Obesity, soft drinks and public assistance
I heard a report today that His Honnuh Mayuh Bloomberg of the New York City - according to his office - wants to help in the fight against obesity by banning the purchase of sugary soft drinks . . . by people using what used to be called food stamps. I guess it's only the poor, the wretched New Yorkers longing to be free that suffer from sugar-induced obesity. Well, OK, why should the taxpayers subsidize consumption of junk food? I'm down with that. The argument that this somehow 'stigmatizes' the poor is spurious. I believe most states have migrated to a debit card system for that program. So what further stigma is there? If you are poor in America, you're already stigmatized and marginalized. How about - instead of telling people what they can or can't consume - the Obama FED takes some of that billion dollar boondoggle bailout money and actually put some people to work? All during the campaign the Obama camp likened Mr. O to FDR. Well, FDR didn't just shovel money into the states for them to burn any way they saw fit. He put people to work via the CCC. Something like three million people. They did work that needed doing and got paid, instead of waiting for a check in the mail.
But, I've strayed off-topic. What I found intriguing about the story was a comment made by someone described as an "advocate for the poor". When asked about Bloombergs proposal she said she was concerned that people would feel so stigmatized that, rather than deal with that, they might just decide not to participate, to "opt out".
As the kids say, "Well, duh!"
If they'd rather not take free money unless they can have a free Pepsi, so be it!
I think that has to get a Whisky Tango Foxtrot Golden Tin Foil Hat award for one of the lamest, non-sequitar arguments ever.
I know!
But, I've strayed off-topic. What I found intriguing about the story was a comment made by someone described as an "advocate for the poor". When asked about Bloombergs proposal she said she was concerned that people would feel so stigmatized that, rather than deal with that, they might just decide not to participate, to "opt out".
As the kids say, "Well, duh!"
If they'd rather not take free money unless they can have a free Pepsi, so be it!
I think that has to get a Whisky Tango Foxtrot Golden Tin Foil Hat award for one of the lamest, non-sequitar arguments ever.
I know!