Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:58 pmNationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
GOP wants to ban foodstamp-purchased junk food
Page 39 of 39
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:58 pmPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:00 pmOh for fucks sake, they never fail to deliver.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:00 pmGreat idea, foodstamps really shouldn't be used on non-essential food, its for the very poor who would starve without them. Also, it would lower obesity by 0.0000000000001%, so there's that.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:01 pmI get the feeling the "breasts" vote has served as a major spoiler in the poll up there.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:05 pmPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:11 pmPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:13 pmPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:19 pmPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:24 pmIf it's food, and it doesn't contain alcohol, then it's SNAP eligible.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:59 pmSiaos wrote:Great idea, foodstamps really shouldn't be used on non-essential food, its for the very poor who would starve without them. Also, it would lower obesity by 0.0000000000001%, so there's that.
Grenartia wrote:Grenartia wrote:As somebody who had to depend on foodstamps, I'll simply say that this is a shitty idea.
First, "junk food" is rather cheap (cheaper than most "health food", and often more filling), and boosts morale (which somebody who is forced to depend on foodstamps often needs). Second, exactly what foods would this mean you can buy? I guarantee well over half the shit you can buy in Walmart qualifies as junk food. Which means you can't get much bang for your buck. I mean, are you going to start forcing people to go to hipster healthfood stores and shit? Then what's the fucking point? I mean, a loaf of gluten-free, whole wheat, suck your dick, wipe your ass bread costs $30. I can run down to the local Dollar General and get a month's worth of bread for that much.
To say nothing of the fact that for the price of that $30 loaf of hipster bread, I could get lunch meat, cheese, chips, and snack cakes for a week at Dollar General.
Which would you rather live off of for a week? $30 hipster bread with nothing else, or sandwiches, chips, and snack cakes?
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:20 pmThe healthiest foods usually are SNAP eligible. They're just so fucking expensive they eat through the average SNAP recepient's allotment like Gary Busey's nostrils eat through cocaine.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:25 pmGrenartia wrote:Siaos wrote:Great idea, foodstamps really shouldn't be used on non-essential food, its for the very poor who would starve without them. Also, it would lower obesity by 0.0000000000001%, so there's that.Grenartia wrote:
To say nothing of the fact that for the price of that $30 loaf of hipster bread, I could get lunch meat, cheese, chips, and snack cakes for a week at Dollar General.
Which would you rather live off of for a week? $30 hipster bread with nothing else, or sandwiches, chips, and snack cakes?
or you could by the shop right organic eggs which are 20 cents a dozen more than regular eggs, whole wheat bread, rice and beans, you can eat healthy cheap. Chicken is cheap.
again i am against the bill, Good shopping and eating habits need to be learned not forced, but the idea you cant eat healthy on SNAP and only junk is available is absurd.
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:08 pmEthel mermania wrote:Grenartia wrote:
or you could by the shop right organic eggs which are 20 cents a dozen more than regular eggs, whole wheat bread, rice and beans, you can eat healthy cheap. Chicken is cheap.
again i am against the bill, Good shopping and eating habits need to be learned not forced, but the idea you cant eat healthy on SNAP and only junk is available is absurd.
I'm not saying you can't eat relatively healthy on food stamps. What I AM saying is that the logical conclusion of the logic behind this bill is that people on food stamps shouldn't be able to buy anything that isn't found in a hipster health food store. I'm also saying that for a person on food stamps (at least in my personal experience as somebody who lived off of them for a period of time), your main concerns with regards to food (assuming no food allergies) are: Is it filling? Is it cheap? How long will it last?
"Junk food" fulfills most, if not all, of those requirements, especially when consumed in conjunction with non-junk food that can be purchased in places such as Walmart.
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:04 amGauthier wrote:Geilinor wrote:The healthiest foods should always have been SNAP eligible. Anything else is a bad idea.
The healthiest foods usually are SNAP eligible. They're just so fucking expensive they eat through the average SNAP recepient's allotment like Gary Busey's nostrils eat through cocaine.
SNAP?
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:06 amPosted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:04 amPosted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:03 pmThe Tiger Kingdom wrote:I get the feeling the "breasts" vote has served as a major spoiler in the poll up there.
Who wouldn't want to take things seriously? Why wouldn't they be totally serious and never make any jokes?
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:41 pmI mean, for instance, I would never chuckle at how I read the poll options in the voice of Nicolas Cage.
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:45 pmi would vote for breasts over nicolas Cage, just sayin
Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:34 pmPosted: Wed Sep 18, 2013 7:49 pm