RFK Jr. says he’s working to stop food stamps buying soda and candy

There was time in my life when most of my food came from a public pantry. I know it's not the same as stamps, bit same principle.
Anyway, birthday rolls around; didn't think anything of it cuz I was in the "it's just another day..." phase of life, and even if I wanted to do something for it, I wouldn't have been able to afford it. Roll up to the pantry for that week's pickup, and they break out a fucking cake and a hand-written birthday card! Nothing crazy - maybe 6-inch diameter, enough for the wife and I to split. But that shit pulled my ass right out of a depression spell like nothing else came close to before or since.
When I finally got a reliable income coming in and paid off the critical stuff and got a little bit of savings, my first 'splurge' was a $1k donation to that pantry with a note saying that their assistance pretty much single-handedly saved me from homelessness and probably from suicide; and enabled me to take the steps I needed to get the job I have now and ultimately become self sufficient.
Food is more than just nutrients; and junk food is more than just food that's junk.
And pantries are bad ass. If anyone reading this is struggling and not yet using one, GO SEE IF YOU'RE ELIGIBLE! Many people are resistant to ask for help prior to hitting absolute rock bottom, but a little help now (even if you only-kind-of need it) could save you from needing a LOT of help later. They're also an awesome source of info on local resources - whatever your unique situation is, they can probably point you in the right direction to start getting shit under control.
...I should make another donation - shit's extra fucked nowadays.
- Thanks for sharing, I feel like people forget we're all just people at the end of the day.
- I bet it would feel very different if you just used food stamps to buy your own cake
  
  Probably, but then that would have enabled me to give my wife that or vice versa. We don't have kids, but a lot of food stamp recipients do - same spiel.
  And even outside of special events, maybe that can of soda with dinner is the carrot-on-a-stick that gets a person through an otherwise miserable day cuz, shocker: poverty fucking sucks.
  That's the cool thing about not having arbitrary restrictions on shit like this: people are free to handle their own unique situation at their own discretion, including whether or not junk food is worth including in that week's budget.

Let them buy what they want you damn Nazi.
- It's not what every snap user wants. It's just that garbage products are calorie dense and need little to no preparation, and those things absolutely matter when working several jobs or being homeless and convincing someone to let you use their address because a permanent address is necessary.
  
  More calories per dollar for things like rice beans pasta. It's a bit more complicated than that.
  Convenience is king when you are constantly burned out and sleep deprived and "just need something good enough and easy"
  
  Eh, can you get a bag of equivalent volume of apples for the same as a bottle of coca cola?
  Same amount of sugar, one is considerably healthier.
- Next it will no sugary cereal, just oats and gruel for the peasantry.
  
  "Ingredients only, no finished products. You want to eat? Work for it!"
  
  I haven't had sugar cereal in a decade. I don't know how you could ever prefer them over oat flakes
  
  Why spoil them? Weevil-infested hardtack, that's all they deserve.
  Obligatory /s

Gotta stop those poors from having any joy. Only misery will suffice.
- Why is it in our interest to pay for food that causes obesity and health issues?
  
  I want you to consider what you would do if you had $300 per month to buy food. How often would you use any of that money to buy soda and candy? Would you do it on a regular? Or would you do it just for special occasions to lift your spirits when things were bad?
  This isn't about health this is about punishing the poor for being poor.
  
  Why do you consider what someone else eats to be a matter of "your interest", at all?
  Do you think your boss...who pays your salary...should be allowed to dictate what you spend it on? Is it in "their interest" to make sure you're spending their money on "the right things"?
  
  If the concern was really about health, they'd be regulating maximum sugar % in all sodas and candies, not banning them to the poor.
  
  What if it's not happening that much and this is just a shoe horn to get legislation to destroy benefits? What if most states already remove some purchases from the EBT/food stamp total?
  It's like drug testing for welfare. It's sounds like a good idea until you realize it costs millions, produces almost no results and the government performing said drug tests can't be bothered to not do it in s corrupt way?
  
  Because giving more people reasons to enjoy life benefits us all. Also, fuck rich people. We should all be clamoring to take as much from them as possible to improve the lives of those who have less.
  You can drink soda and eat candy without becoming obese or having health issues as a result.
  
  Then start with ag subsidies. But that's if you're serious about fixing the problem and don't just want to punish poor people for being poor.
  
  No food individually "causes" obesity and health issues. Overuse of some foods can. If we want people to be healthier, maybe we should offer free accessible cooking classes, or (gasp) not put people in the position where they have to work so much to pay the bills they don't have time to prepare healthy food.
  All this does is punish people who are already in shit circumstances. Maybe they want a treat for their kid, maybe they want to have a fun movie night, maybe it's none of your business?

I used to live in a kinda poor area. Lots of people on some sort of program. And that program had really restrictive rules about what you can and cannot buy. For example, you could buy Skippy peanut butter but not Skippy light peanut butter (whatever that is). It caused great confusion for the people who needed food, huge amounts of labor for the poor grocery person, and a long wait for the other shoppers in line - just so the government can save a few cents. Unbelievable.
- WIC most likely
  
  Yeah WIC is very restricted. Food stamps is more like most things that are groceries but not hot ready to serve items.
- Yep. I used to work in a store where people would ask if some specific food or drink could be paid for by food stamps/EBT all the time. I was like, idk, lets run it and see. 50/50 chance you can buy anything, and no explanation for what's covered and what isn't. It sucks to tell someone they can't buy their favorite food for their birthday.

Uhhhhhh... It already does. Snap changed from actual stamps to a digital card that declines any purchase that does not fit in the categories that justify a snap purchase. I worked a couple of years ago with a non-profit org that helped the needy, and I distinctly remember being at walmart with someone was buying groceries, when they used their snap card the payment covered everything but junk food and the person I was with had to pay with their own money for the rest of their things.
In short RFK is working on stopping something that never has ever existed.
- Which sort of sums this whole regime's work up, doesn't it?
- Because that's not the goal, i can almost guarantee it. Every time they try to "fix" something they are trying to break it and privatize if possible.

These same assholes were the ones freaking out when Michelle Obama was trying to get healthier food for school lunches and making up shit like "Turning Cookie Monster into Veggie Monster" to get mad at.
- Many right-wingers don't care about words or truth or consistency. They just want to hurt their out-group.
  
  Many right-wingers ... just want to hurt their out-group.
  You are right, it's just that there's a weird embedded quality to this statement.

Heaven forbid someone enjoys their life. I'd rather pay for this than billionaire tax cuts and the bloated military budget.
- We can do both. A stopped clock is right twice per day. It would be a good idea, except that you already cant buy junk food with food stamps....

It's like painting over murals at detention centers where kids are housed... with gray paint. It definitely sends a message.
- No, it's like removing soda machines from school cafeterias. It's a good idea. It's so good, in fact, that you already can't buy junk food with food stamps!!

I thought it was already blocked? 🤔
Huh, guess not.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items
Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:
Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes, or tobacco
Vitamins, medicines, and supplements. If an item has a Supplement Facts label, it is considered a supplement and is not eligible for SNAP purchase.
Live animals (except shellfish, fish removed from water, and animals slaughtered prior to pick-up from the store).
Foods that are hot at the point of sale
Any nonfood items such as:
Pet foods
Cleaning supplies, paper products, and other household supplies.
Hygiene items, cosmetics

Let's have a writing contest, you guys. Now that a Trump appointee is against it, let's all think up reasons for why subsidized high-fructose corn syrup sold as food is not only a good thing but actually a basic human right.
- Then restrict it for everyone, not just poor people.
  
  I'm not saying we should ban these things, I'm just saying we shouldn't be subsidizing them and purchasing them with public funds. If poor people want to buy this stuff with their own money that's their right.
- It’s a nanny state. Sure, candy and soda is bad for you, and america has an obesity problem, but I’m against this.
  Just give people money and let them buy what they want / need.
  I’m tired of pedophiles and gay homophobes shaming poor people for having a soda and a candy bar. (Edit: not my intention to associate lgbtq with pedophiles, but it seems a lot of homophobes are into it. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, but republifuckers need to mind their own business in general and stop judging others for the behaviors they are ashamed to participate in themselves.)
  
  It’s a nanny state.
  I mean yea, but so is giving you money for food. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the food you get with it to be nutritious.
  
  At a minimum they should talk about how they will move to providing healthy foods as they cut the bad stuff. Moving to unhealthy food to none, seems like a bad move. Like wtf
  
  Alright, how about alcohol and cigarettes?

- Even ignoring that, just because you are on food stamps doesn't mean you don't deserve some indulgences.
  
  No one ever deserves indulgences. The whole point of an indulgence is that it can't be deserved. Otherwise it would just be a normal reward.

Oh good, we'll have slightly less sugar-related inflammation while we all fucking die of bird flu

What goon-affiliated product will they be able to purchase with food stamps instead? Lee Greenwood Bibles? My Pillows?

Sugar industry is gonna Kennedy this dude.
- I would raise a rootbeer to that.

~~ITT: "You don't deserve candy if you're poor"~~ sorry that was mean
Like, yeah, its bad for me. I was hooked on it as a kid and I'm trying to cut back except so many people in my life eats shit-tons of sugar. I'm working on it, but I do not need the government telling me what I can and can't eat just because I'm poor. I dunno, that seems mean. Maybe RFK should work on just banning them all together (unless you're rich ofc). If its bad for me, its bad for you, too.

This is the kind of BS that leads to you being unable to buy warm food with food programs. A box of fried or baked chicken costs $26 for 24 pieces, which can feed me for 2-3 days, saving me money in the long run. A hot pizza is $13. A rotisserie from CostCo is about $6.
People should make the decisions about their food stamps, because they are familiar with how to best feed themselves. Your typical WalMart employee has to rely on food stamps and other benefits, because WalMart doesn't want to pay a living wage. An initiative like RFK's is designed to punish the poor for failing to be born with a silver spoon.
This isn't about helping people to make better decisions, it is about depriving them the good things in life.

Buying soda and candy. I can get behind a worm for that one. Just ban those things already. But I would step on that worm right after. The guy is clearly crazy. And too old. I wouldn't want anyone to suffer from whatever self inflicted speech impediment this guy has.
- Ever try to water down a fountain drink with carbonated water? You can add 300% soda water and it still tastes sweet. But that overwhelming level of sweetness seems to stimulate appetite. And it's one of many reasons why manufacturers use high fructose instead of table sugar. It's slightly sweeter and more stimulating.
  
  The products are designed to trick our bodies into eating and drinking more. Super sweet spikes the insulin but has nothing to digest so you're hungry and now it's salty snack time making you thirsty for more soda. Consume.

A chunk of my clients from low socio economic backgrounds live on soda and candy. It's how they're raised, a massive packet of crisps, can of coke and chocolate bar is their dinner. Realistically they'll just sell their stamps to buy the food THEY want.
The result of this is parents will sell stamps, have less to feed kids and kids will go short.
- That's horrifying. That's not a dinner.
  
  I know. It's how so many of them live though

RFK jr is a broken clock that became sentient.

The problem is that there is no will of trying to educate the recipients to help them choose healthier snacks. There will be a way for the snap recipients to get what they want through loopholes. Putting a band aid on the problem of poverty obesity won't solve it.

Interesting, why not start branding and labeling better that more products that have high content of X

Truly the land of the free, lads.

But they're the most efficient dollars-to-calories ratio... Cheapest way to feed the hungry lol
- They are not. You're thinking of staple foods, like rice and dry beans. Have you seen the cost of a bag of Doritos lately???
- Here in Canada, it's half the cost for rice. I don't imagine it's that different in the US (at least, pre-tariffs). Assuming 2500Calories per day, I can get a year's worth of Calories from rice for about 500CAD while it would cost me 1k CAD for the same on soda (calculated based on $1/2L of Crush cream soda).

Problem is a lot of shitty food is cheaper than good food.
Also, if you grew up around shitty food you don’t know how to prep good food from whole, cheaper fresh or bulk foods.

"Let them eat roadkill."
Edited in quotes, because people aren't seeing it.
- Alaska does this (admittedly it's a separate system from snap) and most communities seem happy with the system.
  
  That's ... accurate.

Someone has to police that though guess RFK jr won't be picking up that cost.

Oh goodie, Roadkill Fucking Kennedy is deciding what poor people can and can't drink.

Where’s those fucking DOGE cunts when there’s real waste?
Look, I don’t want to subsidize people’s beetus diets, but, fuck me, do we not have better shit to do with our time and money?
Every single republican can fuck off and die.

Sorry Timmy, the Easter bunny could only afford some potatoes this year.

a stopped clock is right twice a day
- People on food stamps aren't buying these things because it's fun, but because it's cheap, easy calories because they're homeless or working three jobs and don't have the time to cook real food. The clock is not right here.
  
  Having grown up in poor areas, people tend to buy things because those are the things they're used to buying. They are generally not making rational choices about optimal calories per dollar spent or best nutritional value per hour of labor expended in cooking. My neighbors almost all drank, a large percentage did drugs, they were often quite impulsive about purchases, and few of them planned ahead very effectively. My mother got some neighbor ladies together to do monthly bulk shopping at a nearby big-city farmer's market, saved us a ton of money, but nobody would have done it if she hadn't talked them into it.
  Real human beings are often not rational utility-maximizers. Explanations that assume that they are, are going to be deficient.
  
  No, they are buying them because they want to. I used to buy milk and cereal. It has sugar, but it's 3 grams per serving instead of like 15.
  Don't tell me you don't have time to pour a bowl of milk
- Those things are unhealthy, but restricting them is policing what poor people eat. It's stigmatizing. Also, people will still buy these things because they're addictive. So they'll be paying out of pocket for it rather than using their SNAP benefits. It's a lose-lose.
  
  Yeah, if the goal was actually to make people eat healthier, he'd be trying to limit the availability of those items to everyone, not just poor people.
  
  I dont get your argument. How's it stigmatizing? Why should someone be able to spend it all on energy drinks and starburst? Just doesn't make sense.
  I support aggressively increasing food stamps for anyone in need. But I'd also support aggressive regulation, like no candy and shit. It just makes sense to me but maybe I'm missing something.
- Yeah I absolutely hate this guy, but agree with this. I don't know it just seems so logical. Others arguments replying to you aren't convincing at all.
- How much of the average food stamp budget goes to soda and candy?
  If you can't answer this, then it would be foolish of you to think it's a problem.
  Is it foolish of you?
  
  According to the USDA, soda represents the most purchased item on food stamps. Candy represents the 11th most purchased item. Very few of the items on the top 20 list are very healthy. Vegetables and fruits are missing from the most altogether, even though these require no prep work before eating.