One conservative position I agree with

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why? . Poor people need caffeine to work too and cant afford a 6 dollar matcha or oat milk latte every morning like the elitist snobs who look down on them.

Poor people dont need to be punished. If you want to go after sugar, go after Starbucks as well but you won't because the poor dont use food stamps for it

I honestly don’t understand the Democratic position here.

To recap, soda and junk food taxes are a standard and important Democratic policy to promote public health.

However, preventing SNAP from being used for soda and junk food is punishment for poor people.

People need to get their stories straight.

You straighten yourself. LBH, you don't care about poor peoples' health.

Why don't you find something else a bit more worthwhile to focus on. "The poors" drinking soda with SNAP benefits isn't something reasonable people are concerned about.

Further, as long as we are making lists about what I don't want subsidized, we can do away with farm, oil, corp subsidies. You benefit from all those things, despite it being sort of a bit of socialism.

I’m reasonable and I’m concerned about it. Frankly, if you were “reasonable” you’d see that soda causes obesity and cancer and would want snap recipients to purchase things like apples and oat bran.

No, I don't micromanage people having a few sodas. And frankly, it is SUPER weird that you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-governor-calls-on-incoming-trump-officials-to-ban-junk-food-in-food-stamps-make-america-healthy-again

We shouldn’t be buying Coca Cola for welfare recipients.

These poor people have very little so why deny them Coca-Cola? How the hell can this affect you?

Ugh. How many fking times do we have to explain to you that their healthcare costs us money. If they drink cola and get obese. You and I pay for it. Not that complex.

We all pay for all sorts of things I'd rather not.
And if the poor families want a little "luxury" by having a soda, let them. You've clearly never been poor (I have).

Post your diet and lifestyle now so we can see what you're doing wrong? You cost people money too, after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-governor-calls-on-incoming-trump-officials-to-ban-junk-food-in-food-stamps-make-america-healthy-again

We shouldn’t be buying Coca Cola for welfare recipients.

If sodas are so bad, why not ban them for everyone? Why only welfare recipients?

Nobody was banning coca cola. Just suggesting that kids should have healthier things to eat and drink in public schools. The right wing absolutely lost their shit over it.

Sure. And here you are doing the same.

Huh? "Doing the same?" If Republicans got behind healthier food and drink in public schools I'd applaud it.

Why is it that Republicans, when they lack any coherent argument about why they suck, they try some lame and fabricated retort of "yabut what about your side?"

Why are democrats hypocritical contol freaks. Live your life and stop worrying about others. Stop banning everything you don't like and demanding everything you want as a human right that must be paid for y others.

The left's ideas are not so wonderful that they must be mandatory.

[Anonymous]

Pretty soon some of you will say beer, cigarettes, and marijuana are “little luxuries” and necessities for stress, and for mental health. After all, these poor people are working 20 hours a day I need to unwind at the end of a long, hard workday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pretty soon some of you will say beer, cigarettes, and marijuana are “little luxuries” and necessities for stress, and for mental health. After all, these poor people are working 20 hours a day I need to unwind at the end of a long, hard workday.

Right?

I’m sorry I’m concerned about subsidizing food that is detrimental to health. How cruel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While the rich are taping the planet, gouging consumers, and lobbying for cushy subsidies and tax breaks that don’t “trickle down”, OP is worried about a poor family squandering Pennies on Coke.

The rich -and republicans- have done their job well. They’ve managed to deflect from them to make the working class go at it against each other instead of them.

SNAP is to provide life saving nutrition. We currently spend billions making people fat (it's not "pennies" and then billions on their health care. If they want to eat junk food, they should pay for it themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why? . Poor people need caffeine to work too and cant afford a 6 dollar matcha or oat milk latte every morning like the elitist snobs who look down on them.

Poor people dont need to be punished. If you want to go after sugar, go after Starbucks as well but you won't because the poor dont use food stamps for it

I honestly don’t understand the Democratic position here.

To recap, soda and junk food taxes are a standard and important Democratic policy to promote public health.

However, preventing SNAP from being used for soda and junk food is punishment for poor people.

People need to get their stories straight.

You straighten yourself. LBH, you don't care about poor peoples' health.

Why don't you find something else a bit more worthwhile to focus on. "The poors" drinking soda with SNAP benefits isn't something reasonable people are concerned about.

Further, as long as we are making lists about what I don't want subsidized, we can do away with farm, oil, corp subsidies. You benefit from all those things, despite it being sort of a bit of socialism.

I’m reasonable and I’m concerned about it. Frankly, if you were “reasonable” you’d see that soda causes obesity and cancer and would want snap recipients to purchase things like apples and oat bran.

No, I don't micromanage people having a few sodas. And frankly, it is SUPER weird that you do.

NP- People are free to buy soda so there's no micromanaging. Should soda be subsidized though? That's a different question. It's like subsidizing cigarettes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to give a little perspective here.

Growing up, my best friend was pretty poor and her family had assistance. Yes, they bought tons of processed and frozen food. That’s because her single mother was going to school and working, both 30 minutes from their house. My friend was 12 and had to prepare most food for her and her little brother because mom was gone all the time, trying really hard to build a better life for them. She didn’t have time to teach her to cook full meals independently. She didn’t have time to grocery shop for fresh produce every few days. So she had to load up the freezer with meal options and also provided some after school snacks, such as chips or ice cream. They were hungry after school and needed a snack. A bag of chips would last several days and was relatively cheap.

As far as Coke products, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other. But I do think they should have access to caffeinated on-the-go beverages. I would imagine my friend’s mom had to rely heavily on caffeine during those long days of work, school, driving, and raising kids.

As far as the 7-11 vs grocery store. Consider why they might choose 7-11. They are called convenience stores for a reason. These folks typically have small children in tow. It was likely much easier to manage this in a 7-11. Mom might have even felt safe leaving them in the car while running into 7-11. If she was on foot, whether her children are with her or left at home, I can see where it would make a huge difference to pop into a convenience store rather than crossing the street and making your way through a large store and possibly wait in a long line.

Let’s just give each other a little grace in this world, can we?

Sorry that you romanticize poverty. I grew up like the girl you are talking about. There are healthy foods in the freezer section, and Mom should have been buying apples and peanut butter, carrots and Ranch or eggs as an after school snack. Those kids also receive free breakfast and lunch. Lots of people have small children and they don't shop at 7-11.

Grace is receiving free money through other people's labor to help you eat. Spending it on soda, chips and candy is even worse than taking the money and burning it because it also makes you unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to give a little perspective here.

Growing up, my best friend was pretty poor and her family had assistance. Yes, they bought tons of processed and frozen food. That’s because her single mother was going to school and working, both 30 minutes from their house. My friend was 12 and had to prepare most food for her and her little brother because mom was gone all the time, trying really hard to build a better life for them. She didn’t have time to teach her to cook full meals independently. She didn’t have time to grocery shop for fresh produce every few days. So she had to load up the freezer with meal options and also provided some after school snacks, such as chips or ice cream. They were hungry after school and needed a snack. A bag of chips would last several days and was relatively cheap.

As far as Coke products, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other. But I do think they should have access to caffeinated on-the-go beverages. I would imagine my friend’s mom had to rely heavily on caffeine during those long days of work, school, driving, and raising kids.

As far as the 7-11 vs grocery store. Consider why they might choose 7-11. They are called convenience stores for a reason. These folks typically have small children in tow. It was likely much easier to manage this in a 7-11. Mom might have even felt safe leaving them in the car while running into 7-11. If she was on foot, whether her children are with her or left at home, I can see where it would make a huge difference to pop into a convenience store rather than crossing the street and making your way through a large store and possibly wait in a long line.

Let’s just give each other a little grace in this world, can we?

Sorry that you romanticize poverty. I grew up like the girl you are talking about. There are healthy foods in the freezer section, and Mom should have been buying apples and peanut butter, carrots and Ranch or eggs as an after school snack. Those kids also receive free breakfast and lunch. Lots of people have small children and they don't shop at 7-11.

Grace is receiving free money through other people's labor to help you eat. Spending it on soda, chips and candy is even worse than taking the money and burning it because it also makes you unhealthy.

Agree with the pp - my poor single working mother left clear instructions for 11 year old me to start making dinner, like peel and chop potatoes, coat the chicken in shake and bake (it was the 80s) and pick a frozen green veg. Snack after school? Cheerios or raisin bran with milk.

Not romantic poverty — practical and real, inexpensive, food.

What we need is home ec classes, not unlimited SNAP.

I vote democrat, btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to give a little perspective here.

Growing up, my best friend was pretty poor and her family had assistance. Yes, they bought tons of processed and frozen food. That’s because her single mother was going to school and working, both 30 minutes from their house. My friend was 12 and had to prepare most food for her and her little brother because mom was gone all the time, trying really hard to build a better life for them. She didn’t have time to teach her to cook full meals independently. She didn’t have time to grocery shop for fresh produce every few days. So she had to load up the freezer with meal options and also provided some after school snacks, such as chips or ice cream. They were hungry after school and needed a snack. A bag of chips would last several days and was relatively cheap.

As far as Coke products, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other. But I do think they should have access to caffeinated on-the-go beverages. I would imagine my friend’s mom had to rely heavily on caffeine during those long days of work, school, driving, and raising kids.

As far as the 7-11 vs grocery store. Consider why they might choose 7-11. They are called convenience stores for a reason. These folks typically have small children in tow. It was likely much easier to manage this in a 7-11. Mom might have even felt safe leaving them in the car while running into 7-11. If she was on foot, whether her children are with her or left at home, I can see where it would make a huge difference to pop into a convenience store rather than crossing the street and making your way through a large store and possibly wait in a long line.

Let’s just give each other a little grace in this world, can we?

Sorry that you romanticize poverty. I grew up like the girl you are talking about. There are healthy foods in the freezer section, and Mom should have been buying apples and peanut butter, carrots and Ranch or eggs as an after school snack. Those kids also receive free breakfast and lunch. Lots of people have small children and they don't shop at 7-11.

Grace is receiving free money through other people's labor to help you eat. Spending it on soda, chips and candy is even worse than taking the money and burning it because it also makes you unhealthy.

Yeah that is not healthy. Maybe if you had a big government republican nanny state you would have been better off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think part of the problem is that many people who rely on food stamps live in food deserts. It would be great if the government could provide incentives to discount grocery stores like Aldi's to spread to rural areas. The difference in price between Aldi's and more traditional supermarket chains is astounding.

Food deserts are largely a myth and you have the causality of this phenomenon backwards. To the extent the do exist it is mainly because people living in those areas don't want to buy healthy food to eat. https://www.cremieux.xyz/p/food-deserts-are-not-real

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty soon some of you will say beer, cigarettes, and marijuana are “little luxuries” and necessities for stress, and for mental health. After all, these poor people are working 20 hours a day I need to unwind at the end of a long, hard workday.

Right?

I’m sorry I’m concerned about subsidizing food that is detrimental to health. How cruel.

Nah, you want to save a few bucks by punishing people who area already at the poverty line. You don't care about their health. If you did, you'd support changes to school lunches, fixing our food chain sources, and providing universal health care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to give a little perspective here.

Growing up, my best friend was pretty poor and her family had assistance. Yes, they bought tons of processed and frozen food. That’s because her single mother was going to school and working, both 30 minutes from their house. My friend was 12 and had to prepare most food for her and her little brother because mom was gone all the time, trying really hard to build a better life for them. She didn’t have time to teach her to cook full meals independently. She didn’t have time to grocery shop for fresh produce every few days. So she had to load up the freezer with meal options and also provided some after school snacks, such as chips or ice cream. They were hungry after school and needed a snack. A bag of chips would last several days and was relatively cheap.

As far as Coke products, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other. But I do think they should have access to caffeinated on-the-go beverages. I would imagine my friend’s mom had to rely heavily on caffeine during those long days of work, school, driving, and raising kids.

As far as the 7-11 vs grocery store. Consider why they might choose 7-11. They are called convenience stores for a reason. These folks typically have small children in tow. It was likely much easier to manage this in a 7-11. Mom might have even felt safe leaving them in the car while running into 7-11. If she was on foot, whether her children are with her or left at home, I can see where it would make a huge difference to pop into a convenience store rather than crossing the street and making your way through a large store and possibly wait in a long line.

Let’s just give each other a little grace in this world, can we?

Sorry that you romanticize poverty. I grew up like the girl you are talking about. There are healthy foods in the freezer section, and Mom should have been buying apples and peanut butter, carrots and Ranch or eggs as an after school snack. Those kids also receive free breakfast and lunch. Lots of people have small children and they don't shop at 7-11.

Grace is receiving free money through other people's labor to help you eat. Spending it on soda, chips and candy is even worse than taking the money and burning it because it also makes you unhealthy.

Then you were not poor. Because processed foods are MUCH cheaper for poor people. Ask me how I know.

You are disgusting to think poor people need to genuflect to you for your "free money." Gross. And during the holidays no less. Such a shining example of the holiday spirit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pretty soon some of you will say beer, cigarettes, and marijuana are “little luxuries” and necessities for stress, and for mental health. After all, these poor people are working 20 hours a day I need to unwind at the end of a long, hard workday.

Apparently, the Progressive position is that soda should be taxed to all hell so that it’s unaffordable to the middle class. But should be given away for free to poor people because they deserve it.

Cannot wait to see them apply this principle to alcohol and tobacco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to give a little perspective here.

Growing up, my best friend was pretty poor and her family had assistance. Yes, they bought tons of processed and frozen food. That’s because her single mother was going to school and working, both 30 minutes from their house. My friend was 12 and had to prepare most food for her and her little brother because mom was gone all the time, trying really hard to build a better life for them. She didn’t have time to teach her to cook full meals independently. She didn’t have time to grocery shop for fresh produce every few days. So she had to load up the freezer with meal options and also provided some after school snacks, such as chips or ice cream. They were hungry after school and needed a snack. A bag of chips would last several days and was relatively cheap.

As far as Coke products, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other. But I do think they should have access to caffeinated on-the-go beverages. I would imagine my friend’s mom had to rely heavily on caffeine during those long days of work, school, driving, and raising kids.

As far as the 7-11 vs grocery store. Consider why they might choose 7-11. They are called convenience stores for a reason. These folks typically have small children in tow. It was likely much easier to manage this in a 7-11. Mom might have even felt safe leaving them in the car while running into 7-11. If she was on foot, whether her children are with her or left at home, I can see where it would make a huge difference to pop into a convenience store rather than crossing the street and making your way through a large store and possibly wait in a long line.

Let’s just give each other a little grace in this world, can we?

Sorry that you romanticize poverty. I grew up like the girl you are talking about. There are healthy foods in the freezer section, and Mom should have been buying apples and peanut butter, carrots and Ranch or eggs as an after school snack. Those kids also receive free breakfast and lunch. Lots of people have small children and they don't shop at 7-11.

Grace is receiving free money through other people's labor to help you eat. Spending it on soda, chips and candy is even worse than taking the money and burning it because it also makes you unhealthy.

Then you were not poor. Because processed foods are MUCH cheaper for poor people. Ask me how I know.

You are disgusting to think poor people need to genuflect to you for your "free money." Gross. And during the holidays no less. Such a shining example of the holiday spirit.

This is so incorrect I don’t know where to start.