Poll of the Day > Iowa GOP members want to ban SNAP from buying meat white bread and cheese

(+) Yeah! (+)

Wow talk about mean! It doesn't get any meaner or more hateful than that.

I guess they do not realize that over 71% of the people who live in Appalachia receive SNAP benefits.

I assume they can buy wheat bread, blue cheese and dark meats!

https://www.salon.com/2023/01/20/its-a-huge-list-iowa-bill-would-ban-people-on-stamps-from-buying-fresh-meat--and-more/

Yeah but they'll do it and say it was actually the democrats that did it, and their voters will believe them.

"It's these entitlement programs. They're the ones that are growing within the budget and are putting pressure on us being able to fund other priorities,"

People being able to eat is not a priority for the Republican party.

But still buy Eggs?

It's astounding how much success the GOP has had with getting their voters to believe that making their tax dollars work for them is "evil socialism" while using their tax dollars to benefit corporations and the wealthy is good ol' capitalism working as God intended. It'll trickle down, folks! Just you wait and see. Wait, and wait, and wait, and wait, and wait....

papercup posted...

Yeah but they'll do it and say it was actually the democrats that did it, and their voters will believe them.

Its a sad truth.

captpackrat posted...

"It's these entitlement programs. They're the ones that are growing within the budget and are putting pressure on us being able to fund other priorities,"

People being able to eat is not a priority for the Republican party.

captpackrat posted...

"It's these entitlement programs. They're the ones that are growing within the budget and are putting pressure on us being able to fund other priorities,"

People being able to eat is not a priority for the Republican party.

Ronald Reagan iit that fire by telling a lie about a Black woman in Chicago who was able to get $150,000 a year (and this was in the 1970s when the average welfare check was like $68 bucks) because she lied and used several aliases to collect welfare and VET benefits and white people actually believed it.

The classic idea of a liberal welfare state has failed, even more demonstrably than "trickle down economics" that the left like to rant about (which should be more accurately described as "climb up" economics as it rewards active participation). When we invest (or gamble) on the least successful aspects of society without oversight, it is throwing good money after bad.

There at least need to be more measures in place to ensure that when money is reallocated from worthwhile expenditures towards less assimilated parts of society, that the money will eventually flow through the community back to job creators and entrepreneurs, instead of getting burned on *checks notes* food.

Blightzkrieg posted...

"trickle down economics" that the left like to rant about (which should be more accurately described as "climb up" economics as it rewards active participation).

you don't seem to understand the problem here...

The super-wealthy sequester wealth; For trickle down to work a billionaire would have to be buying billions of dollars of consumer products, which would in turn fuel the economy... but billionaires aren't buying a million TVs every year (replace TV with whatever consumer product)

Why would you reduce choice on benefit programmes?

A few cities here are running pilots where instead of being allowed to get a pre-decided package from an assigned store, people eligible get a state supplied debit card with a weekly or monthly limit that can be freely used at any grocery store connected to the programme.

Lokarin posted...

you don't seem to understand the problem here...

Are you new here, Lok?

So what can they buy with it? Those seems like the foods that people should be buying the most

The bill dictates that people can only purchase 100% whole wheat bread, brown rice and 100% whole wheat pasta no white grains allowed.

Also on the "do not buy list" are baked, refried or chili beans. Instead, recipients must purchase black, red, and pinto beans. Cooking oil, spices, and salt and pepper would have to be crossed off the shopping list, along with soup, and canned vegetables and fruit.

Fresh meats are off the table, as Iowans would only be able to purchase canned products like canned tuna or salmon. Sliced, cubed, crumbled, and American cheese would also be eliminated from SNAP food purchases.

It's weird... you can get canned beans but not canned veggies. Canned fish but not soup. The article doesn't really specify what you can get but it really seems like it's custom made so you can't make a complete meal with the benefits.

BlackScythe0 posted...

It's weird... you can get canned beans but not canned veggies. Canned fish but not soup. The article doesn't really specify what you can get but it really seems like it's custom made so you can't make a complete meal with the benefits.

Well duh, Republicans are doing whatever to kill people (and I do mean murder) legally. Which is why I am eagerly awaiting the trial of someone straight up murdering someone directly after asking if they are a Republican. The trial will be a glorious showing of how being a Republican is directly antithetical to being human and caring about your fellow man.

It's a tough system. It's supposed to be beneficial, but obviously people waste it.
There should be limits, but people should also be decent and less selfish.
Just make sure they can't spend that money at Starbucks. those are the worst and most entitled people

captpackrat posted...

"It's these entitlement programs. They're the ones that are growing within the budget and are putting pressure on us being able to fund other priorities,"

People being able to eat is not a priority for the Republican party.

Its also a lie. The money paid to people is paid for by federal funds, and the administration is only 50% paid by Iowa... and it hasnt gone up in 12 years. And implementing this system will raise the cost because, obviously, they need to do more to control what people eat.

They just hate poors.

pedro45 posted...

It's a tough system. It's supposed to be beneficial, but obviously people waste it.
There should be limits, but people should also be decent and less selfish.
Just make sure they can't spend that money at Starbucks. those are the worst and most entitled people

You know that SNAP cant be used on Starbucks or fast food, right?

pedro45 posted...

It's a tough system. It's supposed to be beneficial, but obviously people waste it.
There should be limits, but people should also be decent and less selfish.
Just make sure they can't spend that money at Starbucks. those are the worst and most entitled people

SNAP isn't accepted at Starbucks.

In fact, very few states are included in the restaurant meals program currently. And those that are included have strict guidelines for who is eligible and where they can spend. It's geared towards helping the elderly, disabled, and homeless. Restaurant chains have to apply and submit to certain criteria to take part in the SNAP RMP. I could be wrong but I believe Starbucks is not currently one of the restaurants which takes part.

SNAP generally allows for groceries. Not hot meals at restaurants, outside of the states that take part in the RMP.

Zanglerfish posted...

You know that SNAP cant be used on Starbucks or fast food, right?

I believe that in states that the RM program is running, that there are fast food restaurants that take part.

But again, most states do not have the RMP.

Grendel_Prime posted...

I believe that in states that the RM program is running, that there are fast food restaurants that take part.

But again, most states do not have the RMP.

So... not SNAP which is what this topic is about.

And even then, I wouldnt care if people get fast food. Shit with grocery prices right now its not always cheaper to cook yourself.

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

A few cities here are running pilots where instead of being allowed to get a pre-decided package from an assigned store, people eligible get a state supplied debit card with a weekly or monthly limit that can be freely used at any grocery store connected to the programme.

..Is that not how it works everywhere? What you're describing sounds like how it's always worked, where I am at least.

Calling it now: The lawmakers that proposed this will be buying stocks in local industries that supply the prohibited items when they drop in value over the next couple weeks, then will walk back the idea after "studying the potential impact further" and sell their stocks once they rebound.

Zanglerfish posted...

So... not SNAP which is what this topic is about.

The RMP I'm referring to is a part of SNAP.

Grendel_Prime posted...

The RMP I'm referring to is a part of SNAP.

Being a part of is not the same thing it also isnt in Iowa. Your point is fine but youre not going to win a semantics argument.

What I stated is true. There is no argument. I'm offering up information. RMP is an option in any state which chooses to offer it, of which there are only a handful currently.

The RMP is an option of SNAP. States need to show there are members of their population who are underserved by SNAP and could benefit from the RMP in order to qualify. Iowa certainly could have a RMP, should they choose to.

Yes yes. You definitely arent being argumentative by adding superfluous information that has no bearing on Iowas SNAP program. But ok.

Republicans are coming for your hamburgers

Correct, not argumentative. Just informational.

Lord_Shadow posted...

Republicans are coming for your hamburgers

No, not mah hamburgers!

I worked just outside of Des Moines and the number of ads and pundits going off about California taking away their hamburgers was just ridiculous.

Zanglerfish posted...

You know that SNAP cant be used on Starbucks or fast food, right?

It can though. Less than a year ago, i was serving people using ebt/snap. Our location stopped but some stores still allow it.

pionear posted...

But still buy Eggs?

No, they mostly just steal them.

what if someone intentionally made a franchise of restaurants that catered specifically to foods people on SNAP could get... cheap fried tomatoes, nutritious sliced cantaloupe, etc etc etc

Lokarin posted...

what if someone intentionally made a franchise of restaurants that catered specifically to foods people on SNAP could get... cheap fried tomatoes, nutritious sliced cantaloupe, etc etc etc

Then people would lobby to get those franchises shut down for attracting "too many" poor people.

I mean, white bread really doesn't do much for you, nutritionally. There's a reason they have to "fortify" it during production. Whole grain should be the default for anyone, especially those who are poor and needing the additional benefits of good food intake. A shame all around really.