The US Government, Food Stamps, and the Soda Industry

[Paul der Krake]

Isn't there just a master list of barcodes that are allowed or disallowed that the stores pull from a centralized location regularly? I don't really see how adding or removing a couple UPCs to a system adds any real complexity.

[Gin1984]

Isn't there just a master list of barcodes that are allowed or disallowed that the stores pull from a centralized location regularly? I don't really see how adding or removing a couple UPCs to a system adds any real complexity.

No, there really is not.  The cashier is suppose to know if the item is acceptable, and some, very few large grocery stores will tag grocery items vs non, but that is up to the store.  For example, you can buy seeds with SNAP.  Is that food, well according to SNAP yes but according to most people no.  Same with bottled water, it is food because there may be a need for it.  It would cost more to set up a system like you think exists.

[cpa cat]

Isn't there just a master list of barcodes that are allowed or disallowed that the stores pull from a centralized location regularly? I don't really see how adding or removing a couple UPCs to a system adds any real complexity.

Also, new items come and go from grocery stores on a daily basis. If there was a master list, food producers would need to apply to the administration to get their item on the list. Meanwhile, items on the list would need to be periodically reviewed to ensure they still meet the restrictions of SNAP. Simply creating and maintaining such a list would be a monumental and expensive bureaucratic task.

[accolay]

I'll double down: Fuck soda. Smiley face :)

Coffee is not food, how many people also want to ban that from SNAP?  How would you feel if someone tried to keep your coffee from you?  I don't personally drink coffee, I drink soda for the caffeine instead.  If for some reason I needed to go on food stamps, I'd be buying soda because it helps me work.

I don't drink coffee. Not sure I would feel bad about not allowing that either. Did you know that you can buy K cups with food stamps? Talk about another thing that should be banned, a la bottled water, outright for the pollution they cause.

[Gin1984]

I'll double down: Fuck soda. Smiley face :)

Coffee is not food, how many people also want to ban that from SNAP?  How would you feel if someone tried to keep your coffee from you?  I don't personally drink coffee, I drink soda for the caffeine instead.  If for some reason I needed to go on food stamps, I'd be buying soda because it helps me work.

I don't drink coffee. Not sure I would feel bad about not allowing that either. Did you know that you can buy K cups with food stamps? Talk about another thing that should be banned, a la bottled water, outright for the pollution they cause.

I'm sure the people of Flint and other cities with water problems should be allowed bottled water even on food stamps.  There are too many situations which cannot be planned for without a large fiscal outlay that make certain options useful.  Because we are not going to get a large enough benefit for the fiscal outlay, I don't think it is worth cutting things from food stamps. 

[Vanguards and Lentils]

Step 1. Pay for soda
Step 2. Pay for dialysis
Step 3. Pay for amputation
Step 4. Pay for ICU stay

But who pays for the coffin? Just drink diet soda damnit!

I used to drink one, maybe two diet cokes a week. I finally gave up soda because my doctor was nagging me so much to stop drinking diet and go to regular. Multiple doctors told me that.

Is there a reason you think it is healthier?

Odd for multiple doctors to have that opinion, given that there's little/no evidence to support it. Has there ever been a single study that found negative health effects from drinking one or two diet cokes a week, which were cured or prevented by switching to one or two regular cokes a week? I have yet to see it.

One or two of anything save rat poison or meth won't hurt you much. If it's "food" of any kind at all you can probably safely eat it a couple times a week unless you have an allergy.

Unfortunately MDs are not biochemists or nutritionists, and they are often horribly misinformed about even pretty basic stuff.

-W

Oooh! I know a little about this topic. Indigestible foods (like artificial sweeteners but also fibers) often can be fermented (eaten) by the bacteria in our gut. Our gut microbiome is really, really complicated and the number of organisms in it outnumbers the number of human cells in our own body. We are learning more and more about the roles they have evolved to play in our bodies. While we don't yet know what a "good" gut looks like, there is at least one measure, basically a high ratio of bacteria in one genus to those of another, which seems "bad" because people with metabolic syndrome (diabetes and the like) have it. It is hard to measure the effect of foods on our gut microbiota because you would have to control everything that the subjects ate. They can do this with farm animals and rats, and in rats it seems that artificial sweeteners alter this ratio towards the bad, "metabolic syndrome"-y direction. This might be because it is utilized more by the "bad" bacteria which leads them to outcompete the good ones.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweeteners-may-change-our-gut-bacteria-in-dangerous-ways/


So yeah... I would hold off on drinking diet cokes, because back when they concluded artificial sweeteners were safe, looking at the gut microbiome wasn't even a thing yet. It's still going to be a matter of time before we see recent research become part of common medical advice, and doctors can't be expected to keep up with all of that. My opinion is that you can't get "something for nothing" in your food choices.

[accolay]

I'll double down: Fuck soda. Smiley face :)

Coffee is not food, how many people also want to ban that from SNAP?  How would you feel if someone tried to keep your coffee from you?  I don't personally drink coffee, I drink soda for the caffeine instead.  If for some reason I needed to go on food stamps, I'd be buying soda because it helps me work.

I don't drink coffee. Not sure I would feel bad about not allowing that either. Did you know that you can buy K cups with food stamps? Talk about another thing that should be banned, a la bottled water, outright for the pollution they cause.

I'm sure the people of Flint and other cities with water problems should be allowed bottled water even on food stamps.  There are too many situations which cannot be planned for without a large fiscal outlay that make certain options useful.  Because we are not going to get a large enough benefit for the fiscal outlay, I don't think it is worth cutting things from food stamps.

Well, sure, who could argue against Flint and bottled water? But doesn't change the idea about soda. It actually points to collecting and spending tax to improve our infrastructure. Flint is embarrassing on so many levels living in a rich country like the United States.

On a side note about soda though...when I was on the ship, somehow they got JP-5 (jet fuel) in the potable water....the showers smelled like a gas station.
Anyway, I drank soda for the rest of the cruise. Probably was chronically dehydrated.

[Metric Mouse]

I'll double down: Fuck soda. Smiley face :)

Coffee is not food, how many people also want to ban that from SNAP?  How would you feel if someone tried to keep your coffee from you?  I don't personally drink coffee, I drink soda for the caffeine instead.  If for some reason I needed to go on food stamps, I'd be buying soda because it helps me work.

I don't drink coffee. Not sure I would feel bad about not allowing that either. Did you know that you can buy K cups with food stamps? Talk about another thing that should be banned, a la bottled water, outright for the pollution they cause.

Yes, now SNAP should combat pollution.  If that is the goal of the program, then I suppose a budget increase would make sense. If we expand the program from "temporarily assist low income people on acquiring food" to "force participants to eat only healthy food with minimal environmental impacts" there would need to be some changes.

[accolay]

I'll double down: Fuck soda. Smiley face :)

Coffee is not food, how many people also want to ban that from SNAP?  How would you feel if someone tried to keep your coffee from you?  I don't personally drink coffee, I drink soda for the caffeine instead.  If for some reason I needed to go on food stamps, I'd be buying soda because it helps me work.

I don't drink coffee. Not sure I would feel bad about not allowing that either. Did you know that you can buy K cups with food stamps? Talk about another thing that should be banned, a la bottled water, outright for the pollution they cause.

Yes, now SNAP should combat pollution.  If that is the goal of the program, then I suppose a budget increase would make sense. If we expand the program from "temporarily assist low income people on acquiring food" to "force participants to eat only healthy food with minimal environmental impacts" there would need to be some changes.

Sorry that was your take from my aside. But now that you mention it, why not institute more sustainability programs into that too? Great idea.

[Metric Mouse]

Sorry that was your take from my aside. But now that you mention it, why not institute more sustainability programs into that too? Great idea.

I've got no problem with that. Hopefully the program will force persons to plant trees to off-set some of their carbon usage, and encourage low income persons to increase the energy efficiency of their homes and reduce fossil fuel use overall. No reason not to.

[Hotstreak]

Folks have been bringing up examples of non-soda items in their arguments against excluding soda.  Here, and other places, some common ones are:
- Coffee
- Tea
- Bottled Water
- Prime Rib
- Lobster


Each of those is very different than soda, and the arguments for and against their inclusion are different.  Soda is uniquely bad for reasons which have been discussed here already.  It is such a known problem that governments around the world have tried to curtail consumption.  I believe it was New York that tried to limit soda sizes, and France very recently banned free-refills on soda.


Soda is a pure vice, with massive negative consequences on the individual and societal level, and no positive offset.  "But if feels nice when I drink it!" is the only reason to support it's consumption, is that correct?  Certainly people can spend unrestricted dollars on whatever they want, .. SNAP is restricted funds as a stop-gap to prevent starvation or nutritional deficiency, and I just don't see how soda works to achieve that goal.

[Metric Mouse]

Folks have been bringing up examples of non-soda items in their arguments against excluding soda.  Here, and other places, some common ones are:
- Coffee
- Tea
- Bottled Water
- Prime Rib
- Lobster


Each of those is very different than soda, and the arguments for and against their inclusion are different.  Soda is uniquely bad for reasons which have been discussed here already.  It is such a known problem that governments around the world have tried to curtail consumption.  I believe it was New York that tried to limit soda sizes, and France very recently banned free-refills on soda.


Soda is a pure vice, with massive negative consequences on the individual and societal level, and no positive offset.  "But if feels nice when I drink it!" is the only reason to support it's consumption, is that correct?  Certainly people can spend unrestricted dollars on whatever they want, .. SNAP is restricted funds as a stop-gap to prevent starvation or nutritional deficiency, and I just don't see how soda works to achieve that goal.

Soda can be an effective source of carb-equivilents during a hypoglycemic event. There are a non-zero number of positive uses for it.

[accolay]

Soda can be an effective source of carb-equivilents during a hypoglycemic event. There are a non-zero number of positive uses for it.

Yes, true. But one could also eat a banana. I think you're reaching.

[I'm a red panda]

Soda can be an effective source of carb-equivilents during a hypoglycemic event. There are a non-zero number of positive uses for it.

Yes, true. But one could also eat a banana. I think you're reaching.

Bananas don't stay fresh for long periods of time. Having them available for emergency 'what-ifs' could be difficult.
(I carry glucose tablets, but our office actually has soda stocked specifically for this reason as part of their emergency plan. The office manager would ahve to rotate bananas much more frequently than she has to rotate sodas.)

[accolay]

To clarify my point regarding bananas: although soda can be used for acute hypoglycemia it's not enough of an argument for me that SNAP should allow soda. There are a lot of things one can use for some low blood sugar.

All I'm saying is that I still have not heard an argument that would convince me that SNAP should allow soda.

If the rule doesn't change it wont be the end of the world, but I still think soda is no good.

[Gin1984]

To clarify my point regarding bananas: although soda can be used for acute hypoglycemia it's not enough of an argument for me that SNAP should allow soda. There are a lot of things one can use for some low blood sugar.

All I'm saying is that I still have not heard an argument that would convince me that SNAP should allow soda.

If the rule doesn't change it wont be the end of the world, but I still think soda is no good.

Because there would be an increase cost for a non-sufficient benefit. 

[SomedayStache]

I see this along the same lines as the experiment where some states tried drug-testing their welfare recipients.  The drug testing ended up costing taxpayers more money than it saved.

[Metric Mouse]

To clarify my point regarding bananas: although soda can be used for acute hypoglycemia it's not enough of an argument for me that SNAP should allow soda. There are a lot of things one can use for some low blood sugar.

All I'm saying is that I still have not heard an argument that would convince me that SNAP should allow soda.

If the rule doesn't change it wont be the end of the world, but I still think soda is no good.

Because there would be an increase cost for a non-sufficient benefit.

That argument has already been brought up. It was not deemed sufficient.

[Hotstreak]

Folks have been bringing up examples of non-soda items in their arguments against excluding soda.  Here, and other places, some common ones are:
- Coffee
- Tea
- Bottled Water
- Prime Rib
- Lobster


Each of those is very different than soda, and the arguments for and against their inclusion are different.  Soda is uniquely bad for reasons which have been discussed here already.  It is such a known problem that governments around the world have tried to curtail consumption.  I believe it was New York that tried to limit soda sizes, and France very recently banned free-refills on soda.


Soda is a pure vice, with massive negative consequences on the individual and societal level, and no positive offset.  "But if feels nice when I drink it!" is the only reason to support it's consumption, is that correct?  Certainly people can spend unrestricted dollars on whatever they want, .. SNAP is restricted funds as a stop-gap to prevent starvation or nutritional deficiency, and I just don't see how soda works to achieve that goal.

Soda can be an effective source of carb-equivilents during a hypoglycemic event. There are a non-zero number of positive uses for it.

Damn-it, another reason to hate diabetes!


I would argue that this specific use of soda is as a medication, not as a food (there is some overlap there, but the intent is clearly to manage a medical condition).  Medicine is not covered by SNAP at this time.

[teen persuasion]

Isn't there just a master list of barcodes that are allowed or disallowed that the stores pull from a centralized location regularly? I don't really see how adding or removing a couple UPCs to a system adds any real complexity.

No, there really is not.  The cashier is suppose to know if the item is acceptable, and some, very few large grocery stores will tag grocery items vs non, but that is up to the store.  For example, you can buy seeds with SNAP.  Is that food, well according to SNAP yes but according to most people no.  Same with bottled water, it is food because there may be a need for it.  It would cost more to set up a system like you think exists.

All the stores around here have computerized systems.  They track which items are taxable and which are not - I've discovered there's some pretty arcane definitions of what is food (not taxed).  Salted peanuts and honey are not taxed, but honey roasted peanuts ARE taxed.  Apparently candy is excluded from the tax exempt status of food, and honey roasted peanuts are on the list of candy items.  It's clearly coded on my receipt.

Another set of arcane rules grocery stores have programmed in their register systems here: bottle deposits.  Pop and beer bottles have a deposit charged at checkout, but other bottles like juice do not.  Before the proliferation of energy drinks and bottled water, the distinction was codified as "carbonated beverages" required a deposit.  So the odd can of iced tea or lemonade in a variety case of pop had no deposit, while all the otherwise identical cans of pop were charged a deposit.  When water bottles became a growing problem, a deposit was added to them, even though they are clearly not carbonated.  Confused yet?  The grocery store scanner isn't - it is programmed to handle deposits and taxes properly.

I haven't used SNAP, but I'd have to guess that eligible for SNAP is merely another code applied to items in every grocery store here, reflected on the receipt.

[Paul der Krake]

Yeah I have a hard time believing that cashiers are supposed to know what's SNAP eligible and what isn't, when every store already has a system to compute tax depending on the item category.

Willing to be proven wrong, if somebody can find an authoritative source.

[teen persuasion]

Yeah I have a hard time believing that cashiers are supposed to know what's SNAP eligible and what isn't, when every store already has a system to compute tax depending on the item category.

Willing to be proven wrong, if somebody can find an authoritative source.

Umm, self-checkouts?  I scan the item, the system does the rest.  I don't think about whether I need to add taxes or deposits or sale discounts, they are automatic.

Of course, I seem to be the beta tester for our Aldi on Sunday mornings when the new sales go into place.  Nearly every week I find some discount that didn't go thru automatically.  The cashier gets on her walkie talkie to tell a manager to fix it in the computer.  It's usually a local price change - discount on overstocked item almost out of date.

[MoonLiteNite]

Just another reason taking money from some people by force and giving it to others is never a good idea.
Now, tax payers want to judge and say "no you can't get soda"
Well had they been given money, they wouldn't be drinking tax paid for soda :(

[accolay]

Just another reason taking money from some people by force and giving it to others is never a good idea.
Now, tax payers want to judge and say "no you can't get soda"
Well had they been given money, they wouldn't be drinking tax paid for soda :(

I don't consider taxes the equivalent to robbery. Just think soda's awful.

[Metric Mouse]

Yeah I have a hard time believing that cashiers are supposed to know what's SNAP eligible and what isn't, when every store already has a system to compute tax depending on the item category.

Willing to be proven wrong, if somebody can find an authoritative source.

Yes, I think Gin's information may be a little bit outdated. How else would EBT card users go through self-check out?