ADVERTISEMENT

SNAP

So I've noticed an interesting thing when grocery shopping: Some items in grocery stores have little blue or green tags that means that food is eligible for whatever welfare benefit (I forget the acronym) and it's usually 1. cheap, and 2. not hydrogenized. It's always the "knock off" stuff like Best Choice or the non-name brand stuff. You can take an identical food product, and if you look at the ingredient labels of the welfare-eligible stuff and the corresponding "nice" stuff, the cheap welfare stuff isn't hydrogenated. I've seen this with canned biscuits (I fed kids canned biscuits and the hydrogenized stuff demonstrated why I can't be trusted, apparently) and a couple of other things. I dont know this, but I'll bet there's some reg that says that line of eligible foods can't be hydrogenated.

I can't see a problem with limiting assistance food to healthy, whole foods and not sugar or empty processed crap. It's cheaper and provides better nutrition. The gubmint can buy beans and greens and provide x 10 the nutrition as popsicles and chips at a fraction of the price. Hell that's just common sense imo. Processed foods industry probably disagrees...
 
  • Like
Reactions: TD_4OSU
Mmmkay lol. Your team-building diatribe immediately following this statement contradicts you.

Carry on.
Reading%20Is%20Fundamental%20Logo%20%281%29.png
 
had to take a peek at ignored content

predictably
solid dialogue goes straight to the septic tank
 
I can’t imagine that the EBT program couldn’t be suitably restricted re: where it can be used and for what types of purchases. Doing that seems like it would be more efficient and effective to me.

I think if we could apply common sense, then I would agree. However, the first time someone proposed a simple, improved litmus test process which would eliminate abusers and fraud would likely get lost in a message about reducing aid for the poor. We've politicized every action, regardless of common sense, and in that environment, I don't think simple and smart changes could get implemented. And thus we get complex, bloated, government solutions.
 
I think if we could apply common sense, then I would agree. However, the first time someone proposed a simple, improved litmus test process which would eliminate abusers and fraud would likely get lost in a message about reducing aid for the poor. We've politicized every action, regardless of common sense, and in that environment, I don't think simple and smart changes could get implemented. And thus we get complex, bloated, government solutions.

Fair point.

I still hold out hope for simple and smart changes. Maybe I’m naive. ;)
 
i wish there was a way to have kitchens open where people could get food if they were hungry

just do away with snap as we know it and feed people
 
So I've noticed an interesting thing when grocery shopping: Some items in grocery stores have little blue or green tags that means that food is eligible for whatever welfare benefit (I forget the acronym) and it's usually 1. cheap, and 2. not hydrogenized. It's always the "knock off" stuff like Best Choice or the non-name brand stuff. You can take an identical food product, and if you look at the ingredient labels of the welfare-eligible stuff and the corresponding "nice" stuff, the cheap welfare stuff isn't hydrogenated. I've seen this with canned biscuits (I fed kids canned biscuits and the hydrogenized stuff demonstrated why I can't be trusted, apparently) and a couple of other things. I dont know this, but I'll bet there's some reg that says that line of eligible foods can't be hydrogenated.

I can't see a problem with limiting assistance food to healthy, whole foods and not sugar or empty processed crap. It's cheaper and provides better nutrition. The gubmint can buy beans and greens and provide x 10 the nutrition as popsicles and chips at a fraction of the price. Hell that's just common sense imo. Processed foods industry probably disagrees...

The statements that I have bolded are incorrect. Fresh fruits and vegetables are MUCH more expensive per serving than processed foods.
 
The statements that I have bolded are incorrect. Fresh fruits and vegetables are MUCH more expensive per serving than processed foods.

big picture you gotta bottom line it with productivity and healthcare costs
 
1. cheap, and 2. not hydrogenized.

You can take an identical food product, and if you look at the ingredient labels of the welfare-eligible stuff and the corresponding "nice" stuff, the cheap welfare stuff isn't hydrogenated.
Huh?

"Hydrogenated" has to do with oil/fat. Hydrogenation caused liquid vegetable oils to become solid. It's done because hydrogenated vegetable oils are much more shelf stable than fat from animals.

Partially hydrogenated oils are semi-solid at room temp, and have been very desirable in food manufacturing because of their physical properties, but contain the the bad trans fats that result from the chemical process of partial hydrogenation (cis double bonds become trans double bonds, hence the name).

Any vegetable oil used in foods will be labeled as hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated unless it's used in its unsaturated and liquid form, in which case it's simply labeled vegetable oil. There's no difference in "brand" and "generic" food products when it comes to vegetable oil use.
 
big picture you gotta bottom line it with productivity and healthcare costs

I see what you are saying as a big picture. Yes absolutely healthy diets have impact in dollars and cents for healthcare and productivity. But the big picture I am trying to get people to see is that if the largest grocery retailer in the world cannot offer fresh fruits and vegetables at a lower per serving cost than processed foods, what on earth leads us to believe that the government has the ability to do it?
 
So you think the Trump SNAP proposal is good, great, greatest ever? Terrible, yugely bad, worst ever? I didn't actually have you in mind in my initial post on this subject, but I always enjoy your hot takes. I'm 110% against this dumbass proposal, FWIW.

It really isn't a team issue to me outside of the blatant hypocrisy of the Democrats. Reading opinions of the SNAP proposal, lots of squealing about eliminating individual choice, ignoring individual needs, and handing lots of control to the government. I find that hypocritical and dissonant given the pile of shit ACA that the Democrats gave us and rigorously cling to. The SNAP proposal does the exact same thing to the SNAP program that the ACA did for health insurance. Good for one but not the other...:rolleyes:
If we are going to provide a safety net then give people the oppty to make their own decisions. Treating people like children trains them to be children. Let Amazon and Google Express process EBT. Stupid restrictions limit access which is at the root of some of the bad choices people make.

I would extend the same philosophy across the spectrum. Rent subsidy? Get cash. WIC? Convert to cash. Gubment cheese? More cash. All the perverse rules create friction which diminshes benefits, profits those who game the system and introduce unnecessary bureaucratic noise.

As to ACA, my support is/was behind individual mandate (with defined minimum requirements) and from there let industry compete for the business.
 
i wish there was a way to have kitchens open where people could get food if they were hungry

just do away with snap as we know it and feed people

What if people can’t get to kitchens? And now you’ve gotta pay more cooks, more dishwashers, more servers, more hosts, more bussers, more managers...and find a way to get all the people there and fed.
 
Mmmkay lol. Your team-building diatribe immediately following this statement contradicts you.

Carry on.
The adults are having a conversation here. Get back to your glue eating and finger painting. If we decide to talk about Tickle Me Elmo and My Little Pony stuff we'll let you know.

bill-cosby-performs-1000x600.jpg
 
The adults are having a conversation here. Get back to your glue eating and finger painting. If we decide to talk about Tickle Me Elmo and My Little Pony stuff we'll let you know.

bill-cosby-performs-1000x600.jpg

So you think the Trump SNAP proposal is good, great, greatest ever? Terrible, yugely bad, worst ever? I didn't actually have you in mind in my initial post on this subject, but I always enjoy your hot takes.


Carry on.
 
Carry on.
Yes, adult conversation, as I pointed out. Mr. Allen even responded in adult. He's going to get a response in adult. You get finger painting because that's your speed, Brotard.

ChubbyClownCar for the fail as usual. Perennial disappointment.
 
The statements that I have bolded are incorrect. Fresh fruits and vegetables are MUCH more expensive per serving than processed foods.

Well don't move the goalpost on me, I didn't say "per serving" because that metric is meaningless. For sake of illustration:

Take 6 ounces of orange, add up the nutritional benefit and go find processed foods that have the same ballpark of nutritional content. You will buy more processed food and spend more money to get the same nutritional content. Yes, 6 ounces of popsicles or white bread will be cheaper, but nobody is "fed" with any nutrition that is meaningful.

Huh?

"Hydrogenated" has to do with oil/fat. Hydrogenation caused liquid vegetable oils to become solid. It's done because hydrogenated vegetable oils are much more shelf stable than fat from animals.

Partially hydrogenated oils are semi-solid at room temp, and have been very desirable in food manufacturing because of their physical properties, but contain the the bad trans fats that result from the chemical process of partial hydrogenation (cis double bonds become trans double bonds, hence the name).

Any vegetable oil used in foods will be labeled as hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated unless it's used in its unsaturated and liquid form, in which case it's simply labeled vegetable oil. There's no difference in "brand" and "generic" food products when it comes to vegetable oil use.

Huh? Why are you mansplaining hydrogenation? Next time you're in a grocery store look at pillsbury brand biscuits -- they're hydrogenated. Then look at the cheap knock-off competitor. The cheap knock-off is probably not (Wal mart and Buy 4 Less anyhow) It's not a matter of opinion -- if the labeling is accurate it is what it is. It's that way with lots of processed foods.
 
Well don't move the goalpost on me, I didn't say "per serving" because that metric is meaningless. For sake of illustration:

Take 6 ounces of orange, add up the nutritional benefit and go find processed foods that have the same ballpark of nutritional content. You will buy more processed food and spend more money to get the same nutritional content. Yes, 6 ounces of popsicles or white bread will be cheaper, but nobody is "fed" with any nutrition that is meaningful.

I am sooooo sorry. I did not see where you defined "cost." I just assumed that a rational person would be talking about cost per serving. You are correct a box of Popsicles is more expensive than a carrot. Please continue...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ostatedchi
Huh? Why are you mansplaining hydrogenation? Next time you're in a grocery store look at pillsbury brand biscuits -- they're hydrogenated. Then look at the cheap knock-off competitor. The cheap knock-off is probably not (Wal mart and Buy 4 Less anyhow) It's not a matter of opinion -- if the labeling is accurate it is what it is. It's that way with lots of processed foods.
I'm mansplaining it to you because you aren't making any sense. As in none, zero, nada.

The only ingredient in biscuits that might be "hydrogenated" is oil. And no, the hydrogenation of the oil isn't based on brand vs non-brand name. Whether the oil is unsaturated (non-hydrogenated), partially hydrogenated, or saturated (completely hydrogenated) is entirely dependent on its application as an ingredient.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT