So you heard that Bloomberg wanted to restrict people from buying soda with food stamps, right?

[conuly]

Well, the federal government took a look at his plan and said "Nope, too complicated, no can do!"

So far I've seen two articles on the subject, and the comments are going WILD. Apparently, people on food stamps should never spend one cent, of their money or "our" money, on: birthday cakes (sorry, kids!), crab, transportation (no cars for you!), cell phones (nevermind that landlines cost more and that a phone IS a necessity in the modern world....), food that ever tastes good or is easy to prepare, clothing (better go on that interview in your raggedy old jeans) or... anything.

Also, they should never get gifts, just so we KNOW they're poor.

If they get as little as $100 a month in food stamps, they should spend that on nutritious gruel, rather than spending a little on the gruel and a little on the half-price "splurge". Not even if they buy the splurge with cash! It's not sufficient to restrict what they buy with food stamps, they should not even be allowed to use their own wallets.

And none of them work either, so they have all day to go three bus rides here and back (with three kids), so it doesn't matter if the only place to get fresh food is two hours away.

Excuse me while I laugh.

Now, I'll be fair, I do see the logic and sense in putting some restrictions on what you can get with government money. And I definitely think that our government subsidizes too much "junk" foods and not enough healthy ones - there's a reason corn syrup is in everything, but organic peppers cost a small fortune!

However, I'm not ever going to take a stand that agrees with some of these assholes.

One person in the comments pointed out that soda can be helpful for diabetics if they need to raise their blood sugar level. "Oh, orange juice is just as good!" Orange juice costs three, four times as much as soda and it doesn't keep as long. You keep a think of soda in your fridge for a month (or in your cabinet!) and it goes flat. Keep the OJ in your fridge that long (forget the cabinet, it's a lost cause) and it goes bad.

Soda is unhealthy because people should drink water. No argument here - but if your water is truly nasty or contaminated, you still need to drink SOMEthing. Are you going to pay $4 for the soy milk, $2.50 for the milk-milk, $3.25 for the orange juice... or 89¢ for the soda? Maybe it's a bad choice (probably is a bad choice), but I can understand it. (Of course, this doesn't really apply in NYC unless the slum you live in has VERY old pipes, because we've got one of the best municipal water systems in the world... but then again, if you're that poor, you very well might live in a slum with very old pipes.)

Poor people should only be allowed to buy food "they'll learn how to cook!"

Sure, when they have the free time after working two bad jobs to make ends meet - or not, but walking around trying to GET two jobs. And after traveling an hour or two out of their way to do the grocery shopping. And let's not forget that in order to do cooking at home you need to have a large fridge (for ingredients and leftovers), cooking utensils (you at least need one pot or one skillet), a working stove, and, of course, the knowledge to do so. Of these problems, the lack of easy access to real food is probably the most common concern, but the others do appear. The response? "Oh, you're a typical bleeding heart liberal, you take an extreme example and make it sound like it's common!"

Well, aside from the fact that food deserts ARE common... yeah, I am a liberal. It's not an insult, it's a fact. I think the government doesn't belong in my bedroom (or yours or anybody else's - my bedroom isn't very interesting, but it's the principle of the thing!) and that it doesn't belong in my kitchen either. I also think that it IS the job of society (by which I mean the government) to take care of the members of society. Even if they really ARE lazy shiftless bums. (And we can disagree on that, but that's okay, because at least I know you guys won't start off trying to insult me!)

Aside from all this, even if these "extreme" conditions only apply to 10%, 5%, 1% of the people receiving food stamps, what, they should starve just because other people are luckier than they are? Ridiculous!

As far as "oh, they don't pay taxes" - nonsense, of course they do. Even if you redefine taxes to mean "only income taxes". (That's like saying oral sex isn't sex. The word sex is right in the name!)

You pay taxes so you can decide? I don't think so! (For one thing, we don't all agree, so... yeah.) I'm finding it hard to find out how much of your taxes go to food stamps, but here's a pie chart. This website is all interactive, but it lists food stamps under "miscellaneous mandatory programs" and so you can't see how much that one program in particular costs.

So basically it comes down to this. Some people are jerks, and also, they think they know more than they do. (Having fun with that last link, though. You can compare and contrast different nations' tax spending if you remember exchange rates!)

Comments

[chaos_by_design]

It's really insane how entitled people feel to be judgmental of the poor. I suppose it's a defense mechanism of sorts, in that by believing that poverty happens only to people who "deserve" to be poor, that it won't happen to them, because of course, they don't "deserve" it.

It's a really despicable attitude.

[atalantapendrag.livejournal.com]

God, I wish I got $100/mo in food stamps... as a single adult on SSDI, I get $16/mo :(

[conuly]

And if you blow that all buying a pound of lobster, that's not YOUR problem, it's everybody else's business!

[atalantapendrag.livejournal.com]

Agreed! Especially since the occasional bit of self-nurturing is VITAL for me.

[conuly]

And really, what else are you going to buy? From my budget, that's....

6 pounds of apples (1 dollar for three pounds at the farmer's market)
2 loaves of bread (on sale for $5 total)
1 jar of peanut butter ($2)
1 jar jelly ($3)
A gallon of milk ($2.75, I think)
aaaaaaand... I don't know, whatever you can get with the remaining quarters.

Wow. Your SNAP covers lunch for three weeks. Cheap lunch, and not on the weekends.

[xianghua.livejournal.com]

Yeah, and for someone with peanut allergies? Not even that.

[conuly]

Using the peanut butter money and some of your change, buy butter instead. Now you have toast for three weeks instead. Whoop-de-doo.

[xianghua.livejournal.com]

Yup. :(

[xianghua.livejournal.com]

(And I should mention, as an adult on SSDI in Texas? I don't qualify at ALL.)

[atalantapendrag.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I usually save it up for 2 or 3 months so it'll pay for a full trips' worth at least.

*bites off further Tales of Woe*

[conuly]

Ah, yes, the "if they're so poor they should buy in bulk" argument.

I'm not sure if I'm more concerned that they think these people have the MONEY to buy in bulk, or that they don't realize that this stuff has to be lugged home.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

Not to mention stored in some way that's safe from vermin, moisture, mold/fungus, chemicals. A plastic bag is not mouseproof.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Coffee cans are, though, and they are free and plentiful. Glass jars are even better, and restaurants will often give you their empty big ones if you ask. Brown rice goes stale unless you keep it cold in airtight containers, so there's no use buying 20 lbs. at a time if you can't.

It's quite feasible to go shares on bulk wholesale with one's friends. That's how a lot of the Co-ops got started, back in the 70's - two friends become four friends become eight friends become sixteen; pretty soon you need a bookkeeping system, and a better distribution-site than someone's garage. But it doesn't have to turn into a huge unwieldy production; it can remain "us four and no more", which IMHO is about the optimum number for a buying club.

[conuly]

Coffee cans are only mouseproof until one of them gnaws through the lid. Ask me how I know.

[conuly]

Suicidal boredom....

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I'd love to see that 'someone' hoofing it five miles home with a load like that.

[conuly]

Funnily enough, absurd though I find 'someone's argument, I could manage that not to shabbily.

It comes from babywearing.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

In my early 20's, before I got a bike I had to hoof it about three miles home from the store with all my groceries - half in the backpack, half in the satchel - and it was fine as long as I shopped often enough that I didn't have to carry too much at a time.

That's neither here nor there: I'm assuming that 'someone' has never done so, else he or she would not be making such ignorant remarks.

[conuly]

Especially since I'm thinking both of us realize it's madness to try that with small children, aged grannies at home, or working schedules that take up more than half the day BEFORE the commute.

[erisiansaint]

I think people are ENTIRELY too harsh on people using food stamps. I've been on them. I was lucky, I know how to cook, so I could manage, but there was an awful lot of eating the same stuff, day after day because it was what I could afford.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I think soda ought to be excluded from food stamp purchases for the same reasons that beer and cigarettes ought to be excluded: it is not a food, it is a luxury non-food item that nobody needs, and that already costs the taxpayers a bundle in medical bills for all the health problems it causes.

Diabetics absolutely do not 'need' soda pop. Half my family is diabetic; my mother and her sister were both insulin-dependent from an early age - I can tell you right now that no doctor will ever tell you that diabetics ought to drink ANY soda pop.

Arguments about orange juice are not pertinent, because orange juice is not a neccessity either. My mother traveled all over the world with a little tin of restaurant sugar-packs in her purse - as her doctor advised - so that if her blood-sugar took a dive, she could just sprinkle a half-packet under her tongue, and then eat some protein and complex carbs. The amount of sugar in a whole Coke is far more than needed to raise the blood-sugar levels, but people drink it up, forget about the real food - big surprise; same time next day they're taking another dive.

I have two dear diabetic friends who live that way - they both forget to eat what and when they're supposed to, then go for the toxic sweetsies because "I haven't eaten all day, I'm about to pass out, and this is all that's handy". Yeah, y'know what, both of them have enormous bellies, their legs are chronically swollen to twice their normal size, and their blood-sugar levels are all over the map. They're barely older than me, and yet they can hardly walk any more; I dread having to watch their continuing deterioration over the years, because I see already how it's going to be.

Diet soda is even worse. Check it out, look it up, what aspartame and sucralose convert to in the body, and what that does to the brain.

Obviously, the problem is that there are a zillion kinds of bottled and canned drinks, many of which are innocuous or even relatively healthy, and how is the law to distinguish between them all? They can't say it's okay to drink Talking Rain but not Diet Pepsi.

If it was up to me, I'd say just ban high-fructose corn syrup, aspartame, sucrose and sucralose (also hydrogenated or partially-hydrogenated oils) from ALL commercial foods in this country, and let people on food stamps buy what they like. If the stuff is bad for them - and it is - it's just as bad for everyone else, so let's not muck about: get it off the market.

[conuly]

Oh, I know. I don't actually think soda should be bought with grocery money (or food stamps) either.

I just don't want to agree with these jerks, because they're jerks.