It’s not about “promoting healthy eating.” It’s about shitting on the poors.
Republicans just love acting sanctimoniously, and this lets them judge people for occasionally treating themselves to something other than the gruel that their station deserves.
It’s fucking embarrassing that they spent time and money to pass this just because Republicans are so offended that a dirty poor might buy a candy bar for their daughter’s birthday.
Walmart going sue Texas into the ground. 90% of the foods poors can afford is junk.
Walmart is among those massive corporations who don’t pay their workers enough and rely on these benefits to make up what should be paid in wages.
They know the money is coming right back to them; they love the situation.
But muh nanny state
I think they are doing it to punish poor people, but I think it could end up benefiting them. It is 5 grams or more of added sugar so juice should be exempt. I don’t think the government should be dictating what anyone eats but if it is, it should do it for everyone. If not having sugar is good for everyone, tax the same products being banned. Taxing products has been proven to reduce consumption. Since they didn’t, it is clear they are not trying to help anyone, just punish a specific group. However, a positive unintended consequence of this change is that it will hurt Coke, Nestle and other producers of high processed addictive foods.
Fuck Texas and fuck their reason for doing this, but these foods shouldn’t have been purchasable using SNAP in the first place IMO. Sure folks should be able to treat themselves every so often, but these foods are literal poison and are one of the reasons single payer healthcare is so hard to fight for.
Edit: anyone care to elaborate why we should be poisoning the poor with high-fructose corn syrup? No, just downvotes? So we should be rewarding corporations that actively hurt folks health and keep us from being healthy? As classy as reddit I see.
Because it’s paternalistic nonsense.
The vast majority of EBT is spent on staples. The poors don’t need you telling them what to buy or not.
It’s not nonsense at all. I bet you’ve never even been on food stamps have you? I’ve lived in food deserts my entire life and see what us poors settle for. We shouldn’t be allowed to purchase this poison. Why do you think us poors are so fat and prone to diabetes?
I can’t believe you would defend our tax dollars going to subsidize the poisoning of Americans by mega corporations, despicable. I bet you approve of “health taxes” on things like cigarettes and alcohol, so why not poison food?
I absolutely have been on EBT, so take your sanctimonious bullshit somewhere else.
About 80 cents of every dollar in SNAP benefits is used to purchase staples like meat, bread, milk, cereal, and rice. The rest goes to salty snacks, candy, and sweetened beverages, according to the Brookings Institution.
I love how you think you know everything about me though. Have any other strawmen you want to set up?
🤣 saying you weren’t on food stamps is akin to saying I know everything about you? GTFO. If you really were on food stamps you’d know we should be discouraging these poisonous foods.
I like how you just quoted some random sentence without linking the source, how convenient.
I’ll do you one better.
Sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) are a significant contributor to the obesity crisis. Per capita calorie intake from caloric soda consumption quadrupled for American adults between 1965 and 2002.4 Low income American adults now consume nearly two SSB servings a day,5 and for every one to two daily servings consumed, the lifetime risk of developing diabetes increases by 30%.6 Between 1958 and 2010, the number of Americans with diabetes increased 12-fold.7 In addition to obesity and diabetes, SSB consumption is linked to increased risks for hypertension, coronary heart disease, and tooth decay. These health risks are faced most acutely by low-income households, including those eligible for SNAP benefits.8 Among American adults with no college education, about 8% of all deaths due to diabetes and cardiovascular diseases are linked to SSB intake.9
A 2016 study from USDA indicated the number one product purchased by SNAP benefits is sweetened beverages, comprising 9.3% of SNAP benefits.11 And, about three-quarters of all the sugary drinks purchased by SNAP households were purchased using SNAP benefits versus out-of-pocket.12 A 2015 USDA study also revealed that SNAP recipients, compared to other low-income non-participants in the program, drank more SSBs and were more likely to be obese. Obesity prevalence among SNAP recipients was 40%, versus 32% among low-income non-participants.
Get lost, I don’t care to argue with someone who thinks the poors are a pawn to play in his paternalistic power fantasy. There are better ways to ensure that people have access to good food than restricting their ability to purchase what they want. You want to be a daddy? Get a girlfriend.
I’m surprised you didn’t know that, since you apparently know everything (including how I feel about sin taxes and how I’m lying about being on EBT).
Gee, I wonder why nobody wanted to engage.
🤣 you don’t care to argue because you’re a liberal and you have to take the unfortunate side of defending big money interests. I can’t believe you’re self-righteous about wasting our tax dollars on propping up mega corporations that only exist to poison Americans and steal our tax dollars. Us poors can buy whatever we want with our own money, not the tax dollars from others that are an emergency reprieve.
How would you defend the stance that SNAP should allow the customer to purchase alcohol? Alcohol like soda/candy is just empty calories after all. If you can purchase soda you should be able to purchase alcohol.
There are better ways to ensure that people have access to good food than restricting their ability to purchase what they want.
Let me help paint a picture of how things should go. We cut out unhealthy food from SNAP, that leads to lower purchases of said food. The market responds by shifting consumers to something they can use SNAP on that’s more healthy. Same amount of dollars for us poors, same amount of money for mega corps, but at least the food is better. The market also affects those not on SNAP by pushing them to also purchase the healthier foods, a.k.a. positive externalities.
Wow, more assumptions. Calling an anarchist a liberal is definitely a choice.
Fuck off, I’m not reading that slop. Learn how to engage honestly or cry more about downvotes. I don’t really care which.
