Also, isn’t snap a fixed rate per month? So if someone spent all their money on soda, the government wouldn’t bail them out to make sure they have food as the funds have already been dispersed.
Which-Watch6776 on
Also supporting the gaza genocide by taxpayer money.
arrownyc on
Poor people drink soda for the caffeine because they’re constantly exhausted from working 3 jobs.
Butt_Fly_Strike_Yeah on
Fucking crazy the reasons people will defend this lol
Edit: I mean people defending corporations and the government not allowing people a simple pleasure for no reason.
A major difference is that giving money to a poor person to buy soda winds up with the poor person *actually buying* soda. They *use* the money they’re given, getting it moving through the economy.
Giving money to an extremely wealthy person ends with… the extremely wealthy person *having more money.* They *don’t use* the money they’re given, and if they do, it just replaces money they already had and already would’ve spent. It allows them to hoard their billions, literally extracting value from the economy and figuratively burying it in the backyard.
barracuda99109 on
This used to be America. Freedom of choice and all that. People could eat what they wanted without the government getting involved. Something I learned when I was young and taught my kids – never look in someone else’s bowl unless it’s to make sure they have enough. Same goes for shopping carts
psychoacer on
Also $40 billion for Argentina
pwrof3 on
At least she didn’t try to blame a trans person somehow.
tmherbamate on
I’d rather my tax dollars provide a sugary beverage than fund another war in the Middle East
Oraxy51 on
You do not get to be pro war and pro fiscal responsibility.
HabitantDLT on
Or, for that matter, the manufacturered rage they felt when a black woman suggested healthier options than soday and other junk food.
r0addawg on
So what your saying is “aliens exist” and there are pedophiles everywhere. Got it.
Jbradsen on
She wants SNAP benefits to be used at the organic juice bar, doesn’t she? Maybe they can charge SNAP recipients like it’s cheap soda. 🙄
She’s fine with the military getting a $500 BILLION increase in *one year*, but fuck soda for poor people. Shut up and sit down, Nancy.
Potato_Stains on
Heartless cunts manufacturing bullshit to divide us while disenfranchising the vulnerable.
Eat shit forever.
DrunkCupid on
Let’s look at who is paying their salaries, driving and flying them around, and allowing them months paid off work – oh, it’s taxpayers
ObsceneOnes on
The issue is that the more restrictions you place the larger the bureaucracy to enforce it becomes which eats up any savings. Industry is also going to lobby agianst this even if soda seems like no big deal it is a precedent that can encourage more restrictions based on government mandated dietary virtue and whether a recipient “deserves” some such food or not.
It is way more cost effective to have a few restrictions as possible and let folks have the freedom to make theor own choices for good or bad. If you are actually concerned about the health of recipients you would incentivised certain *choices* over others or add in a WIC style check.
But that is not their motivation at all. This is about a belief of merit and virtue starting from the erroneous premise that if one is on assistance one is morally inferior and should be treated differently for their moral failure least you encourage more immorality.
22 Comments
Also, isn’t snap a fixed rate per month? So if someone spent all their money on soda, the government wouldn’t bail them out to make sure they have food as the funds have already been dispersed.
Also supporting the gaza genocide by taxpayer money.
Poor people drink soda for the caffeine because they’re constantly exhausted from working 3 jobs.
Fucking crazy the reasons people will defend this lol
Edit: I mean people defending corporations and the government not allowing people a simple pleasure for no reason.
And, by the way: https://www.popsci.com/health/does-sugar-cause-cavities/?
https://preview.redd.it/gshb7hie82zg1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=795cf821888344a47992f012f76ee624261718df
A major difference is that giving money to a poor person to buy soda winds up with the poor person *actually buying* soda. They *use* the money they’re given, getting it moving through the economy.
Giving money to an extremely wealthy person ends with… the extremely wealthy person *having more money.* They *don’t use* the money they’re given, and if they do, it just replaces money they already had and already would’ve spent. It allows them to hoard their billions, literally extracting value from the economy and figuratively burying it in the backyard.
This used to be America. Freedom of choice and all that. People could eat what they wanted without the government getting involved. Something I learned when I was young and taught my kids – never look in someone else’s bowl unless it’s to make sure they have enough. Same goes for shopping carts
Also $40 billion for Argentina
At least she didn’t try to blame a trans person somehow.
I’d rather my tax dollars provide a sugary beverage than fund another war in the Middle East
You do not get to be pro war and pro fiscal responsibility.
Or, for that matter, the manufacturered rage they felt when a black woman suggested healthier options than soday and other junk food.
So what your saying is “aliens exist” and there are pedophiles everywhere. Got it.
She wants SNAP benefits to be used at the organic juice bar, doesn’t she? Maybe they can charge SNAP recipients like it’s cheap soda. 🙄
https://preview.redd.it/gubu00j2c2zg1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb2ac23f6c6a7b9cc3c5a81393b7d2ea2eca5a37
I drink soda with no sugar.
“ Oh, no! Coca-Cola is going bankrupt! Everybody shell in to save this poor poor business “
https://preview.redd.it/kuc1jhzbd2zg1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5966e13c5e23a2c0ff825a941b916c71fd25c44b
Here is why.
She’s fine with the military getting a $500 BILLION increase in *one year*, but fuck soda for poor people. Shut up and sit down, Nancy.
Heartless cunts manufacturing bullshit to divide us while disenfranchising the vulnerable.
Eat shit forever.
Let’s look at who is paying their salaries, driving and flying them around, and allowing them months paid off work – oh, it’s taxpayers
The issue is that the more restrictions you place the larger the bureaucracy to enforce it becomes which eats up any savings. Industry is also going to lobby agianst this even if soda seems like no big deal it is a precedent that can encourage more restrictions based on government mandated dietary virtue and whether a recipient “deserves” some such food or not.
It is way more cost effective to have a few restrictions as possible and let folks have the freedom to make theor own choices for good or bad. If you are actually concerned about the health of recipients you would incentivised certain *choices* over others or add in a WIC style check.
But that is not their motivation at all. This is about a belief of merit and virtue starting from the erroneous premise that if one is on assistance one is morally inferior and should be treated differently for their moral failure least you encourage more immorality.