RFK Jr. says he’s working to stop food stamps buying soda and candy

It's like painting over murals at detention centers where kids are housed... with gray paint. It definitely sends a message.

Truly the land of the free, lads.

But they're the most efficient dollars-to-calories ratio... Cheapest way to feed the hungry lol

~~ITT: "You don't deserve candy if you're poor"~~ sorry that was mean
Like, 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.

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.
- 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.)
  
  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.
  
  Alright, how about alcohol and cigarettes?

Yeah Fuck any poor bastards with diabetes that wanna keep something on hand to boost their bloodsuger /S
- Even ignoring that, just because you are on food stamps doesn't mean you don't deserve some indulgences.

There was time in my life when most of my food came from a public pantry. I know it's not the same as stamps, bit same principle.
Anyway, birthday rolls around; didn't think anything of it cuz I was in the "it's just another day..." phase of life, and even if I wanted to do something for it, I wouldn't have been able to afford it. Roll up to the pantry for that week's pickup, and they break out a fucking cake and a hand-written birthday card! Nothing crazy - maybe 6-inch diameter, enough for the wife and I to split. But that shit pulled my ass right out of a depression spell like nothing else came close to before or since.
When I finally got a reliable income coming in and paid off the critical stuff and got a little bit of savings, my first 'splurge' was a $1k donation to that pantry with a note saying that their assistance pretty much single-handedly saved me from homelessness and probably from suicide; and enabled me to take the steps I needed to get the job I have now and ultimately become self sufficient.
Food is more than just nutrients; and junk food is more than just food that's junk.
And pantries are bad ass. If anyone reading this is struggling and not yet using one, GO SEE IF YOU'RE ELIGIBLE! Many people are resistant to ask for help prior to hitting absolute rock bottom, but a little help now (even if you only-kind-of need it) could save you from needing a LOT of help later. They're also an awesome source of info on local resources - whatever your unique situation is, they can probably point you in the right direction to start getting shit under control.
...I should make another donation - shit's extra fucked nowadays.
- Thanks for sharing, I feel like people forget we're all just people at the end of the day.
- I bet it would feel very different if you just used food stamps to buy your own cake
  
  Probably, but then that would have enabled me to give my wife that or vice versa. We don't have kids, but a lot of food stamp recipients do - same spiel.
  And even outside of special events, maybe that can of soda with dinner is the carrot-on-a-stick that gets a person through an otherwise miserable day cuz, shocker: poverty fucking sucks.
  That's the cool thing about not having arbitrary restrictions on shit like this: people are free to handle their own unique situation at their own discretion, including whether or not junk food is worth including in that week's budget.

I used to live in a kinda poor area. Lots of people on some sort of program. And that program had really restrictive rules about what you can and cannot buy. For example, you could buy Skippy peanut butter but not Skippy light peanut butter (whatever that is). It caused great confusion for the people who needed food, huge amounts of labor for the poor grocery person, and a long wait for the other shoppers in line - just so the government can save a few cents. Unbelievable.
- WIC most likely

Gotta stop those poors from having any joy. Only misery will suffice.
- Why is it in our interest to pay for food that causes obesity and health issues?
  
  Then start with ag subsidies. But that's if you're serious about fixing the problem and don't just want to punish poor people for being poor.
  
  If the concern was really about health, they'd be regulating maximum sugar % in all sodas and candies, not banning them to the poor.
  
  I want you to consider what you would do if you had $300 per month to buy food. How often would you use any of that money to buy soda and candy? Would you do it on a regular? Or would you do it just for special occasions to lift your spirits when things were bad?
  This isn't about health this is about punishing the poor for being poor.
  
  Because giving more people reasons to enjoy life benefits us all. Also, fuck rich people. We should all be clamoring to take as much from them as possible to improve the lives of those who have less.
  You can drink soda and eat candy without becoming obese or having health issues as a result.
  
  What if it's not happening that much and this is just a shoe horn to get legislation to destroy benefits? What if most states already remove some purchases from the EBT/food stamp total?
  It's like drug testing for welfare. It's sounds like a good idea until you realize it costs millions, produces almost no results and the government performing said drug tests can't be bothered to not do it in s corrupt way?
  
  Why do you consider what someone else eats to be a matter of "your interest", at all?
  Do you think your boss...who pays your salary...should be allowed to dictate what you spend it on? Is it in "their interest" to make sure you're spending their money on "the right things"?

Let them buy what they want you damn Nazi.
- It's not what every snap user wants. It's just that garbage products are calorie dense and need little to no preparation, and those things absolutely matter when working several jobs or being homeless and convincing someone to let you use their address because a permanent address is necessary.
  
  More calories per dollar for things like rice beans pasta. It's a bit more complicated than that.
  Convenience is king when you are constantly burned out and sleep deprived and "just need something good enough and easy"
  
  Eh, can you get a bag of equivalent volume of apples for the same as a bottle of coca cola?
  Same amount of sugar, one is considerably healthier.
- Next it will no sugary cereal, just oats and gruel for the peasantry.
  
  Why spoil them? Weevil-infested hardtack, that's all they deserve.
  Obligatory /s
  
  I haven't had sugar cereal in a decade. I don't know how you could ever prefer them over oat flakes
  
  "Ingredients only, no finished products. You want to eat? Work for it!"

I thought it was already blocked? 🤔
Huh, guess not.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items
Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:
Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes, or tobacco
Vitamins, medicines, and supplements. If an item has a Supplement Facts label, it is considered a supplement and is not eligible for SNAP purchase.
Live animals (except shellfish, fish removed from water, and animals slaughtered prior to pick-up from the store).
Foods that are hot at the point of sale
Any nonfood items such as:
Pet foods
Cleaning supplies, paper products, and other household supplies.
Hygiene items, cosmetics

What goon-affiliated product will they be able to purchase with food stamps instead? Lee Greenwood Bibles? My Pillows?

Oh good, we'll have slightly less sugar-related inflammation while we all fucking die of bird flu

Interesting, why not start branding and labeling better that more products that have high content of X

Where’s those fucking DOGE cunts when there’s real waste?
Look, I don’t want to subsidize people’s beetus diets, but, fuck me, do we not have better shit to do with our time and money?
Every single republican can fuck off and die.

"Let them eat roadkill."
Edited in quotes, because people aren't seeing it.
- Alaska does this (admittedly it's a separate system from snap) and most communities seem happy with the system.
  
  That's ... accurate.

a stopped clock is right twice a day
- How much of the average food stamp budget goes to soda and candy?
  If you can't answer this, then it would be foolish of you to think it's a problem.
  Is it foolish of you?
  
  According to the USDA, soda represents the most purchased item on food stamps. Candy represents the 11th most purchased item. Very few of the items on the top 20 list are very healthy. Vegetables and fruits are missing from the most altogether, even though these require no prep work before eating.
- People on food stamps aren't buying these things because it's fun, but because it's cheap, easy calories because they're homeless or working three jobs and don't have the time to cook real food. The clock is not right here.
  
  Having grown up in poor areas, people tend to buy things because those are the things they're used to buying. They are generally not making rational choices about optimal calories per dollar spent or best nutritional value per hour of labor expended in cooking. My neighbors almost all drank, a large percentage did drugs, they were often quite impulsive about purchases, and few of them planned ahead very effectively. My mother got some neighbor ladies together to do monthly bulk shopping at a nearby big-city farmer's market, saved us a ton of money, but nobody would have done it if she hadn't talked them into it.
  Real human beings are often not rational utility-maximizers. Explanations that assume that they are, are going to be deficient.
  
  No, they are buying them because they want to. I used to buy milk and cereal. It has sugar, but it's 3 grams per serving instead of like 15.
  Don't tell me you don't have time to pour a bowl of milk
- Those things are unhealthy, but restricting them is policing what poor people eat. It's stigmatizing. Also, people will still buy these things because they're addictive. So they'll be paying out of pocket for it rather than using their SNAP benefits. It's a lose-lose.
  
  Yeah, if the goal was actually to make people eat healthier, he'd be trying to limit the availability of those items to everyone, not just poor people.
  
  I dont get your argument. How's it stigmatizing? Why should someone be able to spend it all on energy drinks and starburst? Just doesn't make sense.
  I support aggressively increasing food stamps for anyone in need. But I'd also support aggressive regulation, like no candy and shit. It just makes sense to me but maybe I'm missing something.
- Yeah I absolutely hate this guy, but agree with this. I don't know it just seems so logical. Others arguments replying to you aren't convincing at all.