There should be more restrictions on what poor people can buy with food stamps.

[progressive hunter]

You can't buy champagne with food stamps.
But food stamps are not free.
You have to buy them, and the rate you pay depends on your income.
Most people on food stamps are only getting about a 30% to 40% subsidy.

my god youre a dumbass,,
foodstamps/EBT are given not purchased

 

[meaner gene]

So we need to prove to you that poor people are buying junk food with EBT before you will entertain the discussion? Poor people are the most impacted by the obesity epidemic. Do you think you're being fair or realistic right now?

What You Can and Can't Buy With SNAP Benefits

SNAP benefits cover formula, vitamins, and other essentials, but there are also some unexpected items you can buy with an EBT card.

blog.cheapism.com

Junk Food: Yes

There have been many calls to restrict the types of food that can be purchased with food assistance, particularly in light of growing concerns over obesity and diabetes among Americans. Still, while junk foods like chips, candy, snack crackers, ice cream, and soft drinks may not be particularly nutritious or healthy fare, they're fair game for purchase with SNAP benefits.


Arguments that food assistance recipients should not be allowed "indulgences" like steaks, lobster, and pricier organic foods have likewise been shut down, as was an initiative led by the Trump administration to cut program costs and replace free-choice shopping with government-issued food boxes.

 

[meaner gene]

This is the United States, not Africa. These things come standard in even the most basic houses and apartments.

Ignorance is no excuse.

The answer to the question of whether landlords must supply appliances is no, they aren't legally required to. Refrigerators, stoves, dishwashers, microwaves, washers and dryers do not have to be provided yet many tenants mistakenly believe that they must be provided by law.Oct 4, 2016

 

[MisterBeale]

If I'm going to be buying dinner for the poor I think I should have a say in what's acceptable to buy and what's not. I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to buy steak or anything nice, but I do think they shouldn't be able to buy a bunch of chips, soda and candy. There's an obesity epidemic in the country, particularly among the poor, and I don't want my money to make it worse. With my taxed income I want people to be buying healthy foods that help facilitate healthy lifestyles. If people are really in such rough shape that they need that kind of help they should be more than happy to just buy the things they actually need with it.

It really has nothing to do with the poor, it has to do with the Agricultural Bill. It has to do with the lobbyists that push for the interests on the Ag bill, and the stake holders the profit from the Ag Bill.

SNAP benefits may SEEM like a benefit that is only about giving the poor help, but in reality, it is also a give away to BIG AG, and Big Box Stores nationwide.

A good portion of the poor live in what sociologists term, "food deserts," where there aren't a lot of opportunities to buy good, healthy food.

If you start restricting the kinds and types of food that the poor kind buy? Well, you might just doom them to starvation, because BIG AG, and many of the producers, don't really supply the food deserts with "healthy food." Healthy food doesn't stay fresh as long, and the profit margins aren't as good.


You're middle to upper-middle class privilege and very little knowledge of how stake holder politics and the real world is showing through.

 

[Anomalism]

Ignorance is no excuse.

The answer to the question of whether landlords must supply appliances is no, they aren't legally required to. Refrigerators, stoves, dishwashers, microwaves, washers and dryers do not have to be provided yet many tenants mistakenly believe that they must be provided by law.Oct 4, 2016

How many people do you know that don't have a fridge or a stove? It's not a common problem in the United States. Stop pretending it is.

 

[ClaireH]

You have yet to prove they bought anything you are describing, your hypothesis is amiss of any fact to extract from.

I am referencing what I have seen, that’s where I start. It’s been a few years but let’s take this example: a lady at checkout with 2 toddlers and an infant in the cart. She (not the toddler ha) had a cigarette hanging out of her mouth since at the time that grocery allowed for smoking. My attention was drawn to the fact that the baby was crying but that happens, and cigarette smoke was its primary air source (who cares what an adult chooses for themselves but not others). In addition, the mom’s demeanor: entitlement on steroids: flying off with F bombs toddlers repeat on cell slowing down the line. I don’t usually check out what other people are buying as I’m only concerned about what I’m buying (like you suggested). Because she had toddlers plus an infant that changes the whole dynamic of social responsibility.

So let’s check out what was in her cart: I could not count the number of soft drinks nor chip bags so: “a lot” covers it, candy: she opened for toddlers prior to paying lol She tried to buy something - cigarettes maybe, something sold at checkout but was told she couldn’t buy it using food stamps. Her attitude was instantly put out being required to search for enough change to buy them, baby wailing at this point. The mom’s behavior affected at least 9 people around her. Okay, do I think all people on food stamps act this way? No, no two people act alike. What it supports? There are adults who do not deserve to be parents, but because of the fact that they are “parents”, the needs of those kids should be primary concern to be tweaked via social services to result in a better diet. In my opinion it is certainly not much to ask that someone who is on food stamps and has children cannot buy X number of candy bars and sugar loaded crap.

So before you say I’m trying to tell other people how to live please read the above.

 

[Anomalism]

A good portion of the poor live in what sociologists term, "food deserts," where there aren't a lot of opportunities to buy good, healthy food.

You really think preventing the purchase of soda and candy with EBT could lead to people going hungry? If the only thing on the shelf is candy and soda I guess I see why people are getting so fat.

 

[MisterBeale]

How many people do you know that don't have a fridge or a stove? It's not a common problem in the United States. Stop pretending it is.

88% of households in the US have a fridge.

79% of households in the US have a stove or oven

Household appliances ownership in the U.S. 2023 | Statista

"Microwave" and "Refrigerator" are the top two answers among U.S.

www.statista.com

 

[Otis Mayfield]

What if this woman's husband ran off and left her?

Would you mind her and her kids getting welfare?

 

[Anomalism]

88% of households in the US have a fridge.

Is that the same as saying 12% of Americans don't have access to a fridge, or is that not what it means?

 

[MisterBeale]

You really think preventing the purchase of soda and candy with EBT could lead to people going hungry? If the only thing on the shelf is candy and soda I guess I see why people are getting so fat.

I am not a law maker, and I don't know where you want to draw the line. But I have lived in poor communities, and I do know the selection of what the stores have in those communities.

Soda? What are you going to classify as "Soda?"

Is this "soda?"

 

[Anomalism]

I am not a law maker, and I don't know where you want to draw the line. But I have lived in poor communities, and I do know the selection of what the stored have in those communities.

Soda? What are you going to classify as "Soda?"

Is this "soda?"

I guess there would be some details to iron out, but I'm not advocating for anything that would push people into going hungry. I don't think not being able to buy a super-ultra sized bag of Snickers with EBT is going to hurt poor people. I also think it'll be fine if they can't buy a two liter of Coke.

 

[BluesLegend]

Oh FFS nobody in this country should be going hungry, period! Do some assholes abuse the assistance yes. Fine work to root that out but stop broad brushing poor people trying to feed themselves. Yes as a matter of fact I grew up on government cheese and powdered milk in section 8 housing.

 

[Rigby5]

I remember when it was handled by the Department of Agriculture and composed largely for sustenance and sustainment, not including comfort food, and it was figured on produce, dried beans, and dairy product like cheese purchase as part of price supports to farmers. I bet it was a logistics nightmare for courthouses (where much of it was disbursed) having to be in the storage and disbursement business.

But direct gov distribution saved a ton of money.
It provided a farm subsidy that did not being down food prices for those who were not having financial problems.
But it did ensure proper nutrition.
In the recession of the 50s, we particularly learned to like the bran muffin recipe.

 

[ClaireH]

They sell them for cash to buy drugs. Lots of liquor stores take them.

I’ve seen signs in a few liquor stores that state “ we do not accept food stamps” so enough customers have prompted this sign.

 

[Rigby5]

I guess there would be some details to iron out, but I'm not advocating for anything that would push people into going hungry. I don't think not being able to buy a super-ultra sized bag of Snickers with EBT is going to hurt poor people.

But again, that pushes a huge effort onto the retailers.
They can't do it.

 

[meaner gene]

A good portion of the poor live in what sociologists term, "food deserts," where there aren't a lot of opportunities to buy good, healthy food.

Well, you might just doom them to starvation, because BIG AG, and many of the producers, don't really supply the food deserts with "healthy food." Healthy food doesn't stay fresh as long, and the profit margins aren't as good.

People think that everybody has the same things they take for granted. That anybody can just get in their SUV and drive to the fresh food market 20 miles away for groceries.

 

[dblack]

I guess there would be some details to iron out, but I'm not advocating for anything that would push people into going hungry. I don't think not being able to buy a super-ultra sized bag of Snickers with EBT is going to hurt poor people.

Why are you so eager to control what other people eat? Can't you just mind your own business?

So, government steals your money and gives it to someone else. But instead of taking the government to task for doing that, you target the poor people that they gave "your" money to - the victims of the welfare state.

I'm opposed to the welfare state across-the-board, but using it as an excuse for intrusive government is just compounding the error.

 

[MisterBeale]

Is that the same as saying 12% of Americans don't have access to a fridge, or is that not what it means?

Does it matter?

Access to a fridge?

Are you serious with that?

The statistical metric on that is;

Which of the following household appliances does your household own?​

Household appliances ownership in the United States 2021 | Statista​

So I am not sure, "access," is part of the question. Folks don't borrow access to a refrigerator from their neighbor across the street.

 

[Anomalism]

But again, that pushes a huge effort onto the retailers.
They can't do it.

They have already pushed rules onto retailers. They can't buy hot items or non-food items. Candy and coke could just be classified as non-purchasable items. It wouldn't be perfect, and it wouldn't have to be to make an impact. Hell, even if only Walmart did it it'd make a difference.