By the same logic, you can't have record-low unemployment and rising poverty rates. Somehow we squared that particular circle. Like the unemployment rate and

By the same logic, you can't have record-low unemployment and rising poverty rates. Somehow we squared that particular circle. Like the unemployment rate and actual standard of living, obesity and food insecurity are loosely coupled but somewhat independent things. An EBT program might be able to funnel dollars into grocery store tills, but it doesn't necessarily mean efficient delivery of quality foods. Poverty often involves multiple dimensions of constraints. While it might be easy to simplify an argument by saying "buy 20kg bags of beans and rice and cook that for 93 meals a month", that neglects factors like: * Burdened workers/parents who lack the time/remaining energy to prepare labour-intensive home-cooked food. Opening a tin or putting something in the microwave for six minutes is an awfully compelling proposition. * Poor housing, where you might not have good cooking or food storage facilities. If you don't have a working fridge, many fresh ingredients are too perishable. If you have an infestation, bulk foods are just a hazard. There's plenty of wholesome meals you might have a hard time cooking if you're limited to a hot plate or microwave. * Food deserts, where you have to buy what's reasonably available at what's likely extortionate prices. There's also a bit of a hedonistic limit. We're not just chugging Food Packets to increase an on-screen stamina bar. Most people are not going to be able to stick to a tightly planned, "optimal health" meal program if it doesn't offer at least occasional luxuries and modest variety. Look how even rich people can't stick to diets. This is not a moral failing, but trying to balance health and taste concerns with tight financial restrictions often triggers "poor choices".