3 ms·

Obesity is the problem. And it's so easy to improve: Stop allowing people to use food stamps on unhealthy foods, particularly soda and other sugary drinks.

jfoutz 10y ago
That's kind of a weird approach. Wealthier men tend to be more obese. White women seem to be the only group who's income and obesity levels seem related. It's right there in bold: "Most obese adults are not low income (below 130% of the poverty level)." But maybe food stamps aren't allocated the way i think they are. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db50.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db50.htm
- the_economist 10y ago
  We spend ~5 billion/year giving people free soda. Cutting back on is an extremely easy way to reduce obesity. Maybe it won't solve it. Maybe it won't even make a big difference. But it will certainly help the cause.
  - jfoutz 10y ago
    According to the NYT, "SNAP households spent 9.3 percent of their grocery budgets on sweetened beverages. That was slightly higher than the 7.1 percent figure for households that do not receive food stamps." I mean, soda might be a weird thing for you, but it's clearly something that's a standard part of the American diet. It's a 100 billion dollar industry. I don't really understand how removing soda for poor people would have a substantial impact on obesity. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-... edit "removing soda for poor people" isn't really even the case. it's just not allowing food stamps to pay for soda. I think, effectively, people will just use cash for that, and not change their habits. So $5 less for gas, or rent, or whatever they might actually use the cash for.
    - the_economist 10y ago
      9.3 is 31% higher than 7.1. That's a pretty significant increase. I wouldn't call that "slightly higher" Also, sugar is a standard part of the American diet. But Americans are obese. Here is at least one expert who thinks sugar is the problem: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-fructose-sugar-diet https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic...
      - jfoutz 10y ago
        I'm totally missing the relationship between being poor and being obese. I just do not follow the link you're asserting. It seems like a big non sequitur. I'd sort of think, that you, as an economist would go for more of a national tax on soda. Basic basic macro, subsidize what you want, and tax what you don't. You seem to not want soda and also want to punish food stamp users. A tax like that would be regressive, and seem to support your (as i understand them) twin goals. Instead, you're advocating piling on regulation, making both government and commerce more difficult. I kind of think you're just trolling me, but i'm still willing to give the benefit of the doubt. What exactly is the link between getting food stamps and being obese, and how dose resolving that alleged connection solve obesity in the united states? edit I see, after a careful reading, you're not asserting it would solve obesity. You're asserting that soda, if not subsidized would be consumed less, thus improving the situation. I think you're underestimating people's willingness to use food stamps for other things and cash for soda. I think you're not really evaluating soda vs sugar and are sort of arbitrarily picking that one thing. I think the costs of the regulations you're proposing would overshadow any effect on the 5% of 5% who's behavior actually changes. But, ok, now i see, you're not trolling. You're moving the goalposts from soda to sugar - but ok, you're not crazy.
      - jkmcf 10y ago
        It might 9.3% of their budget because their budget is much smaller. I would bet the 7.1% is possibly skewed due to a lot more people with spare cash finding better ways to fulfill the pleasure aspect (but it's probably craft beer/etc). In the end, buying soda is a combo of poor education/willpower/contemplation. FWIW, I'm pushing 50 and besides the occasional party, I've never had soda in the house from birth to present, and I probably only treat myself to a soda a 1-2 times a month.
  - sharemywin 10y ago
    When I try to stop drinking pop, I just eat more little Debbie's.

jfoutz 10y ago

That's kind of a weird approach. Wealthier men tend to be more obese. White women seem to be the only group who's income and obesity levels seem related. It's right there in bold: "Most obese adults are not low income (below 130% of the poverty level)." But maybe food stamps aren't allocated the way i think they are. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db50.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db50.htm

the_economist 10y ago
We spend ~5 billion/year giving people free soda. Cutting back on is an extremely easy way to reduce obesity. Maybe it won't solve it. Maybe it won't even make a big difference. But it will certainly help the cause.
- jfoutz 10y ago
  According to the NYT, "SNAP households spent 9.3 percent of their grocery budgets on sweetened beverages. That was slightly higher than the 7.1 percent figure for households that do not receive food stamps." I mean, soda might be a weird thing for you, but it's clearly something that's a standard part of the American diet. It's a 100 billion dollar industry. I don't really understand how removing soda for poor people would have a substantial impact on obesity. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-... edit "removing soda for poor people" isn't really even the case. it's just not allowing food stamps to pay for soda. I think, effectively, people will just use cash for that, and not change their habits. So $5 less for gas, or rent, or whatever they might actually use the cash for.
  - the_economist 10y ago
    9.3 is 31% higher than 7.1. That's a pretty significant increase. I wouldn't call that "slightly higher" Also, sugar is a standard part of the American diet. But Americans are obese. Here is at least one expert who thinks sugar is the problem: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-fructose-sugar-diet https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic...
    - jfoutz 10y ago
      I'm totally missing the relationship between being poor and being obese. I just do not follow the link you're asserting. It seems like a big non sequitur. I'd sort of think, that you, as an economist would go for more of a national tax on soda. Basic basic macro, subsidize what you want, and tax what you don't. You seem to not want soda and also want to punish food stamp users. A tax like that would be regressive, and seem to support your (as i understand them) twin goals. Instead, you're advocating piling on regulation, making both government and commerce more difficult. I kind of think you're just trolling me, but i'm still willing to give the benefit of the doubt. What exactly is the link between getting food stamps and being obese, and how dose resolving that alleged connection solve obesity in the united states? edit I see, after a careful reading, you're not asserting it would solve obesity. You're asserting that soda, if not subsidized would be consumed less, thus improving the situation. I think you're underestimating people's willingness to use food stamps for other things and cash for soda. I think you're not really evaluating soda vs sugar and are sort of arbitrarily picking that one thing. I think the costs of the regulations you're proposing would overshadow any effect on the 5% of 5% who's behavior actually changes. But, ok, now i see, you're not trolling. You're moving the goalposts from soda to sugar - but ok, you're not crazy.
    - jkmcf 10y ago
      It might 9.3% of their budget because their budget is much smaller. I would bet the 7.1% is possibly skewed due to a lot more people with spare cash finding better ways to fulfill the pleasure aspect (but it's probably craft beer/etc). In the end, buying soda is a combo of poor education/willpower/contemplation. FWIW, I'm pushing 50 and besides the occasional party, I've never had soda in the house from birth to present, and I probably only treat myself to a soda a 1-2 times a month.
- sharemywin 10y ago
  When I try to stop drinking pop, I just eat more little Debbie's.