s skippy the bush kangaroo: get unhealthy on your own dime

skippy the bush kangaroo



Thursday, October 07, 2010

get unhealthy on your own dime

this won't be the first time we have disagreed w/shakesville on something:
new york mayor and "anti-obesity" crusader michael bloomberg is asking the federal government for permission "to bar new york city's 1.7 million recipients of food stamps from using them to buy soda or other sugared drinks."
the request, made to the united states department of agriculture, which finances and sets the rules for the food-stamp program, is part of an aggressive anti-obesity push by the mayor that has also included advertisements, stricter rules on food sold in schools and an unsuccessful attempt to have the state impose a tax on the sugared drinks.
...the mayor requested a ban for two years to study whether it would have a positive impact on health and whether a permanent ban would be merited.

"in spite of the great gains we've made over the past eight years in making our communities healthier, there are still two areas where we're losing ground — obesity and diabetes," the mayor said in a statement. "this initiative will give new york families more money to spend on foods and drinks that provide real nourishment."
okay, so here's the thing: stigmatizing food stamp recipients by suggesting they're too stupid to make the right decisions about what food they should be purchasing is not a good idea for reasons that ought to be self-evident. but supposing, for a moment, that this proposal wasn't embedded with patronizing classist horseshit and a heap of fat hatred, there still remain reasons to question the potential efficacy of this proposal, and its very design.

why, for example, is the usda being petitioned to allow an infringement on the autonomous decision-making of poor usians, instead of petitioned to ban the use of high-fructose corn syrup in all the foods and beverages purchased by those poor usians (and everyone else)? given that researchers have found that hfcs prompts considerably more weight gain, and that the average usian's consumption of hfcs over the same time period associated with the oh noes obesity and diabetes crisis has increased by "an alarming 12,250%," you'd think that the mayor and usda might want to start there and see if "a ban for two years [has] a positive impact on health."
uh, strawman much, melissa?

we don't think the mayor of new york would be in much of a position of authority to ask to ban the use of high-fructose corn syrup in foods. we think he's perfectly within his purview to ask to keep soda purchases from eligibility of food stamp purchase in his city.

we're all in favor of the food stamp program. skippy once was on food stamps in his younger years, and it's a subsidy that works, and is necessary.

but you know what's not necessary? mountain dew. milk, eggs, hamburger, broccoli, that stuff's necessary. sprite, pepsi, mr. pibb, coke zero, not so much.

we hate to even begin to sound authortarian, but it makes great sense to us to ask that the government not be asked to foot the bill for soda. food stamps should be for staying alive, not for belching contests.

now, we're not, as melissa's post implies, demanding that people on food stamps be restricted from drinking sodas. we are just demanding that if they want to, they pay for it themselves.

if you can't afford to buy a delicious carbonated lemon-lime drink, then don't make 7
up yours.
posted by skippy at 11:52 AM |

8 Comments:

I agree. Why should we be paying for their Cokes?

Add marshmallows to the list, too. Who the hell needs marshmallows to live? Twinkies too. Gummy bears AND gummy worms aren't food.

For that matter, candy is not that important to survival. Buy your own damn candy. Cake mixes and pudding too. And don't get me started on Cheetos.

We got something here. There's lots of garbage in a grocery store that the state shouldn't have to pay for.

Who the hell do these poor slobs think they are, anyway?

If you want to snack, get a freaking job!
commented by Blogger David Aquarius, 12:28 PM PDT  
There is no life without M&Ms
commented by Anonymous Anonymous, 12:42 PM PDT  
Everyone knows that those on food stamps are all eating steaks, so why worry about soda??

Actually if it is listed as food, it should be allowed to be purchased with food stamps, but I have seen where certain foods are not allowed like fresh local eggs.

Once the transfer has been made(food stamps, check or debit card), it is up to the recipient to decide how to use it. It's like if you gave someone a gift card and then told them what to buy with it.
commented by Blogger Kulkuri, 1:03 PM PDT  
Cake and ice cream aren't nutritious either so perhaps we should make it a Class 1 Felony if a mother on Food Stamps buys her 5 year old a birthday cake and tries to have a party for him on his birthday with taxpayer funded empty calories.
commented by Blogger George, 12:40 AM PDT  
What about those "uniquely American" people working 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs just to keep afloat? Maybe they need some quick/cheap caffeine just to get through the day!

Staying awake & alert when working your 3rd job is both important & a survival tactic.

Let them have coke!

Also soda can be used when recovering from a flu, some ginger ale or 7 up, and full sugar soda can be used to pull back a diabetic from a blood sugar low.

I was looking at a grocery store ad yesterday 80% of the stuff advertised is bad for you.
Trans fat, bleached flour, processed & chemicalized. So much of that shit should be banned as well- for everyone.

If you are on Food Stamps, there is always more month than money. If you are trying to feed a family on Food Stamps, chances are you are doing your damndest to stretch those dollars are far as they can go.

I doubt there is vast soda abuse on a large scale going on in the realms of the Food Stamp crowd. However not having enough money for food does equate to buying generally less quality food- the cheapest foods are carb laden... potatoes, noodles, mac & cheese, cheap cereal. It's the carb count that the body converts to sugar in the body.

It is a slippery slope. To ban soda & "sugary drinks"--- so we would have poor folks drinking Kool Aid instead? Just add their own sugar?

You can't buy soda, but you can buy ice cream, cakes, pop tarts, candy, frosted sugar cereal,
crappy white bread, and a host of other really bad shit. Sadly, those are the cheapest "foods" available.

Perhaps Mayor Bloomberg should be pushing for the Government to stop funding wars, & give Food stamp recipients enough money to buy higher quality foods. Or create family wage jobs so people don't have to be on food stamps & can afford high quality, fresh organic foods.

Just sayin'
commented by Blogger Fran, 7:03 AM PDT  
Funny how it's only the poor and powerless who get the "for your own good" attitude forced down their throats, isn't it? You expect them to live up to standards that you would never put up with, because they obviously don't deserve basic dignity. They're poor, after all. Beggars can't be choosers, and you'll be the one to choose what they can and can't buy.

Why stop at pop? Don't let them buy white bread, only wheat. No whole milk, only skim. And no steak, not on my tax dollar. They only deserve hamburger.

You DEMAND if they want a glass of pop they pay for it themselves? Tell you what, your share of everyone's food stamps in that city spent on soda comes to probably one penny, at that. I'll give you the damned penny, since it's all about how upset you are that your money is going towards their soda pop.
commented by Anonymous Anonymous, 10:43 AM PDT  
NYS already has the WIC program which does a similar thing, certain foods and beverages are approved, others are not. I don't know how extensive it is. I don't have a problem with it. Is it better to give the homeless person money to buy their booze or drugs or is it bettter to give them food and blankets and whatnot? Charity is a gift by the giver, the givers get to decide what's given. They are also being given health and dental care and I think there's enough cause to consider what can be done to alleviate what gets taken from our pockets.
commented by Anonymous sean, 8:19 PM PDT  
Before we leave the topic, I'd like to make one more stab and explaining to Skippy why he's being naive on the issue, unusual in that this is usually a savvy blog in political matters.

First, notice the mayor uses the tired old "it's just temporary and we'll use it to study the results" lie. Saying something is temporary is the oldest trick in the book to get something passed. You have to be smart enough to know that once this rule is in place, it's never going to be changed. That's the lie behind every "temporary tax cut" the Republicans push through. They have no plans for it actually being temporary. It's a lie. You enjoy being lied to?

And that "study"? Any scientist would piss himself laughing. That's not how studies are done. You need a random control group, to closely track all participants, and eliminating variables. And it takes money, lots of it. There's no study. Another baldfaced lie from a crusader against soda pop who happens to be mayor.

And let's see what the overall affect of this call to teach the poor how to shop might be. We're once again training people to say it's OK to mess with the poor's food stamps, that it's our money and we should take it away from them because they are just abusing it and wasting your tax dollars. Sound familiar? All good loyal Republican talking points about every program out there that tries to help the poor.

You should be ashamed that you fell for this appeal to our selfish instincts. It's not about buying soda pop on your money. It's about treating the poor like shit because they're powerless to stop us.
commented by Anonymous Anonymous, 4:51 AM PDT  

Add a comment