There is a problem: the poor on food stamps are obese.
Apparently, there is some research claiming that soda and potato chips are the two worst foods for your weight.
So why not say if the government is going to pay for your food, we will restrict what you can buy. You are not allowed to use food stamps to buy alcohol, so why not some other types of drinks that are deemed wasteful?
Well, NYC tried, but the Obama administration said no. Possibly, they just don't want to discourage people from going on food stamps.
A "burden that might be placed on city food retailers"? How is that possible? If consumers change what they want to buy for any reason, why wouldn't food stores start stocking the new products that they want to buy?
Here is the weird thing. The Obama administration has no problems restricting what Americans in general eat, but that they don't want to restrict what those who the get their food costs paid by the government eat. Examples:
1) Salt:
2) the FDA's New Calorie Count Regulations
There is, on the other hand, a lot of evidence of obesity among the poor; their obesity rate is estimated at 36%, and the obesity rate among poor children seems to be about twice the rate among non-poor children. The poor people are eating more calories than they need. . . .
Apparently, there is some research claiming that soda and potato chips are the two worst foods for your weight.
So why not say if the government is going to pay for your food, we will restrict what you can buy. You are not allowed to use food stamps to buy alcohol, so why not some other types of drinks that are deemed wasteful?
Well, NYC tried, but the Obama administration said no. Possibly, they just don't want to discourage people from going on food stamps.
While sharing the goal of reducing obesity, an official with the nation's food stamp program said in a letter Friday addressed to the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance that the USDA had concerns about the plan's "potential viability and effectiveness."
Jessica Shahin, associate administrator of the program, wrote that the proposal lacked clear product eligibility guidelines, didn't take into account the burden that might be placed on city food retailers and failed to put forward a credible design for evaluating the effect on obesity and health. . . .
A "burden that might be placed on city food retailers"? How is that possible? If consumers change what they want to buy for any reason, why wouldn't food stores start stocking the new products that they want to buy?
Here is the weird thing. The Obama administration has no problems restricting what Americans in general eat, but that they don't want to restrict what those who the get their food costs paid by the government eat. Examples:
1) Salt:
The FDA, acting on a recommendation to be made by a task force of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, is about to take the unprecedented step of regulating the salt content of processed foods. . . .
2) the FDA's New Calorie Count Regulations
Obama Administration rejects trial experiment in NYC that would have temporarily stopped using Food Stamps on SweetenedSodas
4/
5
Oleh
abudzar
