Maine Gov. LePage threatens to halt food stamp program amid sugar crackdown

[TZucchini]

the obesity and diabetes rate of the poor says different

Many confounding factors there. Access to quality medical care. Access to education. Access to fitness activities. The poor are much less likely to have these.

And then of course:

Food stamp recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food choices is not clear.

[Hiricine]

The crappy thing about when government gives out free stuff is that if you act like an idiot with it then no one is there to take it away from you (generally). When its private charity, the nice people giving you the free stuff will stop giving it to you when you waste it or act like an asshole.

A safety net shouldn't exist in the form of coerced wealth transfers, and at best should at least act only as a safety net, not as stupidity maintenance. If you can afford to buy candy bars and fast food then the benefit from food stamps should obviously be reduced.

[Zyster]

how come republicans are all small government champions until they have a chance to fuck with poor people? You know he doesnt give one fuck about obesity in his state,

How is preventing unnecessary funding from government money screwing poor people? Please do tell how you not having your candy bar is ruining your life. You ever wonder why "republicans" don't take statements like this seriously?

[TZucchini]

Yes it is, unless you have some condition that would require it. Doing meth once a week isn't an unhealthy practice either. Overloading yourself with something you don't need, regardless of how often, it still unhealthy. Does that mean X person is doing to die sooner than Y person? Not necessarily. Being objective on that matter doesn't mean that all the sudden the facts don't exist.

Oh good. I was wondering when we'd start comparing candy bars to methamphetamine.

[purebalance]

Do you want to live in a free society or one completely ruled by government for peoples daily life?

I mean that's what the left wants. People thought policing everyone. So why not actually police for something worthwhile other than hurt feelings.

[Zyster]

I would consider bombs an unhealthy thing, but our defense fund says we have been doing this for a long time.

You're consuming bombs? I think there is an app for that.

[BreakerOfWills]

I also like how all the morons are in this thread are whining about government not backing unscientific practices, in the meantime the GoP is so mired in flat earth creationist bullshit that they'll destroy the planet cuz their idiocy is more important than science.

Can't cite science to fuck with poor people then claim experts are wrong when it comes to the entire planet becoming a shithole.

[Zyster]

Oh good. I was wondering when we'd start comparing candy bars to methamphetamine.

You lose.

/10char

[watatsuya]

They should try this with alcohol and see what happens.

[Hiricine]

Many confounding factors there. Access to quality medical care. Access to education. Access to fitness activities. The poor are much less likely to have these.

And then of course:

Food stamp recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food choices is not clear.

Well the basis is simple--- its wrong to take money from others and spend it on yourself by force, but some argue that force is necessary to keep some on their feet. If we're talking putting luxury items into the mix, then its no longer just keeping people on their feet. If you're spending your own money you can buy whatever you want, but morally, its wrong to take something thats basically meant for basic survival then spending it on luxuries.

[Lightwysh]

People on food stamps tend to buy whatever is cheapest. Maybe if chocolate bars weren't 5 for $1 people would be less inclinded to buy them as a meal replacement. As it is, most produce is to expensive and you can stretch your budget further with cheap junk food.

This is wrong. I can tell you, from and adult perspective, you can spend the same amount, if not less eating a nutritious whole foods diet. As long as you aren't mildly retarded and can YouTube recipes, you can make complex meals on par or better than processed foods.

We made the switch away from processed foods about 2 months ago. Our family food bill went from about $80/wk to about $50/wk.

[Vyxn]

Many confounding factors there. Access to quality medical care. Access to education. Access to fitness activities. The poor are much less likely to have these.

And then of course:

Food stamp recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food choices is not clear.

it is free to jog around the block
and what is cheaper a box of donuts or a can of green beans? a bag of chips or an apple?

[akris15]

Well the basis is simple--- its wrong to take money from others and spend it on yourself by force, but some argue that force is necessary to keep some on their feet. If we're talking putting luxury items into the mix, then its no longer just keeping people on their feet. If you're spending your own money you can buy whatever you want, but morally, its wrong to take something thats basically meant for basic survival then spending it on luxuries.

Sounds like to me you want a rations cards for welfare people.

[Allerius]

I also like how all the morons are in this thread are whining about government not backing unscientific practices, in the meantime the GoP is so mired in flat earth creationist bullshit that they'll destroy the planet cuz their idiocy is more important than science.

Can't cite science to fuck with poor people then claim experts are wrong when it comes to the entire planet becoming a shithole.

Must have missed the recent research where climate change will "destroy the planet". Will the Earth literally melt or will it explode?

[zenkai]

Yes. I understand now. It's about you being mad about your "hard earned money" being wasted on poor people buying candy bars. I get it.



Yes. I did support that. Because the tax effected all soda buyers. Not just the poor ones.

Now you're just being dishonest, in no way did I infer that, maybe your own twisted logic came out with that conclusion. Just like you're a hypocrite with the soda tax

[Zyster]

I also like how all the morons are in this thread are whining about government not backing unscientific practices, in the meantime the GoP is so mired in flat earth creationist bullshit that they'll destroy the planet cuz their idiocy is more important than science.

Can't cite science to fuck with poor people then claim experts are wrong when it comes to the entire planet becoming a shithole.

Did you just say that there is no scientific evidence towards the consumption of sugary drinks and candy bars while mocking republicans as they all believe in the earth being flat? What? Must need a candy bar.

[Hiricine]

how come republicans are all small government champions until they have a chance to fuck with poor people? You know he doesnt give one fuck about obesity in his state,

Reducing the amount of free stuff you're giving out is always a small government thing, if someone buys a candy bar its mathematically at the expense of 3-4 meals of oatmeal they could have had.

[Xada]

I agree with LePage on this, I don't need the frame of reference of living on food stamps either. Eat better, when you don't need hand outs to pay your expenses, then you can eat like shit.

[TZucchini]

Well the basis is simple--- its wrong to take money from others and spend it on yourself by force, but some argue that force is necessary to keep some on their feet. If we're talking putting luxury items into the mix, then its no longer just keeping people on their feet. If you're spending your own money you can buy whatever you want, but morally, its wrong to take something thats basically meant for basic survival then spending it on luxuries.

A candy bar is a luxury item? A bottle of soda? Are you kidding me? They're like 50 cents...

[BreakerOfWills]

How is preventing unnecessary funding from government money screwing poor people? Please do tell how you not having your candy bar is ruining your life. You ever wonder why "republicans" don't take statements like this seriously?

Republicans like to propose these high cost, low impact proposals that disproportionately effect the poor in the name of saving money. Despite the fact that they never save money, except perhaps in the extreme short term. Defunding food stamps will lead to a crisis in the state, unless you think people in poverty dont deserve to eat.

It's just like the idiots that proposed drug testing for welfare recipients, cept it turned out the numbers indicated it cost way more to test them, and testing caught near zero actual drug users.

The facts mean nothing to these morons, it's all about worrying about the pennies government spend on poor people while corporations can get away with having them work full time for poverty wages, THEN THE SAME PEOPLE GOTTA GO ON SNAP CUZ THEY CANT AFFORD FOOD.