All I thought was, yeah recipients want soda to be no eligible, it would make every grocery store experience with a demanding child that much easier!!! Lol
I’m so late to this I don’t know if anyone will read it.
Part of why I’m late is that I saw the title of this episode and was like, “nooooooooo I can’t handle more of this.”
I was a long term SNAP user. I still qualify for SNAP but I am no longer receiving benefits due to Ohio’s “Right to Work” program. I have two Bachelor’s degrees and a Master’s degree (not that education necessarily means a person is smart), and I could not navigate the absolute ludicrousity (this should be a word) that was Ohio’s requirements. People didn’t answer the phone or return phone calls. They wanted to know why my barely 18 year old senior in high school wasn’t working a 3/4 time job. I am disabled (hopefully for now only and not for always) and before that my daughter spent 15 years in and out of hospitals living all parents’ nightmare scenarios.
Medicaid and SNAP and SSI were how we survived. My husband worked two jobs but also had to take care of our other daughter who was scared and missed her mama. We fought like hell to keep our family together, fed, and our girls cared for as best as we could.
It took a toll on my body and my soul. Surely that is part of why I was susceptible to long covid and the friends it brought with it that don’t allow me out of bed most days.
All this is to say, I would love to sit down with a Republican senator and ask what he (cause it’s likely a he) would have done in my shoes. SNAP was a necessity.
These days I spend a lot of time hungry. My health issues demand a very limited diet. If I stray from that diet I can have anaphylaxis or just plain old intestinal misery. Either way - I’m not healing. Food banks help with my husband and our kids but almost never have food I can eat.
So. I have a lot of baggage about SNAP. Gratitude, anger, frustration. As Sarah said -WHY can’t I get a rotisserie chicken but soda is ok? There are rules that can and should be changed AND so much of it goes deeper into our food system.
I don’t love ruling out soda for SNAP recipients. Often ginger ale was the only thing my sick kiddo could keep down. My other child dealt with type 1 diabetic hypoglycemia and juice was vital. On the other hand, maybe I could have purchased those things myself. I would be all about trading soda for more benefits to get healthier food.
And the Farmer’s Market programs were like magic. The one in our small NE Ohio town gave you wooden coins to spend at the market taken of your EBT card. And then you got half the amount you took off in these shiny green coins that were just gifted. The only catch - they had to be spent on produce. No problem. Great. And I know they had amazing programs for WIC as well.
I also take Beth’s point that people who are already struggling to get by look at the produce aisle and see a lot of work. And there were times - many of them - when between hospitals and work and kids that we did not have the energy to make the healthy meals I loved to cook.
The nuance of the conversation - as I see it - is what Beth said near the end. The food system needs to change. And I could go on and on about that but I won’t. :)
In the meantime - we no longer have SNAP due to Ohio’s work requirements (which we still qualify for), we are starting our Medicaid renewal but I have no idea what will happen with that because my husband starting making a small amount more money. Like he now makes around $3000/month give or take a few hundred. It doesn’t meet our needs but it comes close. Depending on what he’s made on the paychecks Medicaid wants to see determines whether we keep health care. Whether my girl who is finally thriving gets to keep thriving. Whether I get to access treatment and medication. The stress is immense.
It’s one thing to be hungry and another to not have health care. My disability application is still pending. And there’s more I could say about that.
I felt shame when Sarah (or Beth?) said that SNAP and such should be a short term bridge. We have received government assistance in the form of SSI disability (for my daughter), SNAP, and/or Medicaid for 16 years. And yet I honestly don’t know what else we could have done.
We tried so many things. We’ve gone without many things. We’re going without more now than we ever have. And I am worn down by it all.
Believe me when I say that the system - whether by happenstance or intention - is designed to be challenging and wear people down. And I am weary and physically weak and so frustrated at hearing people (not Sarah and Beth) talk about these programs like they are political chips to be traded while lives hang in the balance.
But as always Sarah and Beth’s views brought humanity and intelligence to the topic. And I think changes could be a good thing for SNAP overall.
I’m so late to the party that I don’t know if anyone will read this but I am grateful to this community and to Sarah and Beth and the team for thoughtful discussion.
It’s hard to live in a way where there isn’t enough. There just isn’t. And so you learn to be grateful for the programs that there are even while being angry that it seems politicians just don’t see you.
Kristen, thank you so much for sharing what your days are like. I really, really, really hope your social security disability comes through - I hope/wish that that is the long-term solution for you and that you get the support you need to take care of yourself and your family. There is so much about our economy and social safety net that I wish we would do better by and be kinder to each other when life knocks us down. -m
I really appreciate the way you both can disagree and yet still have a highly productive and engaging conversation. I have SO MUCH to learn about how to do that and episodes like this are a great model.
I am not really going to comment on the soda portion of SNAP but I do have other issues to discuss. One thing that was mentioned a few times is how SNAP is supposed to be temporary. My daughter is classified as disabled and receives SSI. This is under $900 a month and I am here to tell you that she cannot live on that. She receives SNAP and when her children were babies, WIC. (The chances of her ever going off these benefits are slim to none). Heather is lucky; she has support from the father of her children and myself. Many have no additional support. Veterans and the elderly living on fixed incomes rely on SNAP to eat.
I am not in favor of policing the foods they buy/eat. Perhaps if we paid a living wage or treated those who receive disability etc has people worthy of being able to live safely, it would be more temporary.
A couple of additions, we live in the state of Missouri. Participants are already being told there will be no SNAP for the month of November. Supposedly, they will be paying WIC but for how long?
Also, I work for a non-profit. Over 90% of our families live under the federal poverty line. We are trying to figure out how we can make sure no one goes without.
Apologies for the rambling, but this is frightening on so many levels.
Sarah and Beth, you modeled constructive debate so beautifully here on a super complex topic. I love coming away from an episode with so much to think about!
I am late to this party but have to say I loved this episode so much! One of the best Pantsuit Politics has put on the main feed in the last year, and you’ve put a lot of good stuff out. Listening to this conversation felt like “old school” Sarah and Beth, reminiscent of “Sarah from the left and Beth from the right” debates. I loved hearing you both show how to gracefully navigate significant disagreement. You both demonstrated some willingness to be influenced and find a compromise while not totally caving on your core values and beliefs. If we could copy-paste this approach in every political setting in America we would be a far, far more compassionate and inclusive country.
To the topic of the episode: I often think that one of the most meaningful changes we could collectively make for better well being is more exercise. Many experts seem to agree diet is important to a point, but if only one health behavior had to be prioritized it should be exercise. I would love to see our culture restructured more so that activity and exercise could be more integrated in daily life rather than an item we check off our to do list. I wonder if this change would require structural shifts culturally, in how we set up the work day, school day, and of course the phones. It would be interesting to explore what role government could/should play in a shift like that.
A final note, couldn’t agree with Beth more about sticking to the value of keeping it nuanced. I believe Americans collectively operate with perfectionism and all or nothing cognitive distortions in most areas.
I’ve noticed Sarah really pushing herself to think differently in this Trump 2.0 landscape and to learn the lessons dems/liberals didn’t grasp previously. I love that intention and approach and think it’s helping this community grow. I also think so often of Richard Rohr saying he believes the Christian religion is developmentally in its adolescence. I think American culture and politics is in a similar spot. Which is to say, we are never going to mature and get better at holding complexity and nuance if we don’t flex that muscle. Perhaps there are better ways to sell it, and libs certainly need to work on not coming off as know it alls. But I don’t want to throw out the value of non-duality and nuance and complexity because of the challenges of Trump and MAGA.
As always, thanks to the whole team for all you do!
Wow. People really like it when you guys disagree. Lol. I think it would have been a lot easier to listen to this debate and take it seriously if Sarah was able to reign in some of her hyperbolic language. I get that it's not hyperbolic to her, she really believes it, but I still don't think it's helpful. Theological I believe that what you believe about God is a life or death issue, but I don't believe fear is an appropriate motivator for positive change. I think Sarah would win more people over with a softer approach.
I say this with all good will and gentleness but I want to let Sarah be Sarah and not worry about winning people over. I am grateful for her energetic spiciness and for Beth’s more grounded self. And I’m so grateful both of these people are willing to share themselves with us. Again - not meant to criticize in any way. It’s just I like Sarah being Sarah. Let Bartlet be Bartlet. 🩵
Respectfully, you can be yourself without being inflammatory. I agree with many of the posters on here that emphatically stating that soda is poison is inflammatory. I would even feel differently about it if she had qualified it as, "I see soda as poison" or "In my house we treat soda as poison." The comparison I was drawing was that as a Christian I might say that I believe that those who don't place their faith in Jesus will face judgement. I can do that in a respectful way that stresses that this is a personal conviction that I cannot prove or I can go around shouting that everyone is going to hell.
Just wanted to share I appreciated the discourse & back & forth from both of you. I do not want SNAP restricted at all; I’d be in favor of anything at whatever store is easiest for you. And, I’m in favor of less tax breaks for high income earners. I’m in favor of dignity; less restrictions equal more dignity & less red tape & rules for administrators & store employees. I’m also jealous of Beth’s sleep ability & have resigned myself to waking up at 4:00 am; sometimes getting a nap; & moving on. As a white lady, from Utah, I drink True Citrus Energy packets with caffeine from Green Tea😂. I keep thinking of Maggie Gylenhall’s character from Stranger Than Fiction. She gets audited for only paying part of her taxes; because she didn’t want to fund things she disagreed with. That’s sorely tempting at this stage; I’d happily continue to pay for social benefits & infrastructure; I’d happily deduct paying for ICE, multi-billion dollar company bailouts, & the salaries of our non-working Congresspeople…happ-i-ly. Hugs from Millcreek, Utah💕.
I saw an interesting post on IG today from Women’s Personal Finance that suggested if you want to restrict your tax dollars and are able to, then put more money in your 401(k) to reduce your taxable income. They are very pro supporting food banks and other aid organizations too, but I thought it was an interesting idea. It only helps a bit but is something, and that way you won’t get audited.
Okay, so one more point to add, I guess. If we aren’t into policing people’s choices, then why are we giving benefits in the form of SNAP money for only food items, and not just straight up money? Isn’t that policing and limiting to begin with? Isn’t that removing the agency of people to decide how best to spend the $$ they receive, or deciding that aren’t smart enough to budget properly to feed themselves?
I think the bigger picture may be at play with that. As Beth said, this program keeps grocery stores in areas where they would not necessarily be sustainable. There is a bigger economic and social impact by tying it to food (I am guessing). I don’t know enough to have a hard opinion about it either way, but my guess is that is part of what makes the program successful and a good return on tax dollars spent.
If I were you I would have stopped reading the comments long ago, but now that I've listened I want to gather my thoughts. My background: My father had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit. He always had a cigarette in his hand. I don't remember a time it didn't bother me. I hated every minute of having smoke blown in my face. I mean, I also cared deeply that he was going to die of this, but I also just hated the habit. And then one day the government started cracking down on cigarettes, and although I was personally very happy to not encounter cigarette smoke everywhere I went, I also secretly knew this meant one day they'd come after my Oreos. That day has come. (Yeah yeah, it was the second-hand smoke. That's how they got away with it. But notice how the complaint against sugar is "we have to pay for your obesity." The happiness police always come up with a good excuse.) Now, I have implied that I have an Oreo addiction, and once I did. I haven't had an Oreo in 6 years. I haven't had a soda in the same amount of time and had greatly curbed it in the two decades before that. Now I'm going to shock you: I replaced soda with red wine. Not one for one. But I drink a glass of wine with dinner rather than drinking a soda. Or a beer. I had replaced soda with water, but that got boring. So I'm not presenting myself as a shining example of how to live. I try to recognize that people are free to make their own choices and I haven't walked in their shoes. I also had a moment once long ago where I bopped into a 7-Eleven to by a lotto ticket, and I was behind a woman buying loads of top ramen with food stamps. It's not what she was buying that bothered me. It's where she was buying it. We were in a 7-Eleven in the middle of the burbs. If she got there she could have got to a grocery store where it would have cost her far less. So yeah, I judge, but I try not to. I am less concerned about Sarah's being in favor of eliminating soda from SNAP than her stance that maybe we shouldn't be so nuanced. I want us to educate our friends more, not join in by having overly simplistic solutions. And I want to listen to them and learn what their stance is if it's a little less simplistic than we think it is.
Here's another thought. I think later you two both hit on a good idea, that we can just focus on education around soda. It will work. Here's why I think so: My husband and I enjoy several small wineries we support. We visit them several times a year. And for the last year or so, all the talk when we visit is how the wine industry is in the absolute toilet right now. Why? Because the kids have heard that no amount of alcohol is good for you. I mean, there are other factors, but it is a huge contributing factor. The scuttlebutt is the kids are smoking pot instead.
Popping in VERY late, to ask for more clarification on Sarah's comments about pleasure. I would love to understand more about why Sarah doesn't call something that makes a person happy without too much effort pleasure? This would be a great outside of politics or Thursday spicy episode topic.
In these times and my stage of life, I am finding pleasure where I can get it, and often that means quick hits of joy. Would love to know what Sarah would call that and how you would distinguish it from actual effortful pleasure.
I wondered about this too. My simple and most treasured pleasure involves a beautiful cafe or outdoor patio, with a book, a glass of prosecco and a (rare) cheeky cigarette. Add in great conversation with a friend followed by a walk and that may be my top definition of pleasure. It takes little effort and has what some would call vices, and I truly couldn't love it more. No great insight here, just acknowledging that everyone derives pleasure from different spaces.
Random question: Has the argument of being super bothered by tax dollars to these minute items always been around or am I just paying attention more as a 45 year old woman? I feel like it has been around regarding big things, but the minutia (I say this in the grand scheme of things) of SNAP paying for soda and birth control with federal money has just been growing over time. Is it because “transparency” has taken over? I love the wedding analogy, maybe this is it? Social media has transformed everyone into wanting a say in everything? We can’t, as a society, make everyone happy. People are people, they always will be. I think prohibition showed us how NOT to limit certain things and listening to this discussion really reminds me of a lot of arguments that pushed prohibition on the nation. Just an observation (and being subjected to way too many random documentaries by my husband, lol).
It's been there as long as I can remember. I remember birthday-cakes-bought-by-food-stamps being a great big old controversy in Ann Landers column in the 1970s. (Why don't they buy a cake mix?!)
Thank you for this thought provoking episode and showing how we can have respectful disagreement. I would recommend reading the book How the Other Half Eats: The Untold Story of Food and Inequality in America. The author follows in-depth 4 families from different economic and racial backgrounds and shares why people make different food decisions. It also talks about the pressure moms feel to feed their kids. And sometimes mom’s feel that they can treat their kids with food when they can’t buy them new shoes or take them on a fancy vacation. It made me think of this book when people mentioned people using food assistance to buy lobster, steak etc.
Thank you all for broadening my perspective and giving me so much to think about. I love this podcast and this group—grace and lots of love, y’all.
All I thought was, yeah recipients want soda to be no eligible, it would make every grocery store experience with a demanding child that much easier!!! Lol
I’m so late to this I don’t know if anyone will read it.
Part of why I’m late is that I saw the title of this episode and was like, “nooooooooo I can’t handle more of this.”
I was a long term SNAP user. I still qualify for SNAP but I am no longer receiving benefits due to Ohio’s “Right to Work” program. I have two Bachelor’s degrees and a Master’s degree (not that education necessarily means a person is smart), and I could not navigate the absolute ludicrousity (this should be a word) that was Ohio’s requirements. People didn’t answer the phone or return phone calls. They wanted to know why my barely 18 year old senior in high school wasn’t working a 3/4 time job. I am disabled (hopefully for now only and not for always) and before that my daughter spent 15 years in and out of hospitals living all parents’ nightmare scenarios.
Medicaid and SNAP and SSI were how we survived. My husband worked two jobs but also had to take care of our other daughter who was scared and missed her mama. We fought like hell to keep our family together, fed, and our girls cared for as best as we could.
It took a toll on my body and my soul. Surely that is part of why I was susceptible to long covid and the friends it brought with it that don’t allow me out of bed most days.
All this is to say, I would love to sit down with a Republican senator and ask what he (cause it’s likely a he) would have done in my shoes. SNAP was a necessity.
These days I spend a lot of time hungry. My health issues demand a very limited diet. If I stray from that diet I can have anaphylaxis or just plain old intestinal misery. Either way - I’m not healing. Food banks help with my husband and our kids but almost never have food I can eat.
So. I have a lot of baggage about SNAP. Gratitude, anger, frustration. As Sarah said -WHY can’t I get a rotisserie chicken but soda is ok? There are rules that can and should be changed AND so much of it goes deeper into our food system.
I don’t love ruling out soda for SNAP recipients. Often ginger ale was the only thing my sick kiddo could keep down. My other child dealt with type 1 diabetic hypoglycemia and juice was vital. On the other hand, maybe I could have purchased those things myself. I would be all about trading soda for more benefits to get healthier food.
And the Farmer’s Market programs were like magic. The one in our small NE Ohio town gave you wooden coins to spend at the market taken of your EBT card. And then you got half the amount you took off in these shiny green coins that were just gifted. The only catch - they had to be spent on produce. No problem. Great. And I know they had amazing programs for WIC as well.
I also take Beth’s point that people who are already struggling to get by look at the produce aisle and see a lot of work. And there were times - many of them - when between hospitals and work and kids that we did not have the energy to make the healthy meals I loved to cook.
The nuance of the conversation - as I see it - is what Beth said near the end. The food system needs to change. And I could go on and on about that but I won’t. :)
In the meantime - we no longer have SNAP due to Ohio’s work requirements (which we still qualify for), we are starting our Medicaid renewal but I have no idea what will happen with that because my husband starting making a small amount more money. Like he now makes around $3000/month give or take a few hundred. It doesn’t meet our needs but it comes close. Depending on what he’s made on the paychecks Medicaid wants to see determines whether we keep health care. Whether my girl who is finally thriving gets to keep thriving. Whether I get to access treatment and medication. The stress is immense.
It’s one thing to be hungry and another to not have health care. My disability application is still pending. And there’s more I could say about that.
I felt shame when Sarah (or Beth?) said that SNAP and such should be a short term bridge. We have received government assistance in the form of SSI disability (for my daughter), SNAP, and/or Medicaid for 16 years. And yet I honestly don’t know what else we could have done.
We tried so many things. We’ve gone without many things. We’re going without more now than we ever have. And I am worn down by it all.
Believe me when I say that the system - whether by happenstance or intention - is designed to be challenging and wear people down. And I am weary and physically weak and so frustrated at hearing people (not Sarah and Beth) talk about these programs like they are political chips to be traded while lives hang in the balance.
But as always Sarah and Beth’s views brought humanity and intelligence to the topic. And I think changes could be a good thing for SNAP overall.
I’m so late to the party that I don’t know if anyone will read this but I am grateful to this community and to Sarah and Beth and the team for thoughtful discussion.
It’s hard to live in a way where there isn’t enough. There just isn’t. And so you learn to be grateful for the programs that there are even while being angry that it seems politicians just don’t see you.
Anyhow. Thanks for the nuance y’all.
Kristen, thank you so much for sharing what your days are like. I really, really, really hope your social security disability comes through - I hope/wish that that is the long-term solution for you and that you get the support you need to take care of yourself and your family. There is so much about our economy and social safety net that I wish we would do better by and be kinder to each other when life knocks us down. -m
@Kristin- “nooooooooo I can’t handle more of this.”
Literally my exact reaction which is why I am only listening now a week later when I have more mental capacity for it!
Late to the game here!!
I really appreciate the way you both can disagree and yet still have a highly productive and engaging conversation. I have SO MUCH to learn about how to do that and episodes like this are a great model.
I am not really going to comment on the soda portion of SNAP but I do have other issues to discuss. One thing that was mentioned a few times is how SNAP is supposed to be temporary. My daughter is classified as disabled and receives SSI. This is under $900 a month and I am here to tell you that she cannot live on that. She receives SNAP and when her children were babies, WIC. (The chances of her ever going off these benefits are slim to none). Heather is lucky; she has support from the father of her children and myself. Many have no additional support. Veterans and the elderly living on fixed incomes rely on SNAP to eat.
I am not in favor of policing the foods they buy/eat. Perhaps if we paid a living wage or treated those who receive disability etc has people worthy of being able to live safely, it would be more temporary.
A couple of additions, we live in the state of Missouri. Participants are already being told there will be no SNAP for the month of November. Supposedly, they will be paying WIC but for how long?
Also, I work for a non-profit. Over 90% of our families live under the federal poverty line. We are trying to figure out how we can make sure no one goes without.
Apologies for the rambling, but this is frightening on so many levels.
Sarah I am not mad at you.
THIS WAS SUCH A GOOD EPISODE
Sarah and Beth, you modeled constructive debate so beautifully here on a super complex topic. I love coming away from an episode with so much to think about!
I want to thank this community and this show for continuing to step into this space. I have seen so much discussion and learned so much.
I am late to this party but have to say I loved this episode so much! One of the best Pantsuit Politics has put on the main feed in the last year, and you’ve put a lot of good stuff out. Listening to this conversation felt like “old school” Sarah and Beth, reminiscent of “Sarah from the left and Beth from the right” debates. I loved hearing you both show how to gracefully navigate significant disagreement. You both demonstrated some willingness to be influenced and find a compromise while not totally caving on your core values and beliefs. If we could copy-paste this approach in every political setting in America we would be a far, far more compassionate and inclusive country.
To the topic of the episode: I often think that one of the most meaningful changes we could collectively make for better well being is more exercise. Many experts seem to agree diet is important to a point, but if only one health behavior had to be prioritized it should be exercise. I would love to see our culture restructured more so that activity and exercise could be more integrated in daily life rather than an item we check off our to do list. I wonder if this change would require structural shifts culturally, in how we set up the work day, school day, and of course the phones. It would be interesting to explore what role government could/should play in a shift like that.
A final note, couldn’t agree with Beth more about sticking to the value of keeping it nuanced. I believe Americans collectively operate with perfectionism and all or nothing cognitive distortions in most areas.
I’ve noticed Sarah really pushing herself to think differently in this Trump 2.0 landscape and to learn the lessons dems/liberals didn’t grasp previously. I love that intention and approach and think it’s helping this community grow. I also think so often of Richard Rohr saying he believes the Christian religion is developmentally in its adolescence. I think American culture and politics is in a similar spot. Which is to say, we are never going to mature and get better at holding complexity and nuance if we don’t flex that muscle. Perhaps there are better ways to sell it, and libs certainly need to work on not coming off as know it alls. But I don’t want to throw out the value of non-duality and nuance and complexity because of the challenges of Trump and MAGA.
As always, thanks to the whole team for all you do!
Wow. People really like it when you guys disagree. Lol. I think it would have been a lot easier to listen to this debate and take it seriously if Sarah was able to reign in some of her hyperbolic language. I get that it's not hyperbolic to her, she really believes it, but I still don't think it's helpful. Theological I believe that what you believe about God is a life or death issue, but I don't believe fear is an appropriate motivator for positive change. I think Sarah would win more people over with a softer approach.
I say this with all good will and gentleness but I want to let Sarah be Sarah and not worry about winning people over. I am grateful for her energetic spiciness and for Beth’s more grounded self. And I’m so grateful both of these people are willing to share themselves with us. Again - not meant to criticize in any way. It’s just I like Sarah being Sarah. Let Bartlet be Bartlet. 🩵
Respectfully, you can be yourself without being inflammatory. I agree with many of the posters on here that emphatically stating that soda is poison is inflammatory. I would even feel differently about it if she had qualified it as, "I see soda as poison" or "In my house we treat soda as poison." The comparison I was drawing was that as a Christian I might say that I believe that those who don't place their faith in Jesus will face judgement. I can do that in a respectful way that stresses that this is a personal conviction that I cannot prove or I can go around shouting that everyone is going to hell.
Thanks for your perspective. I very much appreciate hearing what you think. I still don’t agree but I understand. Be well.
Just wanted to share I appreciated the discourse & back & forth from both of you. I do not want SNAP restricted at all; I’d be in favor of anything at whatever store is easiest for you. And, I’m in favor of less tax breaks for high income earners. I’m in favor of dignity; less restrictions equal more dignity & less red tape & rules for administrators & store employees. I’m also jealous of Beth’s sleep ability & have resigned myself to waking up at 4:00 am; sometimes getting a nap; & moving on. As a white lady, from Utah, I drink True Citrus Energy packets with caffeine from Green Tea😂. I keep thinking of Maggie Gylenhall’s character from Stranger Than Fiction. She gets audited for only paying part of her taxes; because she didn’t want to fund things she disagreed with. That’s sorely tempting at this stage; I’d happily continue to pay for social benefits & infrastructure; I’d happily deduct paying for ICE, multi-billion dollar company bailouts, & the salaries of our non-working Congresspeople…happ-i-ly. Hugs from Millcreek, Utah💕.
I saw an interesting post on IG today from Women’s Personal Finance that suggested if you want to restrict your tax dollars and are able to, then put more money in your 401(k) to reduce your taxable income. They are very pro supporting food banks and other aid organizations too, but I thought it was an interesting idea. It only helps a bit but is something, and that way you won’t get audited.
I love this idea. Thank you!
Okay, so one more point to add, I guess. If we aren’t into policing people’s choices, then why are we giving benefits in the form of SNAP money for only food items, and not just straight up money? Isn’t that policing and limiting to begin with? Isn’t that removing the agency of people to decide how best to spend the $$ they receive, or deciding that aren’t smart enough to budget properly to feed themselves?
I think the bigger picture may be at play with that. As Beth said, this program keeps grocery stores in areas where they would not necessarily be sustainable. There is a bigger economic and social impact by tying it to food (I am guessing). I don’t know enough to have a hard opinion about it either way, but my guess is that is part of what makes the program successful and a good return on tax dollars spent.
If I were you I would have stopped reading the comments long ago, but now that I've listened I want to gather my thoughts. My background: My father had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit. He always had a cigarette in his hand. I don't remember a time it didn't bother me. I hated every minute of having smoke blown in my face. I mean, I also cared deeply that he was going to die of this, but I also just hated the habit. And then one day the government started cracking down on cigarettes, and although I was personally very happy to not encounter cigarette smoke everywhere I went, I also secretly knew this meant one day they'd come after my Oreos. That day has come. (Yeah yeah, it was the second-hand smoke. That's how they got away with it. But notice how the complaint against sugar is "we have to pay for your obesity." The happiness police always come up with a good excuse.) Now, I have implied that I have an Oreo addiction, and once I did. I haven't had an Oreo in 6 years. I haven't had a soda in the same amount of time and had greatly curbed it in the two decades before that. Now I'm going to shock you: I replaced soda with red wine. Not one for one. But I drink a glass of wine with dinner rather than drinking a soda. Or a beer. I had replaced soda with water, but that got boring. So I'm not presenting myself as a shining example of how to live. I try to recognize that people are free to make their own choices and I haven't walked in their shoes. I also had a moment once long ago where I bopped into a 7-Eleven to by a lotto ticket, and I was behind a woman buying loads of top ramen with food stamps. It's not what she was buying that bothered me. It's where she was buying it. We were in a 7-Eleven in the middle of the burbs. If she got there she could have got to a grocery store where it would have cost her far less. So yeah, I judge, but I try not to. I am less concerned about Sarah's being in favor of eliminating soda from SNAP than her stance that maybe we shouldn't be so nuanced. I want us to educate our friends more, not join in by having overly simplistic solutions. And I want to listen to them and learn what their stance is if it's a little less simplistic than we think it is.
Here's another thought. I think later you two both hit on a good idea, that we can just focus on education around soda. It will work. Here's why I think so: My husband and I enjoy several small wineries we support. We visit them several times a year. And for the last year or so, all the talk when we visit is how the wine industry is in the absolute toilet right now. Why? Because the kids have heard that no amount of alcohol is good for you. I mean, there are other factors, but it is a huge contributing factor. The scuttlebutt is the kids are smoking pot instead.
Popping in VERY late, to ask for more clarification on Sarah's comments about pleasure. I would love to understand more about why Sarah doesn't call something that makes a person happy without too much effort pleasure? This would be a great outside of politics or Thursday spicy episode topic.
In these times and my stage of life, I am finding pleasure where I can get it, and often that means quick hits of joy. Would love to know what Sarah would call that and how you would distinguish it from actual effortful pleasure.
I wondered about this too. My simple and most treasured pleasure involves a beautiful cafe or outdoor patio, with a book, a glass of prosecco and a (rare) cheeky cigarette. Add in great conversation with a friend followed by a walk and that may be my top definition of pleasure. It takes little effort and has what some would call vices, and I truly couldn't love it more. No great insight here, just acknowledging that everyone derives pleasure from different spaces.
Random question: Has the argument of being super bothered by tax dollars to these minute items always been around or am I just paying attention more as a 45 year old woman? I feel like it has been around regarding big things, but the minutia (I say this in the grand scheme of things) of SNAP paying for soda and birth control with federal money has just been growing over time. Is it because “transparency” has taken over? I love the wedding analogy, maybe this is it? Social media has transformed everyone into wanting a say in everything? We can’t, as a society, make everyone happy. People are people, they always will be. I think prohibition showed us how NOT to limit certain things and listening to this discussion really reminds me of a lot of arguments that pushed prohibition on the nation. Just an observation (and being subjected to way too many random documentaries by my husband, lol).
It's been there as long as I can remember. I remember birthday-cakes-bought-by-food-stamps being a great big old controversy in Ann Landers column in the 1970s. (Why don't they buy a cake mix?!)
Thank you for this thought provoking episode and showing how we can have respectful disagreement. I would recommend reading the book How the Other Half Eats: The Untold Story of Food and Inequality in America. The author follows in-depth 4 families from different economic and racial backgrounds and shares why people make different food decisions. It also talks about the pressure moms feel to feed their kids. And sometimes mom’s feel that they can treat their kids with food when they can’t buy them new shoes or take them on a fancy vacation. It made me think of this book when people mentioned people using food assistance to buy lobster, steak etc.