• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Soda Is Target of New Assault

I support the idea that food stamps shouldn't be used for buying soda, cigarettes, alchohol, etc......Its public money. I know it goes against the grain of most other budgetary policy, but public money shouldn't be wasted.

Obesity in this country isn't about malnourishment, its about over consumption and an increasing sedentary lifestyle. HFCS is not going to give anybody diabetes if its not over consumed and people stay active. Sugar/sodium won't have the negative benefits if people are properly hydrated and staying active. Blah, blah, blah on and on people try to blame food industries(because attacking industry, rather than behavior is how some people think) for the fact that lazy people over consume their foods, which is something they have no control over.
 
Kandahar said:
Not THAT much cheaper. You can get healthy food for almost the same price as unhealthy food. And the unhealthy stuff is a lot more expensive once you factor in the diabetes and heart attack.
Click to expand...

What do stamp collectors care? They're not expecting to have to pay for their own medical treatment. That's free, too. It's what the do-gooders have created. Ya'll wanted 100% dependency, you got it.

This is especially true in the case of soda, where the most obvious healthy substitute - water - is virtually free.
Click to expand...

When's the last time you bought a bottle of water at the store?
 
rivrrat said:
But it's not. Soda is far more expensive than water.
Click to expand...

Not so sure. Not sure how safe tap water is, and bottled water isn't always cheaper. Juice is more expensive. So is milk in most places. I can get some soda really cheap. ;):lol:
 
Boo Radley said:
Not so sure. Not sure how safe tap water is, and bottled water isn't always cheaper. Juice is more expensive. So is milk in most places. I can get some soda really cheap. ;):lol:
Click to expand...

A Brita filtered pitcher is pretty cheap.
 
Boo Radley said:
not a food item.
Click to expand...

And what does that have to do with the price of rice in china? A stove isn't a food item either, but I'm assuming that the people on food stamps have purchased one. And pots too. And silverware. And cups.
 
rivrrat said:
And what does that have to do with the price of rice in china? A stove isn't a food item either, but I'm assuming that the people on food stamps have purchased one. And pots too. And silverware. And cups.
Click to expand...

You can't spend food stamps on a non food item.
 
Boo Radley said:
Not so sure. Not sure how safe tap water is, and bottled water isn't always cheaper. Juice is more expensive. So is milk in most places. I can get some soda really cheap. ;):lol:
Click to expand...

That's right, when a store is selling Big Shot drinks for 99 cents and a bottle of water is a $1.29, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which one the stamp collector is going to purchase.
 
rivrrat said:
And what does that have to do with the price of rice in china? A stove isn't a food item either, but I'm assuming that the people on food stamps have purchased one. And pots too. And silverware. And cups.
Click to expand...

If they have, then they're guilty of welfare fraud.
 
apdst said:
What do stamp collectors care? They're not expecting to have to pay for their own medical treatment. That's free, too. It's what the do-gooders have created. Ya'll wanted 100% dependency, you got it.
Click to expand...

Well if they don't care, then that's all the more reason not to incentivize their unhealthy behavior by having the government pay for their soda.

apdst said:
When's the last time you bought a bottle of water at the store?
Click to expand...

Umm never. You don't have to buy it in fancy bottles. Do you have a sink in your house?
 
Kandahar said:
Well if they don't care, then that's all the more reason not to incentivize their unhealthy behavior by having the government pay for their soda.
Click to expand...

I would rather see them weened off welfare.



Umm never. You don't have to buy it in fancy bottles. Do you have a sink in your house?
Click to expand...

And, how much flouride will I be consuming?
 
apdst said:
That's right, when a store is selling Big Shot drinks for 99 cents and a bottle of water is a $1.29, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which one the stamp collector is going to purchase.
Click to expand...

Uhh sounds like a pretty good argument to not let them buy the soda with the food stamps. Maybe you should figure out which side of the argument you're on, instead of just vacillating back and forth, all the while ranting about Teh Evil Libruhls.
 
apdst said:
I would rather see them weened off welfare.
Click to expand...

Cool. Not the subject of this thread though.

apdst said:
And, how much flouride will I be consuming?
Click to expand...

Did you really just channel the John Bircher from Dr. Strangelove in all seriousness? Really?
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh sounds like a pretty good argument to not let them buy the soda with the food stamps. Maybe you should figure out which side of the argument you're on, instead of just vacillating back and forth, all the while ranting about Teh Evil Libruhls.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying, is that you wanted dependency; you got it. You only have yourselves to blame.
 
apdst said:
All I'm saying, is that you wanted dependency; you got it. You only have yourselves to blame.
Click to expand...

I really have no idea what the hell you're even talking about. Other than that your pissed off at liberals about something or other.
 
apdst said:
If they have, then they're guilty of welfare fraud.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? If someone on food stamps has a stove, pots and pans, silverware, and cups then they're guilty of welfare fraud? :lol:
 
rivrrat said:
What are you talking about? If someone on food stamps has a stove, pots and pans, silverware, and cups then they're guilty of welfare fraud? :lol:
Click to expand...

If they purchased those items with food stamps, then yes, they are. Food stamps are good for food items only. Unprepared food, at that. You can't buy boiled crawfish with food stamps, but you can buy live crawfish and boil them yourself. I think buying high end food items should be illegal, too.
 
Food stamp abuse and fraud is why I feel that free-choice food stamps - overall - is just a bad idea.

I support a WIC type program where you can purchase *only* the food provided and listed - nothing else.
 
How about instead of banning stuff why don't we just change the food stamp qualifying standards? You know, require people who don't have jobs to look for jobs like they do when you get unemployment? Require people that are on food stamps to actually...well ya know...WORK? I am so sick and tired of people that think they have a right to tell people what they can and cannot do. Especially people that happen to be having a harder time of it than them.

It also occurs to me that too many people have the common misconception that everyone that is on foodstamps are lazy idiots that are just using and abusing the system. That is just not the case. Both of my folks are retired and are on a fixed income through SSI. Due to a clerical error the amount that they get was reduced forcing my parents to apply for foodstamps at least until the error gets fixed..which is expected to last 3-4 months. So while there may be people that do abuse the welfare service not everyone does.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Food stamp abuse and fraud is why I feel that free-choice food stamps - overall - is just a bad idea.

I support a WIC type program where you can purchase *only* the food provided and listed - nothing else.
Click to expand...

I agree, but know that will be more expensive.
 
Kal'Stang said:
How about instead of banning stuff why don't we just change the food stamp qualifying standards? You know, require people who don't have jobs to look for jobs like they do when you get unemployment? Require people that are on food stamps to actually...well ya know...WORK? I am so sick and tired of people that think they have a right to tell people what they can and cannot do. Especially people that happen to be having a harder time of it than them.
Click to expand...

Applying for employment and gaining employment is part of the program in my state.
It's easy to fleece, too - all you have to do is apply for jobs you don't qualify for. You just have to fill out the sheet and send it in every month proving you've *filled out applications*
Your case worker is suppose to follow up on you - but they often don't bother.

AT the same time, however, many people do find employment and then enter into a transitional period in which they're employed and receiving full benefits - aftera set amount of time they are suppose to take on more of their costs (healthcare, childcare, etc) - and eventually they're weened off the system.

OR you can be in school full time - everything covered - until you graduate.

It also occurs to me that too many people have the common misconception that everyone that is on foodstamps are lazy idiots that are just using and abusing the system. That is just not the case. Both of my folks are retired and are on a fixed income through SSI. Due to a clerical error the amount that they get was reduced forcing my parents to apply for foodstamps at least until the error gets fixed..which is expected to last 3-4 months. So while there may be people that do abuse the welfare service not everyone does.
Click to expand...

Agreed - many don't realize that countless people *are working* and are *on welfare* at the same time. . . and many get off the program.
It's just the bad people who abuse the system who are *heard about* more (news, when they get caught, etc). . . so that's the image that sticks in everyone's mind.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
they are already talking about a soda tax in ny, this is a stepping stone.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. It's a good measure to halt the purchase of non-healthy food items using Food Stamps...you know...that social services program that tends to be wasteful by those who abuse it. I'd figure you of all people would jump all over this as a step in the right direction! And for once, I'd totally agree with you!
 
Boo Radley said:
I agree, but know that will be more expensive.
Click to expand...

How? If someone gets $500.00/month and they are able to cover all the basics - and soda and snacks and expensive foods they don't need - then cutting down their $$ each month saves money.

A Wic type program ensures adequate nutrition - without any excess = without any waste.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom