Should food stamps only be used to buy certain foods? (generations, legal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunatly we can't have it both ways.
You are either FOR more control or AGAINST it. Simple.....
I'm more in favor of eliminating the current program altogether but when you see the 350 pound food stamp recipients waddling through the grocery store with 2 carts of junk food, at the very least you want some control.
These are people who lack the skills to work for a living, can't manage their own lives and control their reproduction so to expect them to make good decisions in food buying is silly.
Since they are dependent on the government for everything, the government needs to guide them better.
Not at all. I'm quite familiar with generic foods, as I used a lot of them while raising my children. There are certain ones that we would just avoid, because they weren't as good as name brand ones, and they tasted off. Cereal is a good example. Take a bag of the generic oat cereal and a box of Cheerios, and pour a bowl of each. The difference in quality is visible, as is the difference in smell and taste.
This isn't the only example by a long shot, but there are many things in generic varieties that just don't measure up. I did use a lot of house brands, because as a general rule most of those taste as good as national brands.
People on FS DO NOT need the brand name version. If they want the better tasting version, have them get a second or third and in a lot of cases, one job and buy the brand name.
I think the abuses are more to do with getting the "junk food" no nutritional value items off there first.
Food stamps shouldn't be for candy, chips and pop. As far as the "they buy Lobster/TBones" argument - that's a simple fix - just set a maximum price per lb allowed for meat/seafoods.
I don't see any issue with allowing processed or name brand foods, even IF we all know it's more financially sound to make it from scratch, a lot of people using Food Stamps don't have the skills/knowledge/facilities to do that (not to mention those "working poor" with little time).
Requiring nutrition/preparation education as a component of FS approval might help too.
after reading these post, I wonder why we dont have more control over our Federal spending...we have it down... to what to limit poor folk from eating, but cant seem to get the glutens in government(from city to congress) from spending on EVERYTHING under the freaking sun.
Not at all. I'm quite familiar with generic foods, as I used a lot of them while raising my children. There are certain ones that we would just avoid, because they weren't as good as name brand ones, and they tasted off. Cereal is a good example. Take a bag of the generic oat cereal and a box of Cheerios, and pour a bowl of each. The difference in quality is visible, as is the difference in smell and taste.
This isn't the only example by a long shot, but there are many things in generic varieties that just don't measure up. I did use a lot of house brands, because as a general rule most of those taste as good as national brands.
And have you ever tasted those generic pork rinds and slim jims? Yot certainly can't expect them to eat that crap!
Food Stamp Nation - Pat Buchanan - Townhall Conservative "The world might be better ... if people limited their purchases of sugared beverages," said George Hacker of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "However, there are a great many ethical reasons to consider why one would not stigmatize people on food stamps."
The Department of Agriculture in 2004 denied a request by Minnesota that would have disallowed food stamp recipients from using them for junk food. To grant the request, said the department, would "perpetuate the myth" that food stamps users make poor shopping decisions.
People on FS DO NOT need the brand name version. If they want the better tasting version, have them get a second or third and in a lot of cases, one job and buy the brand name.
I disagree. I have no problem with limiting food stamps to healthful choices, but when you try to limit the choices within the healthful spectrum you're being petty and dictatorial just for the schadenfreude.
Plus, it's very easy if one clips coupons and watches for sales to find national name brand items on sale for the same or less than generic brands. So if they'd actually save money from using coupons and buying name brands, you'd still limit them to generics just to be mean.
And have you ever tasted those generic pork rinds and slim jims? Yot certainly can't expect them to eat that crap!
I'm not arguing against the possibility of limiting food stamp purchases to healthful choices, so why the sarcasm-laden blindside from left field? Makes you look childish.
I recently had a teenage nonenglish speaking Hispanic girl in front of me at the store.
She used her state issued credit food card to buy a cart fully loaded with nothing but junk food. Lets make them line up for bulk food and stop all this abuse.
I saw a show about poverty in America that spotlighted a family in Tennessee speaking about just this topic. They would use their food stamps to buy nothing but junk- including Mountain Dew, which was rotting out their teeth. Their complaint? No medicaid for dental care. Wow.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
