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

[Gamdwelf]

Noone is saying government should rule people's lives. If you earn your own money you can buy whatever the hell you want. They're saying if you are on food stamps you should not be able to buy junk food and soda with it. Even if you completely discount all the health risks of living solely on junk food...that stuff is a TERRIBLE value for the money. The money spent on 2 bags of chips could provide several days worth of food if you bought stuff like beans, rice, and pasta.

Some people have pointed out that very occasional purchases of stuff like this is ok. That's fine. This can be accodomated. Say you can spend no more than x dollars per month on fast food type items. And it should be something small, like $5-$10.

Really, because that's what many people in this thread are advocating.

[Zyster]

So instead of Tackling the main problem (Unhealthy food) ; The goverment attacks poor people, and what choises of food they have?

This doesn't attack poor people. The same people will still be receiving the same amount of money for food. Not just that, but will still be able to buy luxuries food items and even drinks while the government can know they aren't taking part in providing to unhealthy habits.

[Deleted]

Not by your standards. You are now contradicting other things you have said and changing commonly accepted definitions of words. By what you state and have stated, no where is free, and all governments are authoritarian. Again, where are you going with this on the actual subject? You again, are using this to basically state F the US, and not actually anything about the subject..

Quote, please.

"This doesn't attack poor people. The same people will still be receiving the same amount of money for food."

It literally attacks only people recieving food stamps, and restricts what food they can legally buy for thoose stamps.

How is it NOT attacking poor people?

[Zyster]

Really, because that's what many people in this thread are advocating.

Who exactly? Are you suggesting the government controlling where their money goes and what it is for as controlling? The entire tax process? What exactly are you referring to as saying many people in this thread are advocating for the government to rule people's lives? You can still freely take your money and purchase whatever you want.

[Deleted]

This doesn't attack poor people. The same people will still be receiving the same amount of money for food. Not just that, but will still be able to buy luxuries food items and even drinks while the government can know they aren't taking part in providing to unhealthy habits.

But they are, they give payments to people and keep unhealthy food legalized.

They are actively stopping poor people, and no-one else. That is an isolated attack, on one specific group of people.

[Zyster]

Quote, please.

"This doesn't attack poor people. The same people will still be receiving the same amount of money for food."

It literally attacks only people recieving food stamps, and restricts what food they can legally buy for thoose stamps.

How is it NOT attacking poor people?

How is one attacked by taking nothing away? Or are you going to go in the same circle again. You can't take something away someone never had. Unless you think welfare is money people always had. Then there wouldn't be a welfare problem.

- - - Updated - - -

But they are, they give payments to people and keep unhealthy food legalized.

They are actively stopping poor people, and no-one else. That is an isolated attack, on one specific group of people.

Interesting. I am one of these poor people, and live in the US, and disagree with you. I can still feed my family with my food stamps provided by the government. How am I being attacked?

- - - Updated - - -

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),[1] formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, provides food-purchasing assistance for low- and no-income people living in the U.S. It is a federal aid program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, under the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), though benefits are distributed by each U.S. state's Division of Social Services or Children and Family Services.

The program is still doing exactly what it is intended to do.

[Deleted]

How is one attacked by taking nothing away? Or are you going to go in the same circle again. You can't take something away someone never had. Unless you think welfare is money people always had. Then there wouldn't be a welfare problem.

- - - Updated - - -



Interesting. I am one of these poor people, and live in the US, and disagree with you. I can still feed my family with my food stamps provided by the government. How am I being attacked?

You are unable to read, it seems.

How is one attacked by taking nothing away? Or are you going to go in the same circle again. You can't take something away someone never had. Unless you think welfare is money people always had. Then there wouldn't be a welfare problem.

"Citing Maine’s rising obesity and diabetes rates, LePage said he will look “to implement reform unilaterally or cease Maine’s administration of the food stamp program altogether.”"

[Zyster]

You are unable to read, it seems.




"Citing Maine’s rising obesity and diabetes rates, LePage said he will look “to implement reform unilaterally or cease Maine’s administration of the food stamp program altogether.”"

Food stamps aren't a freedom.

[Deleted]

Food stamps aren't a freedom.

And?

You have literally contradicted yourself and failed to account for that.

[melodramocracy]

It's imposing limitations on poor people, unquestionably.

The prime goal here seems a bit skewed as well, as to prove the effectiveness of this, one would need to assert that the majority of America's obesity issue is a) caused by the sort of junk food being discussed here explicitly, and b) that the majority of obese Americans are welfare recipients.

[Faerillis]

I think people on food stamps should be more limited on what you buy, fast food companies for years have been campaigning to allow people to buy their food with food stamps.

I have a friend who is on disability because he is obese, how does the government fix this? They gave him a place to live then has someone come in clean his place and does his shopping. Guess what he buys? Mt Dew and Chips, he has done nothing but gain weight since he got disability 15 years ago. He went from 500lbs to 770lbs. He pretty much just sits around all day playing video games and watches Netflix.

And what do you think he can afford on a government stipend? Is he going to spend his foodstamps on a variety of knives, pots, pans, sieves and spices before he even gets to actual food — since that's what he'd need to prepare reasonable quality food — or is he going to spend his stipend on super shitty food, that is already prepared and cheap enough for him to actually afford?

Poor economic footing and Poor health go hand in hand. A lot more money goes into cooking healthy food than having healthy ingredients and most houses on Food Stamps can't hope to afford the resources it requires to make healthy food. And hey, because their food is so shitty their families get even more unhealthy and have even less prospects. The problem feeds into itself!

But really what do you expect? LePage is a Republican and is looking for any excuse to cut money from Citizen Welfare to ensure that Corporate Welfare is kept top notch. Because America has Honest Politicians — when you buy one, they stay bought.

[purebalance]

Ah, Republicans are so much fun. They don't get their way, and their first instinct is always the nuclear option.

Seriously, some poor people buy a candy bar and mountain dew every now and then...this is a reason to freak out?

And people wonder why I have hard time taking many Republicans seriously anymore...

Ah liberals so much fun. They namecall and everything else underhanded in the book when they don't get their way too.

[urasim]

And?

You have literally contradicted yourself and failed to account for that.

What do you propose governments do about the unhealthy foods? You seem to think that's the real problem. I'd love to hear what you have to say about it.

[Eviscero]

Lepage looks like he gets down on some Snickers.

[Zyster]

And?

You have literally contradicted yourself and failed to account for that.

What? How is that?

[announced]

food stamps should be redesigned. make them only valuable for buying vegetables and meat products(ie chicken breasts/drums/wings/legs/thighs, porkchops/steak/ground beef/etc). limit people to maybe 1-2 candy bars a month, not a day.
a complete sugar ban wouldnt work, a ban on pop amd camdy bars would be fine though as its mostly just sugar and isnt really healthy
its unfortunate that people have such poor impulse control but i'd gladly suffer a few whiny whales than have the entire town obese.

[Orlong]

The point is that conservatives should really stop either directly or indirectly stating that people on food stamps don't work, as a blanket statement.

Working part time at McDonalds isnt working. Perhaps we should say they should work more!

- - - Updated - - -

I don't know what a food desert is (lol wtf) but, I can assure you there are like zero grocery stores in the hood.

They can ride the bus on their subsidized transit pass to a grocery store, or order plenty of nutritious from Amazon from their Obamaphone

- - - Updated - - -

Except, given this excuse, there's no reason to single out food stamp recipients. There's no evidence that the eating habits of those on EBT are generally worse than those who pay for their own food.

"Because health reasons" is a cop out. Otherwise you'd support banning candy and soda for everyone.

For me, I care less about the health aspect and more about the aspect that they claim they are destitute and beg for help, so we give them help and then they blow it on stuff that isnt a necessity. This brings up 2 possible solutions.

1. Either they have too much of their own money that they use to buy the necessities with, and they spend the money we give them on junk that they dont need to survive in which case, they dont need food stamps anymore and should be dropped from the program, or

2. We are giving them too much money that after buying the necessities, they have an excess to buy junk with in which case they are being given too much and the amount of food stamps they receive should be scaled back.

- - - Updated - - -

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.

Its only because drug users stopped applying for benefits knowing they would pop positive and not receive benefits and likely go to jail Of course there is no way to measure how many never applied or never reapplied for this reason, so the democrats said it was a flop.

- - - Updated - - -

If you really want where to find Republicans at fault here, just look at all the stuff they spend money on while talking about saving money. You don't see a lot of calls to cut military spending, medicare or social security which are the huge ticket items but you'll find far more people on SS who don't need it than people on food stamps who don't.

Thats because people who receive social security retirement earned it by being forced to pay into it, and many rich people payed a lot more into it than other people. People on food stamps didnt pay anything into the program

[TZucchini]

For me, I care less about the health aspect and more about the aspect that they claim they are destitute and beg for help, so we give them help and then they blow it on stuff that isnt a necessity. This brings up 2 possible solutions.

1. Either they have too much of their own money that they use to buy the necessities with, and they spend the money we give them on junk that they dont need to survive in which case, they dont need food stamps anymore and should be dropped from the program, or

2. We are giving them too much money that after buying the necessities, they have an excess to buy junk with in which case they are being given too much and the amount of food stamps they receive should be scaled back.

Except there's really no evidence that SNAP spending on candy bars and other "junk items" is a common behavior.

And the overpayment rate is at historic lows, so that theory is busted as well.

[Moxal]

In Texas (I'm sure it's the same way elsewhere), people cannot buy white potatos or whole milk (unless they have a child under like 2) with the food stamp equivalent.

So this kind of thing is already happening. Seems like a good idea.

[GennGreymane]

In Texas (I'm sure it's the same way elsewhere), people cannot buy white potatos or whole milk (unless they have a child under like 2) with the food stamp equivalent.

So this kind of thing is already happening. Seems like a good idea.

Those savages! Drinking Milk and eating potatoes! Next they will want rice!