Trump's team is reportedly interested in banning junk food purchases for 41 million SNAP users

[edjr 6,578]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-team-reportedly-interested-banning-182502141.html
 

Quote

 

A 2024 report from the US Department of Agriculture (the department that runs SNAP) found that for SNAP households, 26% of expenditures went for candy/sweets, compared to 30.5% for non-SNAP households.

While, 61% of expenditures for sweetened beverages went to SNAP households, compared to 51% for non-SNAP households.

People online are debating whether a potential ban on junk food for SNAP users is an overreach by the government or a positive change to encourage healthier eating. Here's what they're saying:

 

 

 

#winning

Poor Liberals. They are so torn. it is a GOOD thing, but Trump's idea so we must say it's bad.

Simple. You want junk food? GET A FOCKING JOB!

[supermike80 1,807]

Tough one for me.   I can't quite decide where I stand on this.  So what I'm saying is I didn't help this thread at all.

 

[Hawkeye21 2,382]

There are some really pissed off people on social media with this one.  The money is meant for what you need, not what you want.  If you want a bunch of junk food then use your own money.

[edjr 6,578]

2 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

There are some really pissed off people on social media with this one.  The money is meant for what you need, not what you want.  If you want a bunch of junk food then use your own money.

  So simple, yet for the people that don't want to work for iit, complicated. 

[WhiteWonder 2,679]

17 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Tough one for me.   I can't quite decide where I stand on this.  So what I'm saying is I didn't help this thread at all.

 

Thanks, Tim

[supermike80 1,807]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

Thanks, Tim

[TheNewGirl 1,353]

There was some lady on Tik Tok the other day talking about how her welfare is going WAY down because they found out she has a brand new 2024 BMW. She gets EBT/food stamps, she's on Section 8, and a few other things she mentioned that is govt assistance. 

So her rent will go from $60 a month to $400, her food stamps will be all but eliminated. 

She was P!SSED. She's also a "content creator." That's her "job" and she felt like she was being targeted. 

I believe in some social assistance, but if you can get a brand new luxury car and you're b!tching about your $400 rent? Fock off. 

[supermike80 1,807]

Just now, TheNewGirl said:

There was some lady on Tik Tok the other day talking about how her welfare is going WAY down because they found out she has a brand new 2024 BMW. She gets EBT/food stamps, she's on Section 8, and a few other things she mentioned that is govt assistance. 

So her rent will go from $60 a month to $400, her food stamps will be all but eliminated. 

She was P!SSED. She's also a "content creator." That's her "job" and she felt like she was being targeted. 

I believe in some social assistance, but if you can get a brand new luxury car and you're b!tching about your $400 rent? Fock off. 

I saw that...Wasn't she getting like $1800!!! In food stamps?  That's what stuck out for me.   

[TheNewGirl 1,353]

Just now, supermike80 said:

I saw that...Wasn't she getting like $1800!!! In food stamps?  That's what stuck out for me.   

YES. 

It was some ridiculous amount. 

[League Champion 1,896]

MORE AMAZING NEWS!!  

DOES THE WINNING EVER STOP??? 

[WhiteWonder 2,679]

3 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

There was some lady on Tik Tok the other day talking about how her welfare is going WAY down because they found out she has a brand new 2024 BMW. She gets EBT/food stamps, she's on Section 8, and a few other things she mentioned that is govt assistance. 

So her rent will go from $60 a month to $400, her food stamps will be all but eliminated. 

She was P!SSED. She's also a "content creator." That's her "job" and she felt like she was being targeted. 

I believe in some social assistance, but if you can get a brand new luxury car and you're b!tching about your $400 rent? Fock off. 

I did see this on Instagram.   I'd probably caution against being a digby/FBN taking everything on social media at face value. 

But even if it was fake or embellished it is highly plausible and pretty focking sad

[supermike80 1,807]

7 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

YES. 

It was some ridiculous amount. 

I apologize.  I just looked up the video.  It wasn't $1,800 a month.  It was $4,000 a month.  This was directly from her mouth.  She's being lowered from $4,000 a month to $88/month.

This can't be real.     I'm thinking she misspoke.  I think she meant $4,000 a year?  333 or so a month.   That makes way more sense.

God sometimes these rabbit holes....She also has a video complaining that her nail salon will no longer accept her EBT card for services.  I swear to God.

[Strike 5,214]

4 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

There was some lady on Tik Tok the other day talking about how her welfare is going WAY down because they found out she has a brand new 2024 BMW. She gets EBT/food stamps, she's on Section 8, and a few other things she mentioned that is govt assistance. 

So her rent will go from $60 a month to $400, her food stamps will be all but eliminated. 

She was P!SSED. She's also a "content creator." That's her "job" and she felt like she was being targeted. 

I believe in some social assistance, but if you can get a brand new luxury car and you're b!tching about your $400 rent? Fock off. 

How does this even happen?  Isn't there means testing, or at the very least you have to attest to a certain level of income to qualify for those benefits?

[easilyscan 863]

Not defending fast food, but if they go to the grocery store and buy the crap in the frozen food aisle (frozen pizza-lasagna-banquet pot pies, etc or BAR S hotdogs, or the so-called healthy meals like healthy choice, which is still garbage, is it really going to improve anything ?  

[listen2me 23 1,827]

Seems logical.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,115]

5 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I did see this on Instagram.   I'd probably caution against being a digby/FBN taking everything on social media at face value. 

But even if it was fake or embellished it is highly plausible and pretty focking sad

I'm pretty sure that story was fake. I research this stuff. And I'm proven right eventually. Most of the time.

[supermike80 1,807]

1 minute ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

I'm pretty sure that story was fake. I research this stuff. And I'm proven right eventually. Most of the time.

I'm starting to think so too.   I think it's a parody.  And not a very good one.  She gave it away by saying she lost her food stamps and her husband told her "maybe now you'll lose some weight"

So yeah, I officially call this one BS now

[supermike80 1,807]

6 minutes ago, easilyscan said:

Not defending fast food, but if they go to the grocery store and buy the crap in the frozen food aisle (frozen pizza-lasagna-banquet pot pies, etc or BAR S hotdogs, or the so-called healthy meals like healthy choice, which is still garbage, is it really going to improve anything ?  

This is why I am on the fence on this one.  On the one hand, I wanna say "You get $300 per month.  Spend as you wish but when it's gone, that's it."  But on the other hand, we all know there are a ton of crappy parents that will blow that $300 on hookers and blow(like I would) then let their kids starve.  I hate hate hate seeing kids get punished because their parents are azzholes.

[BiffTannen 868]

Dump your grape drank stock now. 

[listen2me 23 1,827]

BS or not we have had this discussion and it would be a logical idea.  It is a simple yet big way to improve any obesity/health we have in this country.  

Now what the stipulations would be, is the dabate.  Cant think of one right or left that would think its a terrible idea.  Unless of course; you collect them.

[Horseman 2,369]

Looooong overdue.  Sick of seeing the fat deadbeats load up on grape soda and cheetos.  

[Horseman 2,369]

1 minute ago, BiffTannen said:

Dump your grape drank stock now. 

    jinx

[League Champion 1,896]

Just now, Horseman said:

Looooong overdue.  Sick of seeing the fat deadbeats load up on grape soda and cheetos.  

.  TRUTH 

[listen2me 23 1,827]

Who is lobbied by frito lay is the question

[Hardcore troubadour 14,950]

Literally Hitler 

[supermike80 1,807]

8 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

BS or not we have had this discussion and it would be a logical idea.  It is a simple yet big way to improve any obesity/health we have in this country.  

Now what the stipulations would be, is the dabate.  Cant think of one right or left that would think its a terrible idea.  Unless of course; you collect them.

I think an earlier post about this has merit.  Just cause we ban "junk food" from EBT, doesn't automatically mean people will eat healthier.  There is a ton of crap in your local grocery store that doesn't qualify as such, but will still make you fat and unhealthy.   This fix isn't gonna change that.

Ban soda.  great..Maybe they buy orange juice.  Which is so loaded with sugar it will have zero impact on a person's health.

Ban twinkies.  Ok.  Can they buy muffins?  Cause those bad boys are so packed with empty calories.   I really don't see the improvement with this idea.  I'm not saying I am against it, I just don't see it impacting American's health in any real way

[TheNewGirl 1,353]

When I was pregnant with my son (23 years ago), I had a co worker tell me to go apply for WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) benefits and to just lie about how much I made, because chances were they'd never check. 

On WIC, you get things like formula, diapers, cheese, milk, peanut butter, etc. at a considerable discount. 

Something tells me it's not difficult for people to "apply" for benefits. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,950]

Come on libtards, defend junk food getting paid for. You know you want to.  

[League Champion 1,896]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Come on libtards, defend junk food getting paid for. You know you want to.  

BOYOs gonna tell you it's racist  

[WhiteWonder 2,679]

17 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

This is why I am on the fence on this one.  On the one hand, I wanna say "You get $300 per month.  Spend as you wish but when it's gone, that's it."  But on the other hand, we all know there are a ton of crappy parents that will blow that $300 on hookers and blow(like I would) then let their kids starve.  I hate hate hate seeing kids get punished because their parents are azzholes.

 

I guess there is likely a slope here.  I think it's fair to ban using government assistance on candy, soda, chips etc...  but someone else mentioned shitty hotdogs, frozen dinners, etc.  At some point it's probably considered essential nourishment, even if it's also sort of considered junk, and it would be hard to blame people for going that route if those items happen to be cheaper.  You could try limiting it to bread, eggs, milk, meats, fish, canned goods and so on but if some "junkier" options are more affordable and means you can stretch more meals out of your assistance money...   why should we care? 

but yes, definitely should care if people are spending it on snack food 

[MLCKAA 546]

I’m not exactly on the fence with this; I can generally support it.  However, there’s a difference between spending a bunch of SNAP money on junk food and simply eating things that are part of American diet zeitgeist.

For example, getting chips or a bag of Oreos is simply living.  I would hope we’re not going to tell people on food stamps that they can’t have any comfort foods.

On the other hand, a whole lot of SNAP dollars are spent at the gas station.

Regarding whether or not canned, boxed and frozen meals are actually healthy, I understand the argument that they’re high sodium, high calorie and often low quality.

But that’s not the only variable to consider.  Having those things can foster family togetherness if you believe in the importance of family dinner, which I do.  They’re also time-saving, which could be important to many of the families on SNAP.

[Herbivore 1,115]

5 minutes ago, MLCKAA said:

I’m not exactly on the fence with this; I can generally support it.  However, there’s a difference between spending a bunch of SNAP money on junk food and simply eating things that are part of American diet zeitgeist.

For example, getting chips or a bag of Oreos is simply living.  I would hope we’re not going to tell people on food stamps that they can’t have any comfort foods.

On the other hand, a whole lot of SNAP dollars are spent at the gas station.

Regarding whether or not canned, boxed and frozen meals are actually healthy, I understand the argument that they’re high sodium, high calorie and often low quality.

But that’s not the only variable to consider.  Having those things can foster family togetherness if you believe in the importance of family dinner, which I do.  They’re also time-saving, which could be important to many of the families on SNAP.

Good idea to look at this for cost and for health. I agree with most of what you wrote here. The gas station purchases for example, if it's big gulps and candy, that's a problem. Even that though has questions. Does the person on SNAP have a fridge or stove? A car? If no, they might buy a sandwich at Wawa, or a frozen meal to go right in the microwave. Also the chips and Oreos comment. Families should be able to buy some snacks, get a cake for a kids bday. So, it might be hard to get this in the right spot. 

[Red White and Blue 81]

1 hour ago, easilyscan said:

Not defending fast food, but if they go to the grocery store and buy the crap in the frozen food aisle (frozen pizza-lasagna-banquet pot pies, etc or BAR S hotdogs, or the so-called healthy meals like healthy choice, which is still garbage, is it really going to improve anything ?  

It will make people who hate the poors feel better. 

[Horseman 2,369]

3 minutes ago, Red White and Blue said:

It will make people who hate the poors feel better. 

[Horseman 2,369]

1 hour ago, supermike80 said:

I think an earlier post about this has merit.  Just cause we ban "junk food" from EBT, doesn't automatically mean people will eat healthier.  There is a ton of crap in your local grocery store that doesn't qualify as such, but will still make you fat and unhealthy.   This fix isn't gonna change that.

Ban soda.  great..Maybe they buy orange juice.  Which is so loaded with sugar it will have zero impact on a person's health.

Ban twinkies.  Ok.  Can they buy muffins?  Cause those bad boys are so packed with empty calories.   I really don't see the improvement with this idea.  I'm not saying I am against it, I just don't see it impacting American's health in any real way

Make them turn in receipts to be reviewed by a nutritionist. If they don't meet set standards cut the benefits.  

[WhiteWonder 2,679]

44 minutes ago, MLCKAA said:

I’m not exactly on the fence with this; I can generally support it.  However, there’s a difference between spending a bunch of SNAP money on junk food and simply eating things that are part of American diet zeitgeist.

For example, getting chips or a bag of Oreos is simply living.  I would hope we’re not going to tell people on food stamps that they can’t have any comfort foods.

On the other hand, a whole lot of SNAP dollars are spent at the gas station.

Regarding whether or not canned, boxed and frozen meals are actually healthy, I understand the argument that they’re high sodium, high calorie and often low quality.

But that’s not the only variable to consider.  Having those things can foster family togetherness if you believe in the importance of family dinner, which I do.  They’re also time-saving, which could be important to many of the families on SNAP.

I would strongly disagree that buying chips or oreos is "simply living".  Yes, comfort foods are a part of life but they are not essential. 

I guess I feel like food assistance funds should only be used on essential meals. So while I don't think we need to worry about fresh vs frozen, perceived quality, name brand, etc... I do think we need to consider what makes up these essentials. 

Like what is the difference between buying Oreos at the supermarket or at the gas station? Besides value. It's still Oreo cookies and it's still a luxury. 

I am all for allowing families using benefits to go for cheap TV dinners and similar things regardless of the reason, but I agree, time saving and convenience is important. As long as it's fulfilling the need of essential meals 

24 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

Good idea to look at this for cost and for health. I agree with most of what you wrote here. The gas station purchases for example, if it's big gulps and candy, that's a problem. Even that though has questions. Does the person on SNAP have a fridge or stove? A car? If no, they might buy a sandwich at Wawa, or a frozen meal to go right in the microwave. Also the chips and Oreos comment. Families should be able to buy some snacks, get a cake for a kids bday. So, it might be hard to get this in the right spot. 

Families getting benefits can absolutely buy snacks and buy a kids birthday cake. They can do this with their own money. These benefits are meant to be a supplement. they should be used on the essential items, which in turn should allow families to use their regular funds on any non essential snacks they feel they need. If they feel they can't afford this stuff without government assistance then you don't buy them.   any time in my life where I felt I needed to cut back on some spending, fast food and snacks were the first to go. 

I know you were just giving an example on the fly but if a person doesn't have a car, do they really need to walk to Wawa to get a sandwich over making their own ham and cheese at home? I feel like someone in this situation is probably getting other living assistance that would allow them to be living somewhere with a fridge. 

[WhiteWonder 2,679]

1 hour ago, supermike80 said:

I think an earlier post about this has merit.  Just cause we ban "junk food" from EBT, doesn't automatically mean people will eat healthier.  There is a ton of crap in your local grocery store that doesn't qualify as such, but will still make you fat and unhealthy.   This fix isn't gonna change that.

Ban soda.  great..Maybe they buy orange juice.  Which is so loaded with sugar it will have zero impact on a person's health.

Ban twinkies.  Ok.  Can they buy muffins?  Cause those bad boys are so packed with empty calories.   I really don't see the improvement with this idea.  I'm not saying I am against it, I just don't see it impacting American's health in any real way

I don't really care about the nutritional value.

For me it comes down to essential vs non essential and I admit, that also might be a tough argument... . but as long as you're using your benefits to buy things that fall into the category of essential meals, have at it. You will never eliminate all junk food. frozen TV dinners are junk... but they are produced and consumed as meals and its generally accepted. 

[League Champion 1,896]

Damn, no more Grape Soda and Jolly Ranchers 

[MLCKAA 546]

7 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I would strongly disagree that buying chips or oreos is "simply living".  Yes, comfort foods are a part of life but they are not essential. 

I guess I feel like food assistance funds should only be used on essential meals. So while I don't think we need to worry about fresh vs frozen, perceived quality, name brand, etc... I do think we need to consider what makes up these essentials. 

Like what is the difference between buying Oreos at the supermarket or at the gas station? Besides value. It's still Oreo cookies and it's still a luxury. 

I am all for allowing families using benefits to go for cheap TV dinners and similar things regardless of the reason, but I agree, time saving and convenience is important. As long as it's fulfilling the need of essential meals 

Families getting benefits can absolutely buy snacks and buy a kids birthday cake. They can do this with their own money. These benefits are meant to be a supplement. they should be used on the essential items, which in turn should allow families to use their regular funds on any non essential snacks they feel they need. If they feel they can't afford this stuff without government assistance then you don't buy them.   any time in my life where I felt I needed to cut back on some spending, fast food and snacks were the first to go. 

I know you were just giving an example on the fly but if a person doesn't have a car, do they really need to walk to Wawa to get a sandwich over making their own ham and cheese at home? I feel like someone in this situation is probably getting other living assistance that would allow them to be living somewhere with a fridge. 

I hear what you’re saying.   To me, your perspective is valid and I see your point.  

[edjr 6,578]

15 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I would strongly disagree that buying chips or oreos is "simply living".  Yes, comfort foods are a part of life but they are not essential. 

I guess I feel like food assistance funds should only be used on essential meals. So while I don't think we need to worry about fresh vs frozen, perceived quality, name brand, etc... I do think we need to consider what makes up these essentials. 

Like what is the difference between buying Oreos at the supermarket or at the gas station? Besides value. It's still Oreo cookies and it's still a luxury. 

I am all for allowing families using benefits to go for cheap TV dinners and similar things regardless of the reason, but I agree, time saving and convenience is important. As long as it's fulfilling the need of essential meals 

Families getting benefits can absolutely buy snacks and buy a kids birthday cake. They can do this with their own money. These benefits are meant to be a supplement. they should be used on the essential items, which in turn should allow families to use their regular funds on any non essential snacks they feel they need. If they feel they can't afford this stuff without government assistance then you don't buy them.   any time in my life where I felt I needed to cut back on some spending, fast food and snacks were the first to go. 

I know you were just giving an example on the fly but if a person doesn't have a car, do they really need to walk to Wawa to get a sandwich over making their own ham and cheese at home? I feel like someone in this situation is probably getting other living assistance that would allow them to be living somewhere with a fridge.