Texas to outlaw the use of SNAP for purchasing junk food/energy drinks.

[mvaliz]

Makes sense to me if it's just outlawing junk food - which is really 1 step away from McDonalds. :P

The idea of food stamps is to provide adequate nutrition for your survival, junk food does not do that... junk food just puts off the hunger while adding goodness knows what kind of chemical crap into your system, which could actually HINDER your performance in finding/obtaining full time work.

[seta-san]

So much hatred and ignorance, but this is the internet. It's not within the gov't scope to say what you can and can't eay. How would you regulate this? Being directly involved in the field, I can honestly say there are more people who legitimately need benefits (my gf's mother, who is disabled and cannot work and SSI barely covers rent/bills, for one) than those who milk the system. For every dollar of entitlements that go out, it goes back into the pockets of taxpayers. Consumer buys food at WalMart, goes into pay for the workers, which gets taxed, then goes back into circulation, getting taxed again, and then the consumer rec's benefits again. People who don't understand are nothing but ignorant.

it's not dictating what you can and can not eat. it's dictating what you can and cannot buy with government money. When you accept handouts from the government you are agreeing to the terms the government sets out in exchange for that money. When it comes to unemployment checks you usually have to contact the unemployment office once a week and make sworn statements regarding your situation and how many job contacts you've made.

[Pfeff]

Bad move...

[Locruid]

Whats next, seriously? Dont you all understand this is just more government control? Sure it sounds good on paper but next it'll be:

MUST buy brand XX
Can ONLY shop XX
Papers please....

[Thage]

I'll be honest here, I'm not seeing the downside. If you're good at bargain-shopping, you can find pastas, meats, and even ramen noodles (and enough to survive for the month on what they offer) for a lot cheaper than most stores advertise them. It might not be as tasty as oatmeal cream pies, but that's just a little more money you can put toward stuff that'll last you longer and keep you more filled (when all else fails, the old PBJ standby does serve to fill you up).

---------- Post added 2013-02-10 at 01:36 PM ----------

Whats next, seriously? Dont you all understand this is just more government control? Sure it sounds good on paper but next it'll be:

MUST buy brand XX
Can ONLY shop XX
Papers please....

This is government aid for people who can't afford to eat. When I'm dining on someone else's dollar and they ask me to keep within XYZ limits, I stay within XYZ limits because they're paying for it. If this sort of initiative were being imposed on general consumers, I'd agree with you but as it stands, the slippery slope fallacy is just that: a fallacy.

[cherb]

I'll be honest here, I'm not seeing the downside. If you're good at bargain-shopping, you can find pastas, meats, and even ramen noodles (and enough to survive for the month on what they offer) for a lot cheaper than most stores advertise them. It might not be as tasty as oatmeal cream pies, but that's just a little more money you can put toward stuff that'll last you longer and keep you more filled (when all else fails, the old PBJ standby does serve to fill you up).

Don't think it can be said better. None of the things they won't be able to buy are needed at all. You don't need energy drinks, cookies, etc. Wish this wasn't just in Texas.

1000000000x Better way of managing a system like this than trying to drug test like Florida and lost half a million dollars of more tax money.

[Spectral]

If society must purchase your food because you're unable to feed yourself, I think society has every right and perfectly valid reasons to choose what that food is.

[Coldtooth]

The moderators really need to do something about Dr. Welfare, the blatant racism dropping from almost EVERYONE of your posts is really starting to piss me off. It's classless, and IMO trolling. Welfare isn't a color issue, you ignorant, disgrace. It made reading the first few pages of this thread extremely depressing.

Infracted: Please do not insult other users

[The Ogdru Jahad]

Fully agree with everything you said. While not a fan of telling people what to do. It makes no sense to let people spend taxpayer money on things that aren't necessities and in the end provide more harm than good to their body. Simple bills like this help people make sensible decisions. We need more stuff like this to get people to eat healthy.

[Deleted]

I just wonder how they define junk food.

[Spectral]

I just wonder how they define junk food.

Even if it was wildly arbitrary, something like saying that any food with a certain percentage of fat or sugar calories qualified as junk food, I'd still support this idea.

[Kalyyn]

Oh noes tax payer dollars won't buy people organic vegetables. Now they'll have to buy 70c cans of vegetebles like people who don't have food stamps in the first place. We're all going to die of pesticides and all the bad things everything except organic stuff has.

THANK YOU! It baffles me seeing all these "my only choices are junk food or expensive organic food!" posts. I mean really, how stupid are people? At my local grocery store, the aisles are lined up Organic/Nurtrition, Soda, Cookies/Chips, Cereal, etc...

I guess some people can't find their way past aisle three...

[Spectral]

I mean really, how stupid are people?

In the case of individuals that can't pay for their food with government help, I'd say they're pretty fucking stupid, on average.

[Kalyyn]

Whats next, seriously? Dont you all understand this is just more government control? Sure it sounds good on paper but next it'll be:

MUST buy brand XX
Can ONLY shop XX
Papers please....

While I'm 110% in favor of self-reliance and keeping the government out of my life, somebody who is living off money that the government gave them for free has no right to complain about government interference.

It's a two-way street. If you want the government to stop taking things from you, then you have to stop taking things from them.

[Jazara]

It's crazy how many people think that everyone on welfare doesn't work. We needed food stamps for about six months and my husband was working 40 hours a week at the time. It's dumb to use the whole "good, lazy welfare people need to stop spending MY money" When many impoverished people work, as well.

[Seegtease]

Whats next, seriously? Dont you all understand this is just more government control? Sure it sounds good on paper but next it'll be:

MUST buy brand XX
Can ONLY shop XX
Papers please....

Are you serious? Government control?

Food stamps are a government service, and by no means a right. If you don't want to be "controlled by the government", don't accept their handouts. Really, what's more limiting, having 200 bucks to spend on certain food items, or having 0 dollars to spend on no food items? The government is not telling you what you can and cannot buy. If you want to buy certain items not on their approved list, all you have to do is simply use your own money.

On the subject matter: I pretty much agree with this, but in the end it could be kind of a problem considering healthy food tends to cost more than unhealthy food, meaning you'll burn through the allocated funds that much more quickly. Of course, I don't see any reasonable argument against disallowing the use on energy drinks. I don't classify those as food any more than alcohol is food.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

It is constitutional and a logical move (less logical than eliminating the entitlement altogether, but still logical).

In what way is it constitutional? I guess if you mean the very general sense of the term, but most people use it specifically relating to the Constitution when talking American politics.

[crakerjack]

I like this idea alot... I concur. I've witnessed this in person... this fat lady was buying those hydrated fruit pies that are like a buck, but she had 30 of them and was using food stamps to pay for them... on top of that, she was talking to the cashier about how she's going in for surgery for her spine because she weighs too much and the weight puts too much pressure on it.

I just find it highly illogical to allow people to spend tax payer dollars on junk food, and then turn around to spend even more tax payer money on their surgery that is related to their eating habits... why must those who want to maintain a healthy lifestyle suffer because people want to be remain lazy? It's not fair and this is where double standard needs to be drawn... i think you should have to meet a certain criteria to earn medicare, meaning you have to live a healthy lifestyle in order to gain access to it... so if you're fat and obese due to being lazy and don't have an illness that makes you immobile... then you don't deserve medicare, simple as that.

[Spectral]

In what way is it constitutional? I guess if you mean the very general sense of the term, but most people use it specifically relating to the Constitution when talking American politics.

I think he just means that it's not constitutionally forbidden. I'd say that's correct.

[Orbitus]

It would be fine with me were this to happen. I just wish drug testing to receive benefits was mandatory as well.

The problem then comes at what is determined to be healthy and what isn't. Can you buy canned corn? It has nearly no good nutritional value, but is commonly used as a healthy vegetable substitute. Does iceberg lettuce count? It has no nutritional value to speak of, but is the primary ingredient in cheap salads. There is plenty of things that people would have to be educated about concerning what is and is not acceptable. And all that is going to do is cost more tax money. Plus, we have to make sure that those that determine what is and is not allowed have no alternate agenda that they want to push on people.

Off-topic: BTW, people are being kinda racist in this thread w/o REALLY calling out race. Those comments should be discouraged.

There is one thing wrong with your wish about drug testing to be required for food assistance. Florida already tried it and they paid more for the testing than they saved for catching drug users.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/2...ests-cost.html