Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Should You Be Able to Buy Soda With Food Stamps? [View all]CTyankee
(68,213 posts)115. public health measures to help people is "crap"?
what an interesting idea...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
291 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Soda is poison in a can that has zero nutritional value. The point of SNAP is to feed people
CBGLuthier
Jan 2016
#1
Exactly! With universal health insurance now becoming more and more widespread,
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2016
#253
"Hell, I would support banning the sale of soda period." This is more what I was responding to. nt
el_bryanto
Jan 2016
#236
I'm all for legalizing pot, but don't think people should be able to use SNAP benefits to pay for it
MH1
Jan 2016
#279
Another one who wants to make the poor into role models for the rest of us profligates.
WinkyDink
Jan 2016
#285
What has that got to do with the OP's topic? Gas, stamps, and eggs were cheaper 3/4 of a centiry ago
WinkyDink
Jan 2016
#289
No one banned poor people from having soda, just not with SNAP dollars. Use your own money as you
Pisces
Jan 2016
#19
when it comes to nutrition, public health and soda, scientists DO know better>
KittyWampus
Jan 2016
#83
Are those scientists here? In this discussion thread? Let them stand and be recognized!
Orrex
Jan 2016
#91
Buy what you want, but I agree that SNAP dollars should be spent on nutritious food ( soda does not
Pisces
Jan 2016
#239
this is an issue on public policy. The whole idea of feeding programs is to keep people
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#11
I agree. We should increase cash assistance and just get rid of SNAP. Let people
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#147
then I assume you are, one of those above the rest of us who know more than others do
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#149
I have no idea what Melville's quote has to do with me...it is more to pump up your
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#153
It is also an issue of public policy when apples are MORE expensive than apple sauce
nadinbrzezinski
Jan 2016
#185
The food stamp program itself is micromanging. If is saying basically that recipients
kelly1mm
Jan 2016
#62
i agree with that. If the money is available it can just be given in cash benefits.
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#126
I don't think there's any inherent indignity in eating nutritious foods
lumberjack_jeff
Jan 2016
#272
I don't care about soda. I strongly feel that every state should allow feminine hygiene products
pnwmom
Jan 2016
#9
I am in favor of this. It is common sense to me and I don't know why it isn't public
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#12
Here's an article about that. As another poster mentioned, toothbrushes and toothpaste
pnwmom
Jan 2016
#183
I don't think soda is poison in moderate amounts but I see it in terms of "best use of
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#121
It's standing in for "I care more about the poor because the government shouldn't be
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#131
I see this as the difference between educating and advocating, and mandating
uppityperson
Jan 2016
#197
I don't get that just because we think our limited resources should go to good food
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#27
DU has always had a contingent strongly advocating for Dickensian modes of poverty
Orrex
Jan 2016
#102
Wait--you're a patronizing blowhard who can't defend her self-righteous preaching?
Orrex
Jan 2016
#108
"They simply reduce your tax burden, not give you money collected from other people's tax burdens."
JonLeibowitz
Jan 2016
#57
we're allowing nuance, contextual limitations and regulations on a federal program
LanternWaste
Jan 2016
#54
It's a good idea! It would encourage health eating and of course help the farmers...
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#28
No, Food Stamps are not 'Charity'. They are given to assist citizens who need help
KittyWampus
Jan 2016
#30
how about we give more cash assistance in lieu of SNAP and how about every school
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#135
Public health advocates and scientists all agree soda leads to type 2 diabetes.
KittyWampus
Jan 2016
#85
Yes, let's control the poor even further, because....MY TAXES!! Poverty is bad for the health, too.
WinkyDink
Jan 2016
#290
It is when one wants to ban the poor from simple pleasures available to, say, YOU.
WinkyDink
Jan 2016
#287
I think people on food stamps have the ability to choose for themselves.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jan 2016
#42
The fact that there are 'food stamps' at all as opposed to unrestricted grants kind
kelly1mm
Jan 2016
#69
You equate accountability and basic fiscal responsibility with 'beating on the poor'?
TipTok
Jan 2016
#266
Your notion of "accountability and basic fiscal responsiblity" equals beating on the poor.
Orrex
Jan 2016
#267
Craft Beer is certainly more nutritious than Coke, but it's not available under SNAP.
leveymg
Jan 2016
#55
Yes, I've heard that recently. Beer also has an advantage over water - less likely to kill you.
leveymg
Jan 2016
#66
I people want to buy beverages with zero nutrional benefit, they can use their own funds.
Agnosticsherbet
Jan 2016
#61
Why do affluent people think it's their duty to tell impoverished people how to live?
hunter
Jan 2016
#70
not again. . .I find all the rationalizations for micromanaging poor people coming from a
niyad
Jan 2016
#77
This discussion again! I think it should be full cash grants and do away with the stigma
My Good Babushka
Jan 2016
#82
It's like walking into a fundie site when people here start talking about the poor.
ladyVet
Jan 2016
#144
There was an article all around DU a while back about how people on food stamps
gollygee
Jan 2016
#138
Yeah, because infantilizing other people by making their choices for them works SO well
Warpy
Jan 2016
#154
It should be nutritional food, similar to what you can get with WIC. I knew someone on food
Luciferous
Jan 2016
#169
Yes, what I see here is a demonstration by the Chronically Morally Outraged and
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#191
Of course. Should you be able to buy candy, snacks, meat, processed foods? What about organic as
uppityperson
Jan 2016
#180
Because they cost more, are not cost effective. I don't think there should be
uppityperson
Jan 2016
#196
What about sugared cereal, cake, fruit flavored drinks with mega sugar , salty snacks really why
Person 2713
Jan 2016
#190
If we went back to the Poor House system we could monitor and control these sorts of people
Warren Stupidity
Jan 2016
#219
We could contract with the giant food corporations to develop a cheap, nutritious, dry food...
hunter
Jan 2016
#241
what's wrong with just cash assistance and let folks figure out the budget that best suits
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#230
But it can be reassuring when you work it all out. Of course, there can be curve balls
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#234
everybody should be taught in school about nutrition. Just a straight up course to all students,
CTyankee
Jan 2016
#265
Many people on food stamps are so broke they can't afford much in the way of
OregonBlue
Jan 2016
#238
What's next, require them to wear pink underwear along with sackcloth and ashes?
47of74
Jan 2016
#263
The WIC program does not ban anyone from buying specific food or non-food, it only pays for specific
liberal N proud
Jan 2016
#280