Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 190

Thread: Soda Is Target of New Assault

  1. #101
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    No, actually, I'm saying that if you don't like what they're buying, then trim their allowance back, or cut them off, all together.
    Then what exactly are you pissed off about? You're saying that they shouldn't be allowed to buy soda (via a reduction in their food stamps). I'm saying that they shouldn't be allowed to buy soda (via simply not allowing them to do it). You aren't even disagreeing, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    It's the pinnacle of stupidity to say they can't buy a few soft drinks, but can eat all the greasy fried **** they want.
    I'd rather the government not micromanage every aspect of what foods they can and can't buy. But they can at least weed out the easy things like soda, which have literally NO nutritional value and are one of the biggest contributors to obesity.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 10-08-10 at 12:50 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #102
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,574

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Then what exactly are you pissed off about? You're saying that they shouldn't be allowed to buy soda (via a reduction in their food stamps). I'm saying that they shouldn't be allowed to buy soda (via simply not allowing them to do it). You aren't even disagreeing, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
    You want to control people's spending habits for the sake of control. You are opposed to sody-waters, while stamp collectors are buying food stuffs that are far worse, yet you don't want to control those purchases. Why the hypocrisy?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #103
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    What's going to happen when a checkout line is clogged up with a stamp collector; half of whom's purchase can't be bought with food stamps? The CSM is going to hit the override button on the register, that's what.
    This just isn't how it works in real life. I worked in a rural grocery store 10 years ago. Even then and even there, the system for separating food stamp eligible products from non-food stamp eligible products was instantaneous. Every piece of merchandise is characterized as eligible or ineligible in the store's system. Modifying the system to treat soda as ineligible would require each store to spend maybe 30 seconds changing their database once.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #104
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,880
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Here's a few questions for all of ya that want to control what people eat/drink for those on foodstamps.

    Is it right to control people in this way? Is it right to punish those that are responsible and yet are still in need of help? One example would be those with extreme disabilities. Those that are unable to get a job to support themselves through no fault of their own.

    I've heard lots of people say that it is not right to punish those that are good for the misdeeds of the few. And yet here we are in this thread trying to control everyone on foodstamps because of people that happen to abuse the system. Why not fix the system instead of punishing everyone? Banning things does nothing to solve the over all problem that is inherent in the system itself. It is those problems which costs unnecessary expenditure of "your" money. Not soda's. You can try to claim that it is for health reasons and the saving of money in the long run but in reality it is truely about your disdain and feelings of supiority over those less fortunate than you. That is what I get from most of these posts in this thread and others threads that talk about foodstamps. Weather it's true or not I don't really know. But it sure does sound like it.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #105
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You want to control people's spending habits for the sake of control. You are opposed to sody-waters, while stamp collectors are buying food stuffs that are far worse, yet you don't want to control those purchases. Why the hypocrisy?
    Since you actually agree with me, and you're just hooting and hollering to be a dick rather than because you actually disagree, I'm gonna cease responding to you.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #106
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Here's a few questions for all of ya that want to control what people eat/drink for those on foodstamps.

    Is it right to control people in this way? Is it right to punish those that are responsible and yet are still in need of help? One example would be those with extreme disabilities. Those that are unable to get a job to support themselves through no fault of their own.

    I've heard lots of people say that it is not right to punish those that are good for the misdeeds of the few. And yet here we are in this thread trying to control everyone on foodstamps because of people that happen to abuse the system. Why not fix the system instead of punishing everyone? Banning things does nothing to solve the over all problem that is inherent in the system itself. It is those problems which costs unnecessary expenditure of "your" money. Not soda's. You can try to claim that it is for health reasons and the saving of money in the long run but in reality it is truely about your disdain and feelings of supiority over those less fortunate than you. That is what I get from most of these posts in this thread and others threads that talk about foodstamps. Weather it's true or not I don't really know. But it sure does sound like it.
    Modifying the food stamp program so that the funds cannot be used for soda is not a "punishment," IMO. Nobody is proposing cuts in the amount that these people will receive, just that they will no longer be able to spend it on a nutritionally useless product.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #107
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Modifying the food stamp program so that the funds cannot be used for soda is not a "punishment," IMO. Nobody is proposing cuts in the amount that these people will receive, just that they will no longer be able to spend it on a nutritionally useless product.
    Wait. Why would it be bad for it to be punishment? In the same fashion that we restricted CEO compensation for TARP recipients, why not restrict what food stamp receivers can buy with them? You get government assistance, you get some restrictions.

    If you're on food stamps, I feel like you willingly have given up some freedoms.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #108
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Wait. Why would it be bad for it to be punishment? In the same fashion that we restricted CEO compensation for TARP recipients, why not restrict what food stamp receivers can buy with them? You get government assistance, you get some restrictions.

    If you're on food stamps, I feel like you willingly have given up some freedoms.
    Oh, I'm not disagreeing at all, I'm just saying I wouldn't necessarily characterize either of those things as a "punishment." Companies could have avoided the limits on CEO pay by rejecting TARP funds. They chose to avail themselves of a government program that was being offered and in doing so, agreed to be bound by some additional restrictions.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #109
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    Government money should not be used to buy junk food. Also, there needs to be more regulations in general. I don't like government intrusion where it's not necessary, but look at the facts... there is an obesity epidemic. If it were a viral epidemic, there would be all sorts of mandatory procedures put into place to try and stop it; but because it's obesity, something gradual and not instantly life threatening, people are against certain controls.

    Stopping the sugary products is only one side of the problem. Obesity represents malnourishment. The body is lacking essential nutrients and so it goes into survival mode, which involves hording calories. Too many people are eating high calorie, nutrient poor foods.

    The use of high fructose corn syrup in virtually everything seriously needs regulation. The sugar industry has had way too much of an influence on government policy and now we are seeing serious health effects.


    Survival mode?

    Its about input vs output.

    If your a fatass sitting on the cou h eating ringdings all day your body is not obese because of "survival mode" :


    As for hfcs its fructose just another sugar. Personally i avoid it because i don't eat lroccessed foods but its the fatties shoving ring dings down thier gullet thats making them fat, not the ring dings themselves.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #110
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Soda Is Target of New Assault

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I would wager than >99.5% of people in this country have access to "safe" tap water in their homes.
    Depending on the standard we use, you could lose that wager:

    All told, more than 62 million Americans have been exposed since 2004 to drinking water that did not meet at least one commonly used government health guideline intended to help protect people from cancer or serious disease, according to an analysis by The Times of more than 19 million drinking-water test results from the District of Columbia and the 45 states that made data available.

    In some cases, people have been exposed for years to water that did not meet those guidelines.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/17/us/17water.html?_r=1

    Cutler, Calif. Ľ Over the last decade, the drinking water at thousands of schools across the country has been found to contain unsafe levels of lead, pesticides and dozens of other toxins.

    An Associated Press investigation found that contaminants have surfaced at public and private schools in all 50 states -- in small towns and inner cities alike.

    But the problem has gone largely unmonitored by the federal government, even as the number of water safety violations has multiplied.

    Drinking water unsafe at thousands of schools | North America > United States from AllBusiness.com

    More than 20 percent of the nationís water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/bu...t/08water.html

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •