Uhhhhhh… It already does. Snap changed from actual stamps to a digital card that declines any purchase that does not fit in the categories that justify a snap purchase. I worked a couple of years ago with a non-profit org that helped the needy, and I distinctly remember being at walmart with someone was buying groceries, when they used their snap card the payment covered everything but junk food and the person I was with had to pay with their own money for the rest of their things.
In short RFK is working on stopping something that never has ever existed.
Which sort of sums this whole regime’s work up, doesn’t it?
Because that’s not the goal, i can almost guarantee it. Every time they try to “fix” something they are trying to break it and privatize if possible.
These same assholes were the ones freaking out when Michelle Obama was trying to get healthier food for school lunches and making up shit like “Turning Cookie Monster into Veggie Monster” to get mad at.
Many right-wingers don’t care about words or truth or consistency. They just want to hurt their out-group.
Many right-wingers … just want to hurt their out-group.
You are right, it’s just that there’s a weird embedded quality to this statement.
Sugar industry is gonna Kennedy this dude.
I would raise a rootbeer to that.
Heaven forbid someone enjoys their life. I’d rather pay for this than billionaire tax cuts and the bloated military budget.
We can do both. A stopped clock is right twice per day. It would be a good idea, except that you already cant buy junk food with food stamps…
It’s like painting over murals at detention centers where kids are housed… with gray paint. It definitely sends a message.
No, it’s like removing soda machines from school cafeterias. It’s a good idea. It’s so good, in fact, that you already can’t buy junk food with food stamps!!
This is the kind of BS that leads to you being unable to buy warm food with food programs. A box of fried or baked chicken costs $26 for 24 pieces, which can feed me for 2-3 days, saving me money in the long run. A hot pizza is $13. A rotisserie from CostCo is about $6.
People should make the decisions about their food stamps, because they are familiar with how to best feed themselves. Your typical WalMart employee has to rely on food stamps and other benefits, because WalMart doesn’t want to pay a living wage. An initiative like RFK’s is designed to punish the poor for failing to be born with a silver spoon.
This isn’t about helping people to make better decisions, it is about depriving them the good things in life.
Buying soda and candy. I can get behind a worm for that one. Just ban those things already. But I would step on that worm right after. The guy is clearly crazy. And too old. I wouldn’t want anyone to suffer from whatever self inflicted speech impediment this guy has.
Ever try to water down a fountain drink with carbonated water? You can add 300% soda water and it still tastes sweet. But that overwhelming level of sweetness seems to stimulate appetite. And it’s one of many reasons why manufacturers use high fructose instead of table sugar. It’s slightly sweeter and more stimulating.
The products are designed to trick our bodies into eating and drinking more. Super sweet spikes the insulin but has nothing to digest so you’re hungry and now it’s salty snack time making you thirsty for more soda. Consume.
The problem is that there is no will of trying to educate the recipients to help them choose healthier snacks. There will be a way for the snap recipients to get what they want through loopholes. Putting a band aid on the problem of poverty obesity won’t solve it.
Let’s have a writing contest, you guys. Now that a Trump appointee is against it, let’s all think up reasons for why subsidized high-fructose corn syrup sold as food is not only a good thing but actually a basic human right.
Then restrict it for everyone, not just poor people.
I’m not saying we should ban these things, I’m just saying we shouldn’t be subsidizing them and purchasing them with public funds. If poor people want to buy this stuff with their own money that’s their right.
I’m just saying we shouldn’t be subsidizing them and purchasing them with public funds.
Then start with the ag subsidies, not the tiny joy that poor people can wring from life.
Ditching subsidies is a start.
I would tax them into oblivion like cigarettes. Hits the poor first still, but it would shift consumption habits rather than ban them outright.
It’s a nanny state. Sure, candy and soda is bad for you, and america has an obesity problem, but I’m against this.
Just give people money and let them buy what they want / need.
I’m tired of pedophiles and gay homophobes shaming poor people for having a soda and a candy bar. (Edit: not my intention to associate lgbtq with pedophiles, but it seems a lot of homophobes are into it. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, but republifuckers need to mind their own business in general and stop judging others for the behaviors they are ashamed to participate in themselves.)
At a minimum they should talk about how they will move to providing healthy foods as they cut the bad stuff. Moving to unhealthy food to none, seems like a bad move. Like wtf
It’s a nanny state.
I mean yea, but so is giving you money for food. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that the food you get with it to be nutritious.
Eat your own nutritious food. Stop sniffing poor people ass, mind your own business
When the money for it stops coming out of my check, I’ll stop having an opinion on it.
Are you worried about corporate welfare recipients as well, or do you just like the smell of poor people farts?
I hate corporate welfare far more than paying for junk food but I don’t like either one.
I am opposed to corporate welfare and paying for someone else’s Little Debbie habit.
Alright, how about alcohol and cigarettes?
Just give them money, I don’t care if they want hookers and blow
It’s none of your business what poor people spend their money on.
Weird way to come around to UBI, but I’m with it
lol… I’m just tired of people trying to gate keep basic needs as though they somehow know better than poor people what they need.
If we checked what government subsidized millionaires and billionaires spent their money 10% as much as how we do poor people we could actually save money……
Food stamps and wic and other programs are generally less than a couple hundred dollars. It’s not your business what they spend it on.
Then they spend their money on hookers and blow, and then come back saying they have no money to buy food. Do you let them starve then?
No. When the corporations ruin the entire economy and say they don’t have any money we also bail them out.
When the corporations ruin the entire economy and say they don’t have any money we also bail them out.
Okay… so let’s stop doing that…
But if we aren’t letting hookers and blow guy starve, how are we doing that?
(a) give him more money, so he can spend it all on hookers and blow again and come back, still hungry, asking for more money.
(b) ask him what food he wants, and give him that. He says he only wants to eat lollipops. We give him endless lollipops - he is no longer technically starving to death, but is now slowly dying of nutrient deficiencies.
(c) some how, some way, choose what he should eat for him, and give him that, so that he will be somewhat healthy.I think you’re beating up a straw man here….
Welfare is a couple hundred dollars at most, usually much less than that.
Stop worrying about what everyone else is eating and worry about yourself.
If you want to make products healthier on a larger scale, then pass regulations concerning toxic chemicals and labeling for food products.
Limiting people in literal poverty from having a lollipop or a candy bar with their money is not the answer.
Alright, fair enough
A chunk of my clients from low socio economic backgrounds live on soda and candy. It’s how they’re raised, a massive packet of crisps, can of coke and chocolate bar is their dinner. Realistically they’ll just sell their stamps to buy the food THEY want.
The result of this is parents will sell stamps, have less to feed kids and kids will go short.
That’s horrifying. That’s not a dinner.
I know. It’s how so many of them live though
RFK jr is a broken clock that became sentient.
ITT: “You don’t deserve candy if you’re poor”sorry that was meanLike, yeah, its bad for me. I was hooked on it as a kid and I’m trying to cut back except so many people in my life eats shit-tons of sugar. I’m working on it, but I do not need the government telling me what I can and can’t eat just because I’m poor. I dunno, that seems mean. Maybe RFK should work on just banning them all together (unless you’re rich ofc). If its bad for me, its bad for you, too.
deleted by creator
Even ignoring that, just because you are on food stamps doesn’t mean you don’t deserve some indulgences.
No one ever deserves indulgences. The whole point of an indulgence is that it can’t be deserved. Otherwise it would just be a normal reward.
Problem is a lot of shitty food is cheaper than good food.
Also, if you grew up around shitty food you don’t know how to prep good food from whole, cheaper fresh or bulk foods.
Technically cooking rice with vegetables (cabbage, onions, potatoes, carrots, bell peppers, a bit of everything) and a few pieces of turkey or chicken meat is good food and is easy to prepare.
But from the interwebs it seems that there in Kennedy land everything is fried and heavily seasoned with a lot of cancer-causing fats of all kinds.
Truly the land of the free, lads.
