comment: >
  
  
  Again, what are the ethics of subsidizing disease?
  
  Not every person who receives EBT food assistance is obese or even overweight. Not all of them live in areas where they have easy access to affordable healthy food (your aforementioned food deserts — where are they going to buy the food they're allowed to buy?). Not all of them have the time or even skills to prepare healthy meals. 
  The fact of the matter is that you're not entitled to know the individual circumstances of every single recipient of welfare, and when you come up with these conditions for welfare recipients  to be allowed to use said welfare, you are only tailoring them to your preconceived, radically incomplete notions of who those recipients are.
context: This concept is way overdue at schools. School meals need to nourish kids, not line the pockets of fructose companies. >
  
  But ketchup is a vegetable? >
  
  No, the vegetable was Reagan. >
  
  Yep. That tracks. >
  
  Those pizza slices in the thumbnail aren’t nearly rectangular enough. >
  
  Yes, also GWB started giving her candy at every opportunity. >
  
  Good. 
  Today for breakfast my preschoolers got a honey bun, a package of craisins, orange juice, and a carton of milk. 
  This isn't even the worst breakfast they've had. >
  
  Good grief. The orange juice alone is a sugar bomb. >
  
  It's all good. They'll get diagnosed with ADHD and the Adderall will take care of it. >
  
  I'm not fun at parties, and that's not even remotely close to how ADHD manifests. 
  But they will add onto the trend of insulin resistance in  children. >
  
  I think it is more of a comment on how kids eat a bunch of sugar then get hyper, teacher reports the kid as "disruptive", after a few rounds of this parents take kid to doc, tell the doc what the teachers say, doc writes an rx for Ritalin. >
  
  Yeah that was the idea but sugar doesn't cause hyperactivity. >
  
  Ketchup is a vegetable! 
  Go fight Ronald Reagan's grave if you doubt me. >
  
  "Big government taking away our freedoms" - Conservatives probably >
  
  Sugar is the worst part of the American diet. >
  
  Thank you! Tired of seeing sugar candies , Cheezeits, sugar syrup fruit packs and what not. What’s wrong in giving kids a simple banana or apple to eat! Why all this sugary garbage in public schools. >
  
  
  why
  
  Money >
  
  One of the easiest scams to spot and all of our addicted asses can't or won't see it. We love our sugar and salt enough to die for them. >
  
  Let me guess that the School Nutrition Association is gonna fight this tooth and nail. >
  
  Good. Stop trying to turn kids into fruit bats. >
  
  
  trying to turn kids into fruit bats
  
  Globalist Man-Bat conspiracy confirmed. >
  
  Wait a sec there are schools experimentally turning children into fruit bats? >
  
  Great.  
  Unpopular opinion, now, can we restrict EBT cards from being used to purchase goods that almost guarantee obesity, diabetes and heart disease? I'm looking at you, liter sodas, candy bars, etc.  I mean, you can't buy cigarettes or liquor with EBTs, but pure corn syrup, we're apparently okay with that?
  Edit: I should add the underappreciated impact of lobbying by industrial food (corn) producers like Archer- Daniels- Midland, Monsanto, etc can't be overstated in policies like allowing these foods to be subsidized. >
  
  
  you can't buy cigarettes or liquor with EBTs
  
  That's because you can only cold, unprepared food groceries with EBT (e.g. no rotisserie chickens). You can't even buy pet food with EBT.
  Funny enough, at Publix this means you can use EBT to buy a cold sub, but not a hot sub. >
  
  I get that.  Mb we should redefine "food". 
  Technically, I know sucrose is a nutrient, but subsidizing chronic disease that especially afflicts the same population using EBTs just seems unwise, from public health, economic and ethical standpoints. >
  
  
  Mb we should redefine "food". 
  
  I'm not really interested in further restricting less fortunate people who are already dealing with enough struggles from being able to do something as basic as eat the foods they want. That's some basic human dignity shit. >
  
  Even if it's killing them?  
  And no one's saying they can't still buy all the corn syrup they want, I just don't see why we should encourage it via subsidizing, then pay again via massive public health costs.
  I'd rather put those funds towards addressing the food desert issue. >
  
  
  If rather put those funds towards addressing the food desert issue.
  
  Maybe we should do something like tax the mega-wealthy more, tax corporations more, and shave some money off of our ridiculously bloated, nearly $1,000,000,000,000 defense budget before we start slapping poor peoples' hands away from the foods they like for being too poor.
  Seriously, my grandmother is 93 years old, on a fixed income the bulk majority of which goes to medicine and insurance. She receives a grand total of $23/mo from the Free State of Floriduh for food assistance and you want to tell her whether she is still allowed to buy apple sauce. >
  
  
  Maybe we should do something like tax the mega-wealthy more, tax corporations more, and shave some money off of our ridiculously bloated, nearly $1,000,000,000,000 defense budget
  
  Why not both?
  Again, what are the ethics of subsidizing disease?