re: Welfare and Obesity

Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:" Question though... why is everyone okay with what WIC provides? Vouchers specifically for CERTAIN cereals ... [snip!] ... for what help they can get. Why would they have a problem with cutting out the processed foods or at least limiting them?"

I agree. People should be grateful.

WIC is seen as more of a health program by others. According to wiki (I know, not the best source), WIC started off as a nutritional program :

In 1968, a group of physicians described to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and the USDA that young women, often pregnant, came to their clinics with various ailments that were caused by a lack of food. The doctors would prescribe needed foods, with the prescription acting as a sort of food voucher. WIC’s program beginnings surface in 1969, when the White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health recommended that special attention be given to the nutritional needs sof low-income pregnant women and preschool children.[2]
WIC was formally created by an amendment to section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 on September 26, 1972.

Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:" Isnt your daughter old like mine?"

Yup. She turned 16 in November.

Quoting khigh:" What the federal government is supposed to spend money on is all listed in the Constitution. You think ... [snip!] ... on welfare. I personally think a yearly budget of any money over ZERO by the fed (not the states) is too much for welfare."

Not my point. I'm saying in the grand scheme of things, social welfare programs are the least of our concerns, and to "bully" them by telling them what they can and cannot do, in exchange for benefits, is ridiculous. I think it's absolutely lovely that we cater to our OWN citizens that are in need -but I don't think that means we need to mandate that they give up their own rights as individual. It may not say that we have to spend any money on them in the constitution, but the constitution was implemented to protect the rights of individuals, and THAT INCLUDES the impoverished. That's why I said, it's a grey area. Are they not entitled to the same rights as the middle class or the rich? That seems more than unfair. What else will we seek to take away from them? And why is it okay for the government to use our money to pay for their bloated lifestyles, yet all the attention seems to be focused upon using the impoverished as an economic scapegoat? It's bullsmurf.

As I stated earlier, I don't think we can control how a person lives, no matter what we try and take away from them. Spending money on nutrition classes is a joke, as was implementing a drug testing system for those receiving benefits. We need to reform the food that is manufactured to the masses, that is much more of an issue than a few mandated classes on nutrition. Most of the food in grocery stores is disgusting, and should not be eaten whatsoever. Not even the "healthy" food. It's a joke.

Quoting Back to Noob Status:" I agree. People should be grateful. WIC is seen as more of a health program by others. According to ... [snip!] ... children.[2] WIC was formally created by an amendment to section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 on September 26, 1972."

So I wonder why we cant do that with food stamps as well? Would it be that difficult? Honest question.

Quoting Back to Noob Status:" Obesity will always be a problem until individuals themselves decide to change their habits. There is nothing that the government can do to remedy this situation without being fascist. "

     

Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:" So I wonder why we cant do that with food stamps as well? Would it be that difficult? Honest question."

I think that we could, but there would a massive uproar over it and I don't think the government is too concerned over food stamps with the way the economy is.

I would have no problem if the government passed stricter rules, but I can't say the same for millions that are on welfare.

Quoting MAIKENTRA:" Not my point. I'm saying in the grand scheme of things, social welfare programs are the least of our ... [snip!] ... of the food in grocery stores is disgusting, and should not be eaten whatsoever. Not even the "healthy" food. It's a joke. "

but what are those things exactly? Middle and upper class generally pay for things themselves. Many life paycheck to paycheck because of their bills and necessities. Welfare is supposed to be a transitional assistance anyways. If I needed it, I'd take what I could get while pounding the pavement and wouldnt be on long.

Why is it fascist to say what you can use taxpayer money for? It's only fascist if they say what you can buy with your own money.

<blockquote><b>Quoting Punk Rock Princess {EBFT}:</b>" My kids love rice too! We like chicken, rice and salsa mixed up and baked. Cheese on top if we have it, super easy!"</blockquote>




Hmmm I think I'm gonna make this for dinner....lol
For them of course. I'll probably have an omelet with Morningstar crumbles...

Quoting MAIKENTRA:" Not my point. I'm saying in the grand scheme of things, social welfare programs are the least of our ... [snip!] ... of the food in grocery stores is disgusting, and should not be eaten whatsoever. Not even the "healthy" food. It's a joke. "

Which is why I suggested vouchers for local farmers.

<blockquote><b>Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:</b>" I'm all for mandatory nutrition classes and putting a limit on what food stamps can buy. I've been behind ... [snip!] ... with government money. The food stamp program needs to do what WIC does. Vouchers for certain items, and a nutrition class."</blockquote>




I buy 1-3 packs of cookies a month (for 7 people) and the only time I buy chips is when we're having a birthday party or for DH's lunch. It's the same for soda. I don't see the big issue...we pay out of pocket for food too so IMO, it breaks even.

I don't think everyone on FS should be controlled. I get assistance and I try as hard as I can to buy fresh foods and things I can make meals with myself- I rarely buy pre-made meals, etc. I try my hardest, but I don't have a car, so I take the bus and have to shop within an hour if I want to get home with my 3 year old...so I just grab what I can as fast as I can. And I STILL manage to buy fresh meats, veggies, salad, fruit etc. And I only buy soda because it helps my migraines (caffeine). I think the BIGGEST problem is that VERY FEW people know how to cook these days- rich poor or otherwise- people are lazy and everything is so convenient these days- so why learn how to read a cookbook, right? Parents, teach your kids to cook, so when they are adults, they can eat healthier- even if they end up on assistance at some point. Being able to cook everything yourself saves a TON of money if you do it properly. Popping something in the microwave is NOT cooking lol.

<blockquote><b>Quoting khigh:</b>" I'm all for a federal WIC type program to replace FS and putting a limit on how long you can use it unless ... [snip!] ... a limit of 6 months on FS and welfare and unemployment and see how many people actually try to get a job or help themselves. "</blockquote>




You're assuming many don't already have jobs...

Quoting ~Ice Princess~:" <blockquote><b>Quoting khigh:</b>" I'm all for a federal WIC type program to replace ... [snip!] ... people actually try to get a job or help themselves. "</blockquote> You're assuming many don't already have jobs..."

You know.... in your avi, we kind of look alike! LOL

Quoting khigh:" I'm all for a federal WIC type program to replace FS and putting a limit on how long you can use it unless ... [snip!] ... a limit of 6 months on FS and welfare and unemployment and see how many people actually try to get a job or help themselves. "

These programs are in place in many states. CT is the worst state if you need any help. They require you to work for the state from 8 am to 5 pm every single day but weekends. If you live in sect 8, they force you into community service, even if you have a non-school age child and a disabled family member to care for. If you have a child, or you don't have a car- you are screwed and can't get any help at all from the state. People who haven't been on assistance ( due to honest reasons, not just being lazy) have no idea how hard it is to get OFF of it even when you want to. So basically, if you have a kid, and you are poor, the state forces you to rarely be around your kids and give them up to daycare centers so you can only get 200 a month...which won't even cover rent. When if you found a job on your OWN, you'd make over 200 a week at a lot of places on your own! 200 isn't enough money to most parents to send their kids to daycare all day long for no reason. But finding a job is insanely difficult too, especially if you don't have a ton of education....It's all a clustersmurf.