maybe if you stuff that strawman full enough, it will just burst on its own.

I don't want to take all that straw away from poor people, otherwise what are they gonna eat?
---

southcoast09 posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I don?t get why everybody doesn?t do this.

"I don't get why some people don't do things that not everyone wants to do"

Quick and convenient isn?t an option when you?re begging the taxpayers to put food on your table. You earn those things.

So the taxpayers should be handing out massive briskets and roasts to government-beggars but yet deny them ramen noodles and dollar menu fast food? Not every person on government assistance has the kitchen space/cookware to properly prep and cook massive briskets and roasts.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I don?t get why everybody doesn?t do this.

"I don't get why some people don't do things that not everyone wants to do"

Quick and convenient isn?t an option when you?re begging the taxpayers to put food on your table. You earn those things.

So the taxpayers should be handing out massive briskets and roasts to government-beggars but yet deny them ramen noodles and dollar menu fast food? Not every person on government assistance has the kitchen space/cookware to properly prep and cook massive briskets and roasts.

What he's trying to say is that people can learn to be creative and do more with less.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

southcoast09 posted...

You can make something like a massive brisket or roast that lasts for days. You can make soups and stews, casseroles, all kinds of stuff for that price. Rich or poor, I don?t get why everybody doesn?t do this.

"I don't get why some people don't do things that not everyone wants to do"

Quick and convenient isn?t an option when you?re begging the taxpayers to put food on your table. You earn those things.

So the taxpayers should be handing out massive briskets and roasts to government-beggars but yet deny them ramen noodles and dollar menu fast food? Not every person on government assistance has the kitchen space/cookware to properly prep and cook massive briskets and roasts.

What he's trying to say is that people can learn to be creative and do more with less.

If they have the options required to make something "more" with the "less" they are offered, why not also offer them an alternative of "more" in the options of quickness and convenience? Or are certain mores more than other mores and certain lesses less than other lesses?
---

It is funny some of the same people who are complaining about these poor people are ok with rich guy gaming the system. They make excuses and say well that is how the system is set up. Yet they want to do backflips in order to make the poorest American life that much worse.
---

Sounds good to me. I don't see why people should be allowed to use OTHER people's money to buy junk. If you're on a safety net program whereby you require aid in the form of MY and OTHER people's money, then you need some motivation to get off that safety net program. Not being able to buy needless junk MIGHT be a good motivator.

There's some pretty sweet hilarity in this topic when southcoast is complaining about how taxpayer money is spent despite not being a taxpayer
---

KillCommunism posted...

Sounds good to me. I don't see why people should be allowed to use OTHER people's money to buy junk. If you're on a safety net program whereby you require aid in the form of MY and OTHER people's money, then you need some motivation to get off that safety net program. Not being able to buy needless junk MIGHT be a good motivator.

Most people are on program for a year or less, many people how are on the program for longer most times have other issues that they are dealing with. Do you just think the average person on SNAP.. wants to me on SNAP, over having normal income ?
---

Metro2 posted...

Under the proposal, which was announced Monday, low-income Americans who receive at least $90 a month just over 80 percent of all SNAP recipients would get about half of their benefits in the form of a "USDA Foods package."

So the US government is giving people free food, and the topic title isn't even true, and we make a topic complaining about it.
---

I'm assuming they don't want them eating McDonalds so that frees up more for fat fuck Donnie to eat!
---

I thought they were pro free market?
---

If they just cut out candy, I'd be fine. Energy drinks used to not be allowed on there but is now. Lol such inconstancy.

Liberals cheered for Michelle Obama's lunch program. They cheered for soda taxes in liberal states. Oh, but now they can't stand the fact that people's snap benefits are going to be more restricted?

I don't care, I'll support this just to piss off all of the liberals who would be praising this if Obama did it.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Liberals cheered for Michelle Obama's lunch program. They cheered for soda taxes in liberal states. Oh, but now they can't stand the fact that people's snap benefits are going to be more restricted?

This, fucking hypocrites. I'm glad something is finally being done about our over bloated food stamp program.
---

Christ, this topic. Okay, a few things need to be pointed out.

- There's no way something like this will ever see the light of day. It would cost far more to implement than the current system. Which brings me to

- This would end up costing taxpayers more.

- The majority of SNAP recipients don't abuse it.

Someone made a post earlier about straight, white males. We all know why that lot wants more restrictions in place.

Believe it or not, stores like Walmart need the SNAP program as it is right now.
---

voldothegr8 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

Liberals cheered for Michelle Obama's lunch program. They cheered for soda taxes in liberal states. Oh, but now they can't stand the fact that people's snap benefits are going to be more restricted?

This, fucking hypocrites. I'm glad something is finally being done about our over bloated food stamp program.

Finally something being done about it, you know this program get something done about it all the time.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Liberals cheered for Michelle Obama's lunch program. They cheered for soda taxes in liberal states. Oh, but now they can't stand the fact that people's snap benefits are going to be more restricted?

This. I'm confused by the strong reactions. I'm not on a political side but I think this seems like a decent idea. I don't see how this is more "big government" if they were already giving out more money in the first place. But for many people this was doomed from the get go for being done under Trump's administration.
---

Trump and the republicans sure love big government
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

This. I'm confused by the strong reactions. I'm not on a political side but I think this seems like a decent idea. I don't see how this is more "big government" if they were already giving out more money in the first place. But for many people this was doomed from the get go for being done under Trump's admin

You don't see how this is a bigger government. The government now how to house and ship out food. You have to go thru more levels if have needs that have to be checked. How in the hell is not that bigger government to you? And if you agree with that spiteful comment and think the only issue people have with this is trump , you are clearly solidly red.

Also you honestly think Dems would support going back to government cheese if it was done under anyone else besides trump. That is bull shit and you fucking know it.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Liberals cheered for Michelle Obama's lunch program. They cheered for soda taxes in liberal states. Oh, but now they can't stand the fact that people's snap benefits are going to be more restricted?

I don't care, I'll support this just to piss off all of the liberals who would be praising this if Obama did it.

But school lunch is nothing new so why not make it healthier? Sadly since they can't force kids to eat all it did was lead to vegetables being thrown out. Of course people like you want to blame Obama for the isolated incidents where a school took away a kids lunch and replaced it with a school lunch to demonize her.

Supporting something just to piss others off is petty. Really people that do that need to grow up. There are immature people on the left and the right doing that when working together would actually solve problems.

Oh I live in the Chicago land area. There was no cheating for the soda tax. It was despised almost universally from day one. You had week ad campaigns saying how it was good for kids health while every Chicago news station was just waiting for it to end with no one thinking it was a good idea. Plus living in northwest Indiana as I did local stores had signs saying we had no soda tax advertising for people from Illinois to shop there. Clearly your hatred of the left has blinded you.
---