Food stamps for fast food?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2005
Food stamps for fast food?
60
Thu, 09-08-2011 - 1:54pm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/story/2011-09-05/More-restaurants-are-targeting-customers-who-use-food-stamps/50267864/1

Florida is joining California, Arizona, and Michigan in allowing their folk to use their food stamps at fast food restaurants.
Should we overhaul this system?
When we have an obese nation, seems we are not going to cut health care costs going this route.
Should food stamps only be redeemed for healthy choices? Should we just be giving out prepackaged healthy meals?
Might as well just give them a debit card to spend any way they choose?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Thu, 09-08-2011 - 2:11pm
I think NYC tried to prohibit purchase of high fructose drinks with food stamps and got shot down.

If we admit the problem of hunger has been resolved, we won't have much need to ever obsess over it (and spend ever more money to solve a solved problem, sort of like the EPA).
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Fri, 09-09-2011 - 8:53am

In one way, I can see how using food stamps to buy hot food would help the homeless.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Fri, 09-09-2011 - 8:53am
Yeah, tell that to the homeless.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Fri, 09-09-2011 - 10:18am
What makes you believe that there are no people who go hungry?

Comparing programs to fight hunger and poverty to the efforts of the EPA to provide clean air and water is more apt than you may realize. Assuming that business would have the willingness and resources to be good stewards is tantamount to putting the fox in charge of guarding the henhouse. For example, take a look at "fracking", what it entails and the threat it poses to the purity of ground water and water tables, before making assumptions about problems or "obsessions".

Oh, the irony.........

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Fri, 09-09-2011 - 2:10pm
Sometimes we need to accept victory. The EPA won, food stamps won.

Homeless can get food stamps, it seems like the in thing to do for many.

The administrative overhead could be less if we just gave every kid free lunches at all public schools (no means testing) and gave anyone who expressed interest food stamps. The reduction in overhead could cover any fraud (which seems to be an epidemic for these programs anyway).

After a federal program is a success, it should consider maintenance of it's victory, not look to ever expand.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 09-10-2011 - 9:58am
Wow. Who knew that there was no more hunger in the United States? That the environment was so carefully protected that water, air, and ecosystems were pure and untainted? Gee, we must be living in Utopia!

Oh wait. Reality check. There are still people (not necessarily the homeless alone) who struggle to make ends meet which, at times, means that they must sacrifice a meal. Did you happen to look at the issue of fracking? Until we make a shift away from dirty energy sources like fossil fuels and nuclear power, there will continue to be ongoing need for monitoring and regulation by the EPA. But I suppose that "declaring victory" would mean that laissez faire could resume.

You might want to think twice before endorsing such a position because affluence would not necessarily suffice to protect air and water quality.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Sat, 09-10-2011 - 10:33am
15% of our population gets food stamps. We spend almost 70 billion dollars a year feeding the poor. Add in all the food banks and what not, and we are awash in an epidemic of obesity.

As to fracking, as used today with horizontal deep wells, the exemption given from the clean water act doesn't make sense. The EPA should be allowed to pass reasonable regulations regarding fracking for natural gas production.

The problem with fracking is an exemption was made for it, the exemption shouldn't have been made law imo.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 09-10-2011 - 9:20pm

The last time I looked, the issue of obesity was one which did NOT preclude going hungry. It happens. My mother struggled with weight control and obesity throughout her life. When she was a child (one of five live births, her mother also had a number of stillbirths), she lived on low nutrition food. Her father, a sharecropper to all intents and purposes, worked hard but couldn't make enough to feed his family. The children were farmed out during the Depression to relatives. Food security? They didn't have it. They ate what they could get, when they could get it. She never really overcame that aspect of her upbringing--and the net result was a constant tendency to overeat.

When people fume against regulations and demand smaller government with little if any oversight, fracking should serve as the poster child for what will likely result. For those who are unaware, here's a bit of background. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/09/benjamin-grumbles-bush-epa-fracking_n_833781.html I especially liked this bit: "What came across clearly to the EPA was that the [Bush] administration did not want us to take a formal position of opposition to the exemption. It wasn't so much a pressure. It was just very clear, here is the situation: EPA officials or career staff are not to take a position of opposition or support for the legislation." There, in a nutshell, is what the future of non-regulation would look like if the "tea party" or its ilk, had their way.

Edited to insert formatting.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Sun, 09-11-2011 - 10:45am
Generally obesity means someone consumes more calories than they use. This is the case for most in the U.S. Anyone who is poor and needs food has had a program to provide needed nutrition for generations.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sun, 09-11-2011 - 3:23pm

I pointed out that obesity does not preclude hunger. When there's no certainty about the timing, quantity, or quality of one's next meal, habits can be developed which lead to obesity.

There have been food programs. They have not reached everyone. As regards the generations comment, no such programs existed during the Depression.

It is glib and facile to claim that anyone who needs food has a program to match. There are still plenty of working poor who find it challenging to provide adequate and nutritious food for their families. Even Fox News agrees: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/09/08/latino-kids-have-greater-chance-going-hungry-in-us/
According to them, "immigrant households have an unfounded fear that asking for or receiving help through SNAP could affect their immigration status." I dispute the "unfounded fear" wording. States have agitated and instigated nativist-type legislation. Small wonder that undocumented workers would shun application to ANY governmental assistance (and that same attitude makes total nonsense of the claims that illegals are draining social security, welfare, health care, etc.)

Jabberwocka

Pages