Minnesota seeks ban on junk food

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:12:31 -0400, Roger Zoul
wrote:

Ignoramus17184 wrote:
:: In article , Roger Zoul
:: wrote:
::: Ignoramus17184 wrote:
::::: In article , Roger
::::: Zoul wrote:
::
::
::: Now, here it is
::::: the government that gives money, but still, it is not unfair to
::::: impose
::::: some restrictions on how government grants are used.
:::
::: There are already restrictions -- why are more needed?
:::
::: Would it be fair
::::: to allow the poor to buy vodka with food stamps?There are
::::: calories in vodka, after all.
:::
::: Vodka is not need to live -- it is not food. It has calories, but
::: it provides 0 nuriousment (sp?)
::
:: junk food is not needed to live, either.

No particular food, such as chicken or rice, is needed to live. Hence, as
long as something fits with the category of food, then them have it.

Besides - define junk food.



Pretty much anything in the middle of the store.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Lictor wrote:

"Patricia Heil" wrote in message
...
A bag of Doritos costs twice what
I'm having for lunch today, and has 1/10th the
nutrition.

Doritos is a brand name, if you go for brandless potato chips, you can
have a pretty good calories/cost ratio. Likewise, pasta is pretty
inexpensive, for $1 you can have a whole 1kg package that will feed you
for several meals.

A bag of pasta is only marginally better than potato chips for food as well.
Pasta, even egg-based, has very little actual nutrients and is very
starchy. Many many years ago, I was unemployed for a while, and was on and
off the dole (in Canada), and we didn't have food stamps, but we were given
a certain amount to live on each month. Even when employed I wasn't
earning a fortune.

With what was left after paying rent, we had to spread a small amount of
money over the remaining entirety of the month for food, clothing, coin
operated laundry, entertainment (ha! It's called a "library card") and
minor emergencies. Leafy greens were a luxury that I enjoyed only in the
summer time when Romaine lettuce could be bought for 25 cents a head.

So for volume per cost, and shelf life, starchy foods, even if it's not
"junk food" by definition, like a sack of potatoes, unpopped popcorn, a
giant bag of flour, a huge sack of white rice, were pretty much the main
staples of my household. Any vegetables I bought were the frozen kind
(preferable to canned which were gross), and were more expensive by volume
than all the starchy staples.

When you're that poor, quantity usually is the preferred choice over
quality.

--
The post you just read, unless otherwise noted, is strictly my opinion
and experience. Please interpret accordingly.

Bob in CT wrote:
:: On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:12:31 -0400, Roger Zoul
:: wrote:
::
::: Ignoramus17184 wrote:
::::: In article , Roger
::::: Zoul wrote:
:::::: Ignoramus17184 wrote:
:::::::: In article , Roger
:::::::: Zoul wrote:
:::::
:::::
:::::: Now, here it is
:::::::: the government that gives money, but still, it is not unfair to
:::::::: impose
:::::::: some restrictions on how government grants are used.
::::::
:::::: There are already restrictions -- why are more needed?
::::::
:::::: Would it be fair
:::::::: to allow the poor to buy vodka with food stamps?There are
:::::::: calories in vodka, after all.
::::::
:::::: Vodka is not need to live -- it is not food. It has calories,
:::::: but it provides 0 nuriousment (sp?)
:::::
::::: junk food is not needed to live, either.
:::
::: No particular food, such as chicken or rice, is needed to live.
::: Hence, as long as something fits with the category of food, then
::: them have it.
:::
::: Besides - define junk food.
:::
:::
::
:: Pretty much anything in the middle of the store.

According to you....there are plenty who would disagree. For example, you
can find pasta and rice in the middle of the store. Most of America would
not consider those to be junk food.

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message
...
According to you....there are plenty who would disagree. For example, you
can find pasta and rice in the middle of the store. Most of America would
not consider those to be junk food.

I can find also all kind of oils in the middle of my supermarket, does this
mean they're junk food? That's also where they have nuts, organic food,
veggies preserves and wine. All these are junk food?

Ignoramus17184 wrote in message
Minnesota Seeks Ban on Junk Food Stamps
snip

I worked as a cashier for a grocery store for 3 years when I was in high
school, and it was amazing to me how overweight the people using food stamps
were. And the garbage they would buy with those food stamps. Your average
middle class family with 2 kids paying by check (and numerous coupons,
usually) would buy staple items like potatoes, meats and vegetables and
maybe one or two "treat" items with an order. Meanwhile the food stamp
family would have potato chips, donuts, soda pop, Little Debbie snack cakes,
frozen pizzas, TV dinners and other convenience foods. They were too lazy to
cook their own meals. They couldn't be bothered to use coupons. And many
were obese. It made me sick.

Minnesota has the right idea. Welfare is supposed to be a temporary
solution, not a way of life. If a welfare recipient wants to treat her kids
to cupcakes she shouldn't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. She should get
a job.

Mathilda

I don't see why those who are less well off should be singled out to
be penalised like this. I wish governments could put a subsidy on
fresh fruit and veg and other healthy food rather than taxing "junk"
food.
janice

On 30 Apr 2004 16:11:03 GMT, Ignoramus17184
wrote:

Minnesota Seeks Ban on Junk Food Stamps

Friday, April 30, 2004



ST. PAUL, Minnesota ? Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (search) wants to
fight obesity (search) in his state by limiting the amount of junk
food people on public assistance programs can buy.

Pawlenty has asked the federal government for permission to take junk
food off the shopping list of Minnesotans like Angel Buechner, who use
food stamps (search) to buy their groceries.

"We've already eliminated tobacco and booze. Why is it too much of a
leap then to say that things that are particularly unhealthy from a
food supply standpoint or a nutrition standpoint, we would exclude
those too?" asked Pawlenty, a Republican.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (search) is now mulling Pawlenty's
request to de-junk, at least partially, the shopping cart of
Minnesota's food stamp recipients.

Angel Buechner, a working mother of four boys, says junk food is a bad
buy for people who use food stamps like her family, but she doesn't
believe the federal government has the right to prevent her from
buying something special for her sons.

"Why should I have to shop on the other side of the grocery store just
because I get food support?" asked Buechner, a food stamp recipient.

Click here for a report by Fox News' Steve Brown.

Ignoramus17184 wrote:
:: My final conclusion is that, considering everything, Minnesota acts
:: in
:: a misguided way andis not using the role of the state properly.
::
:: Besides, feeding food stamp recipients junk food will have an effect
:: of reducing the number of people relying on government assistance,
:: via unforced attrition and their early death due to junk food abuse.

1) plenty of non recipients eat junk food, so they'll have the same fate
2) recipients have choice, they don't have to buy junk food. we don't know
that all of them do, either.

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message
...
1) plenty of non recipients eat junk food, so they'll have the same fate
2) recipients have choice, they don't have to buy junk food. we don't
know
that all of them do, either.

3) Junk food doesn't kill you. It's eating a lot of it that (can) kill you.
Getting morbidly obese on healthy food will kill you faster than eating an
industrial cake loaded with trans fat and corn syrup once a month.

Lictor wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" wrote in message
:: ...
::: 1) plenty of non recipients eat junk food, so they'll have the same
::: fate 2) recipients have choice, they don't have to buy junk food.
::: we don't know that all of them do, either.
::
:: 3) Junk food doesn't kill you. It's eating a lot of it that (can)
:: kill you. Getting morbidly obese on healthy food will kill you
:: faster than eating an industrial cake loaded with trans fat and corn
:: syrup once a month.

Good point! Oh, and lots of athletes eat junk food.

In article ,
Ignoramus17184 wrote:
Snip
Well, if they are giving me food money, I think that it is only fair
that they tell me what I can or cannot do with it. Now, here it is the
government that gives money, but still, it is not unfair to impose
some restrictions on how government grants are used. Would it be fair
to allow the poor to buy vodka with food stamps?There are calories in
vodka, after all.

Snip

Or beer. There are some good beers one could live for a _long_ time on.
DoubleSpatten for one, the one with two spades on the label. I know one
person who states that it must have provided the nutrition to get her
through one period of poverty.

Come to think of it, if I had to live for a month on the beer, or
Hostess anything, I would choose the beer. Much more like food. And it
wouldn't give me tooth decay either.