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

[Spectral]

Honestly, buying store brand 2-liters of soda, or a bag of sugar and packets of drink mix is cheaper than buying an individual size soda in almost every case. Part of the problem here is the fact that the more unhealthy a food is for you, the cheaper it is. We should be cracking down on the industry, not the consumers.

Water is significantly cheaper than either of the soda options you mention. This refutes the bolded.

There are, obviously, many cheap foods that are healthy. People just prefer Doritos.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

That's wonderful but stopping the use of federal dollars to purchase garbage food does it all.

You keep on missing the point that restrictions don't work.

I'll post it again. Maybe try reading it this time

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/defaul...strictions.pdf

No clear standards exist for defining foods as good or bad, or healthy or not healthy.

• Federal dietary guidance uniformly applies to the total diet – there are no widely accepted standards
to judge the “healthfulness” of individual foods.

• Foods contain many components that can affect health, and diets contain many foods. As a result, it
is challenging to determine whether – and the point at which – the presence or absence of desirable
nutrients outweighs the presence of nutrients to be avoided in ruling a food “in” or “out”

Implementation of food restrictions would increase program complexity and costs.

• There are more than 300,000 food products on the market, and an average of 12,000 new products
were introduced each year between 1990 and 2000. The task of identifying, evaluating, and tracking
the nutritional profile of every food available for purchase would be substantial. The burden of
identifying which products met Federal standards would most likely fall on an expanded bureaucracy
or on manufacturers and producers asked to certify that their products meet Federal standards.

• Responsibility for enforcing compliance would rest in the hands of employees at check-out counters
in 160,000 stores across the nation. While many have modern scanning and inventory control
systems, others – especially small stores and specialty markets – do not.

• New effort would be needed to help participants avoid the rejection of purchases at the check-out
counter, an event with the potential to reduce productivity at the register and stigmatize participants.

Restrictions may be ineffective in changing the purchases of food stamp participants

• About 70 percent of all food stamp participants – those who receive less than the maximum benefit –
are expected to purchase a portion of their food with their own money. There is no guarantee that
restricting the use of food stamps would affect food purchases – other than substituting one form of
payment (cash) for another (food stamps).

No evidence exists that food stamp participation contributes to poor diet quality or obesity.

• There is no strong research-based evidence to support restricting food stamp benefits. 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.

There are better ways to work towards the goal of healthier diets that do not require such restrictions.
Incentives – rather than restrictions – that encourage purchases of certain foods or expanded nutrition
education to enable participants to make healthy choices are more practical options and likely to be more
effective in achieving the dietary improvements that promote good health.

All that is just the summary of what the entire article goes into into greater detail but, if I had to summarize the summary...it would be this:

Restrictions don't work. They cost more the taxpayer more and do not actually fix the problem that exists.

- - - Updated - - -

When can a dead cat be a nutritionist? That's probably the most insane argument I've ever heard. WTF is wrong with you?

What he means is that there is no kind of regulation to calling oneself a nutritionist. Anybody can just decide to call themselves a nutritionist.

[Masark]

When can a dead cat be a nutritionist? That's probably the most insane argument I've ever heard. WTF is wrong with you?

When the so-called certifying agency allows it.

Calling ones self a "nutritionist" is a worthless title and would only ever be done by someone incapable of obtaining a title of actual worth in an attempt to appear credible.

[kail]

That brings up another point Id like to see happen. I firmly believe the government should restrict food stamp purchases to store brand or generic items and forbid the purchase of brand names. Just that one simple change would save taxpayers a LOT of money. We could save almost a dollar every time someone buys a bottle of "Great Value" ketchup over Heinz. If every person on foodstamps (40 million according to other posts) buys a bottle of ketchup every week would save 160 million dollars a month and thats just one product.

And what if there is a sale on name brand? Or what if the store brand is out of stock because of the restrictions imposed? With all of the micromanaging you advocate for food stamps, might as well just ship all of the low income people food packages instead of having them shop at all.

Or we could just keep it simple and allocate whatever dollar amount it takes to eat decent meals. Stupid spenders will go hungry, smart spenders won't. Again, I think several people in this forum just believe that the poor are given too much for food stamps. Maybe they're right, maybe not. But that's really where the discussion should end tbh. Complicating how the food stamps are spent is pure stupidity, a waste of government time, and money.

[urasim]

When the so-called certifying agency allows it.

Calling ones self a "nutritionist" is a worthless title and would only ever be done by someone incapable of obtaining a title of actual worth in an attempt to appear credible.

I can get a PhD for 60$, too. Does that mean going to college and getting a PhD means nothing? Stupid argument is stupid.

Nutritionist is a word that has a meaning. Just because some nut has the same title doesn't suddenly remove the meaning of that title.

What he means is that there is no kind of regulation to calling oneself a nutritionist. Anybody can just decide to call themselves a nutritionist.

Then maybe he should learn how to communicate properly.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Then maybe he should learn how to communicate properly.

The meaning of what he said came across rather clearly to me.

[Arcanimus]

Water is significantly cheaper than either of the soda options you mention. This refutes the bolded.

There are, obviously, many cheap foods that are healthy. People just prefer Doritos.

Man cannot live on bread and water alone.

Water is fucking boring.

[Stacyrect]

You keep on missing the point that restrictions don't work.

I'll post it again. Maybe try reading it this time

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/defaul...strictions.pdf












All that is just the summary of what the entire article goes into into greater detail but, if I had to summarize the summary...it would be this:

Restrictions don't work. They cost more the taxpayer more and do not actually fix the problem that exists.

- - - Updated - - -



What he means is that there is no kind of regulation to calling oneself a nutritionist. Anybody can just decide to call themselves a nutritionist.

Let's agree to disagree

- - - Updated - - -

You should be talking to a dietitian, not a nutritionist.

Dietitians are actual certified medical professionals, whereas nutritionists are not.

You are right

[TheDestinatus]

Let's agree to disagree

- - - Updated - - -



You are right

Restrictions don't work therefore shouldn't exist. See my good friend murder right here, its illegal but it doesn't stop people doing it so you may as well just legalise it. Totally removes the issue.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Let's agree to disagree

As long as you understand you are disagreeing with studies that say that restrictions would make the program more complex and costly and not solve the issue while not providing any evidence at all to support the opposite.

- - - Updated - - -

Restrictions don't work therefore shouldn't exist. See my good friend murder right here, its illegal but it doesn't stop people doing it so you may as well just legalise it. Totally removes the issue.

Yes, because buying a chocolate bar and murdering someone are totally the same thing.

[Orlong]

Man cannot live on bread and water alone.

Water is fucking boring.

Tough shit then. If you want something more than water, then work more hours or get another job

[lockedout]

Tough shit then. If you want something more than water, then work more hours or get another job

I only drink water.