Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-22-2015, 07:04 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,887,972 times
Reputation: 14125

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No, I posted the USDA graph showing that 44% of adult food stamp participants are obese (compared to 33% of income-eligible adult nonparticipants). That strongly suggests that adults are overeating the extra food they're buying with the food stamps they get (but don't need) to provide their kids the same meals they already get for free at school.

The Office of the Inspector General also states that overlap and duplication of FNS program benefits are providing up to 158% of recommended daily nutrition instead of the 100% that's needed. I posted that link, as well.
Or you seem to neglect the magic bullet of what they can eat on food stamps based on all economic costs being considered (time, money and other resources Including but not limited to transportation and storage,) they can only buy Ramen noodles, canned veggies, frozen meat and other food that had they had the time, money and resources to make better decisions to, they would infact buy and eat healthier options.

Buying healthier and better-for-you foods, also often require a trip to the store twice or three times a week. So the individual bills maybe smaller BUT, you may also see higher costs to transportation. If they do not have a car, it may require more bus fare (if a monthly pass isn't offered) and more walking as well as or double the taxi fare which as I stated would be another $26 dollars without added costs for sur-charges such as traffic or how far from the city you are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-23-2015, 02:00 AM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,116,164 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That doesn't appear to be the problem, and THIS is how we know... Look at the USDA chart below to see that:

Obesity rate:
Adult SNAP participants: 44%
Adult income-eligible nonparticipants: 33%

The poor getting food stamps have a significantly higher obesity rate than the poor who qualify but don't get food stamps. The poor with more resources to buy food, who should then be able to afford healthy food the most, instead of having a healthier diet, are the most obese. Giving them food stamps actually does appear to enable them to overeat and become obese at a significantly higher rate than the eligible adults who aren't getting food stamps.


* Denotes significant differences in percentages.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/defaul...-SNAP07-10.pdf

(This image does not violate copyright law. The Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. ruling in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained why the method of inline linking which causes the image to appear in this post does not violate US copyright law.)
It's amazing out of a 300 page report you pull this single factoid up.... I highly doubt you actually read the report. How'd you come across this graph?

Why are you assuming poor folks have sufficient access to healthy food options? Why are you assuming they are over eating instead of eating more unhealthy food than their non snap counterparts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 03:06 AM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,295,190 times
Reputation: 2314
This thread is a test of who read the linked article and those that didn't.

The simple minded would believe this is proof that food stamp recipients are consuming more food which is making them slightly more likely to be overweight.


But right in the article it says food stamp recipients consume fewer calories. Fewer as in not as many calories, which means logically their slightly elevated chance of being overweight has nothing to do with the food stamp program over feeding them.

It is clearly tied to physical activity. Which is a different issue.

Now take note if this thread proceeded from the phony premise that food stamp recipients are eating more then other Americans with people on both sides of the issue discussing that phony factor, then that's proof those people didn't read the article that the thread is based upon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 04:32 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,988 posts, read 44,799,475 times
Reputation: 13689
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
It's amazing out of a 300 page report you pull this single factoid up.... I highly doubt you actually read the report. How'd you come across this graph?

Why are you assuming poor folks have sufficient access to healthy food options? Why are you assuming they are over eating instead of eating more unhealthy food than their non snap counterparts?
Disproportionate obesity doesn't occur evenly across the entire poor population. The obesity rate of the Income-Eligible Adults who don't get food stamps is only 1 percentage point above that of higher income earners. But the obesity rate of Income-Eligible Adults who DO get food stamps is 12 percentage points higher.

To anyone who is familiar with statistical analysis, a huge anomaly such as this within the same economic level group really sticks out and merits further attention.

How do so many of you not understand that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 06:33 AM
 
Location: USA
6,230 posts, read 6,921,685 times
Reputation: 10784
When I'm in the grocery line I see food stamp recipients carts loaded with TV dinners, deli service counter products, snacks and soda. Those items are far more expensive than perhaps a sack of rice, beans, and lean chicken breasts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 06:49 AM
 
17,468 posts, read 12,933,703 times
Reputation: 6763
Quote:
Originally Posted by LibertyandJusticeforAll View Post
This the only country where poor people are fat :-)
Sorry, but I see many coming from Mexico. Really doesn't seem like they have a food shortage, even after walking miles in the desert.

I was watching people in Greece and most of them could use some dieting. Possibly, those with early retirement or pensions, have weight issues also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 07:05 AM
 
Location: USA
6,230 posts, read 6,921,685 times
Reputation: 10784
I should also add that it's not just the food that makes poor people obese. Poor people generally are living in lower cost suburban areas, smaller towns and rural areas that require a car to get anywhere. They are priced out of urban areas where people get around by walking, biking, or public transport.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 07:09 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,219 posts, read 27,589,701 times
Reputation: 16058
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3~Shepherds View Post
Sorry, but I see many coming from Mexico. Really doesn't seem like they have a food shortage, even after walking miles in the desert.

I was watching people in Greece and most of them could use some dieting. Possibly, those with early retirement or pensions, have weight issues also.
LOL hahahaha This is so funny and so true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 07:12 AM
 
7,214 posts, read 9,392,359 times
Reputation: 7803
It's a big misconception that "all calories are the same." Foods with a healthy mix of protein and carbs, low in sugar and saturated fat, tend to be more expensive than what many food stamp recipients are able to get. And of course, many neighborhoods throughout the country don't have decent grocery store options. They might at best have access to a corner grocer or the local convenience/liquor store.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 07:59 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,988 posts, read 44,799,475 times
Reputation: 13689
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaseMan View Post
It's a big misconception that "all calories are the same." Foods with a healthy mix of protein and carbs, low in sugar and saturated fat, tend to be more expensive than what many food stamp recipients are able to get. And of course, many neighborhoods throughout the country don't have decent grocery store options. They might at best have access to a corner grocer or the local convenience/liquor store.
Again, the problem that's been found is that among those with the same economic and demographic characteristics, those who receive food stamps have a significantly higher obesity rate.

Why are so many of you having such a hard time understanding that FACT?

"SNAP participants were more likely to be obese than income-eligible nonparticipants who were matched in economic and demographic characteristics (46 percent versus 36 percent)."

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/defaul...10-Summary.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top