25
u/Andrew-Cohen 14h ago
Building data centers that use more water and electricity than Los Angeles, sure no problem! TS in bathrooms? OMG IT IS THE END IF THE WORLD!
Idiots.
4
u/Appropriate_Top9685 7h ago
priorities so scrambled they think data centers are more essential than letting people have a damn soda
2
u/Fluffy_Battle_3232 7h ago
priorities so scrambled they think data centers are more essential than letting people have a damn soda
1
u/FederalTelevision376 3h ago
priorities so scrambled they think data centers are more essential than letting people have a damn soda
10
10
8
9
u/B0wmanHall 12h ago
My tax dollars shouldn’t be used for the president to make political commercials but here we are.
6
u/BemusedBipartite 9h ago
Food stamps should always count double towards healthier foods like farmers markets and premade meals, imo.
2
u/pithynotpithy 8h ago
That's a good idea. Great way to incentivize healthy food without punishing people for being poor.
1
u/Yuyu_hockey_show 8h ago
I would love this. Its hard to incentivize people to eat healthy in this country.
1
5
9
10
u/B4L0RCLUB 13h ago
I’ll never understand why so many people are bothered by things that don’t affect them and with what others are doing.
3
u/A_Nonny_Muse 8h ago
And it's so selective. A kid buying a soda with tax money? Pearl clutching outrage. quarter million dollar tax write off for a drunken drug binging yacht trip through the bahamas with underage hookers?
not a peep. just business.
And just to be clear, I know a business owner who does exactly that. Quarter million dollar tax write offs for his alcohol and drug binging yacht trip through the Bahamas with underage hookers. 100% tax writeoff as long as he can get 1 local or state politician on the boat. Anybody who can represent a city, county, or state.
-2
u/please_trade_marner 10h ago
Entitlement spending was 0% of budget 100 years ago and today it is 70% of the federal budget. The more free shit you give people, the more they feel entitled to it and the more they vote for parties promising to give them free shit.
The national debt is completely out of control and is EVERY American's business.
1
u/theantijuke 8h ago
Social Security Medicare and Medicaid take the lion's share of that budget. Programs like SNAP only take about 10%.
Also, conflating the term "entitlement spending" to "people are entitled brats for relying on these programs" is ridiculous. If corporate greed was kept more in check and/or we taxed billionaires fairly, there wouldn't be a need to lower entitlement spending as fewer people would need those programs to survive in the first place.
2
u/please_trade_marner 7h ago
The top 10% pay 60% of all tax revenue. The top 60% pay 93% of all tax revenue. The bottom 50% pay (lol) 2% of all tax revenue.
We literally have a system now where the rich pay all of the taxes and the poor are free to leech off of entitlement programs with little to no regulation.
1
u/pithynotpithy 2h ago
And the top 10% own 68% of the wealth in America so they should be paying most of the taxes.
0
u/rightymighty69 3h ago
No soda, no candy, no cake, no sweets. You want free food, you shouldn't get ANY junk food
-4
u/windsockglue 10h ago
I don't really feel compelled to support anyone drinking soda, honestly, completely independent of income. Is our world actually better because of sweetened soda? How many people have had dental issues, health issues, extra weight and other issues because of this dumb substance that doesn't actually provide any real benefit outside of making someone money? Is it essential for anyone, outside of soda manufacturers, for life or survival?
2
u/arthriticpyro 9h ago
You leave it up to the individual to make the choice for themselves if they want it or not and clearly a lot do. Hell, my world is better with a couple of em, it doesn't get me high/drunk and it is something I can look forward to drinking throughout the day. I don't understand where everyone decided it was up to them whether they supported it or not and whether we should have it or not. Hell, half the time it's people not on food stamps trying to tell people on food stamps what they should and shouldn't be able to have.
0
u/windsockglue 8h ago edited 8h ago
I think your body would be much better if you drank water. I don't know of anyone who is healthier or in a better place because they wasted money on sugary sodas. Justify it all you want that it's better than alcohol, but it doesn't make it good for you. It's like saying you'll vape nicotine and it's all ok because you're not smoking cigars all day. It's still bad for you and the world would be better without cigars or vapes, just like the world would be better without sugary sodas. Horrible health and heightened obesity rates for people in so many countries is directly tied to sugar filled sodas. I'm sure you could find something worth living for that doesn't mess with your body or health. It's pathetic that people can't imagine life without it. Sugar soda hasn't existed for most of human history.
•
u/B4L0RCLUB 31m ago
You’re missing the point spectacularly. I agree with that you’re saying but you don’t get to control what other people do. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.
3
u/Whythehellnot225343 8h ago
Better question, Chris. Where the fuck are you that you’re finding pop for a dollar?
1
u/Sheerluck42 7h ago
I buy a 12 pack for $6. $0.50 each for namelbrand
1
4
u/Chakasicle 13h ago
The government should only be allowed to buy the same food as those on food stamps and with the same budget. If we're going to cut down on unnecessary spending, let's start at the top and let trickle down economics do it's thing.
3
13h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Chakasicle 13h ago
Fully agreed. Let's put some perspective in to their decisions. They get food stamp allowances for all government meals/parties and the most that a congressman can make is 3x their state's minimum wage. No more dominoes for the Pentagon, they have to hire a chef that makes everything from the food stamp approved list.
2
2
u/Glass-Amount-9170 11h ago
Tax dollars shouldn’t be spent on yet another Middle East forever war for oil but here we are.
2
u/Imnotsureanymore8 10h ago
I wish people would stop giving this clown air. He just wants engagement.
2
u/rorowhat 10h ago
I think the point here is that soda has no nutritional value, and the money could have been used to buy food. Also it's easy to make fun of $1 dollar soda, but we know that's not the case. People don't drink 1 soda per month.
2
1
u/dantevonlocke 7h ago
Pet peeve. When someone says something has "no nutritional value" its just wrong. It doesn't have good value. But it has calories, carbs, salt, and sugar(yes too much sugar).
2
u/rorowhat 7h ago
Tell me what nutritional value it has please.
2
1
u/dantevonlocke 7h ago
You can look on the can/bottle. Calories. Salt. Carbs. And sugar. Just because it isn't healthy doesn't mean it has no nutritional value.
1
1
u/Dense_Priority_7250 11h ago
Ignoring the ChatGPT-assness of the reply,
What in the top comment suggests that they are pro-billionaire? If anything, they think that their tax dollars shouldn’t pay for items that are bad for one’s health. For that reason I kinda get the original reply
1
u/zyptzk 9h ago
Some people expect the food stamps to cover just the basics. You haven't hit on the hard times. Used to be the government had surplus goods the poor people could buy. Guess they cared more about people then than they do now. Not everyone can have sustainable jobs. Try a little compassion.
1
u/SchizoidRainbow 8h ago
Bro where you getting $1 sodas
1
u/dantevonlocke 7h ago
Walmart near me has 1.48 liter coke and sprite.
0
1
u/BlueFlob 7h ago
The whole system doesnt make sense and has clearly been built by lobbyist and brown envelopes.
Like subsidized sugar industry and oil industry vs Privatized healthcare for heart disease and lung disease
Hundreds of extremely damaging industries to society are being subsidized with limited benefits outside of investor profits. It's madness and we just go along with it.
0
u/Uh-trey-you 13h ago
Food stamps should only be used for necessary food not garbage
3
u/pithynotpithy 13h ago
Why? What would happen if your employer said you can only buy healthy food with your paycheck.
Maybe let's concern less with what poor people are going with their shrinking benefits and more with how the donor class is ripping us off everywhere.
1
u/TartJealous5180 9h ago
This is not an employee and employer relationship. Foodstamps and government assistance should be reserved for necessities. This is why there are already restrictions on them. Soda and junk food offer no nutritional value and are damaging to the health of the consumer. That are purely a luxury item so it would make sense that restrictions would be applied against the item.
1
u/pithynotpithy 8h ago
Why? Why should foodstamps be "limited to necessities"? We as a country don't limit tax breaks to those who need it most. We don't limit government subsidies to only the most dire circumstances - and that typically costs are FAR more than a poor family buying a 2 liter of coke every week. Why do ya'll insist on gatekeeping the meager pay outs poor people get so badly, where there are so many worse things happening?
3
u/TartJealous5180 8h ago
It is already limited right now. Not every food item in a grocery store is covered for food stamps. It's a very strange stance that assistance for food should also include items that do not provide nutritional and cause worse health outcomes. Should foodstamps include cigarettes and alcohol while we are at it? Why would I ever support subsidization of products that are detrimental to health, especially to low income people who already have limited access to healthcare?
-1
u/cbflowers 9h ago
I don’t mind being taxed to help the less fortunate. I do mind the less fortunate killing them selves with junk food that the tax payers paid for. There’s nothing wrong with my logic
3
u/arthriticpyro 9h ago
Except for the fact where you're pushing your beliefs on the rest of the people because "YOU don't think it should be this way." Do the rest of us a favor and keep yalls voices out of other people's business since you're the reason a lot of us are forced to "eat healthy" by your just-as-shit standards. It don't matter what tf yall think about what we get to eat, you aren't the ones eating it anyways. I know most of you don't practice what you preach and wouldn't eat most of the things on the list if given a choice.
0
u/cbflowers 8h ago
I would gladly keep my opinions to myself except for the fact that my tax dollars subsidize food stamps. Therefore I have a say so in the matter.
1
u/pithynotpithy 8h ago
What if a dad, who is working two manual labor jobs, needs the caffiene to keep up with this brutal schedule, and soda is the most affordable way for him to get it? What if mom wants to provide a sweet treat for their kids to do their homework, and soda is the most affordable way? What if a family just wants to treat themselves to one goddamned good thing as they work hard just to survive?!
Suffice it to say, I'm absolutely done punishing poor people for being poor. The donor class is stealing from us at every turn, suffer no consequences and are demanding more. Republicans want nothing more than to have your demonize the lower classes, while their corporate backers are funneling money from your bank account to theirs.
0
u/cbflowers 8h ago
Ok. Let’s just wish diabetes on these folks.also a coffee has more caffeine and is cheaper so there goes your hypothetical
1
u/pithynotpithy 8h ago
Coffee isn't cheaper and not everyone likes coffee. Clearly you want to spend your time screaming at poor people for being like while the billionaires rob you blind. But I guess some people need folks they can look down on.
1
u/cbflowers 7h ago
Why do you play the victim? If you’ll reread my original comment I said I don’t have a problem helping the less fortunate. That’s hardly “ screaming at the poor” . I do have a problem with my tax dollars going to shit food for the hungry. You can take your self righteous self and fuck right off
1
u/pithynotpithy 2h ago
Support healthy lunches in schools, support incentives for people to buy healthy foods. But spend less time gatekeeping what poor people do with the tiny amount of money they get and more time wondering why Tesla essentially paid zero federal taxes last year when they are owned by a goddamned trillionaire
0
u/thebaine 2h ago
Then he can use the money from his two jobs to buy soda that he wants. Use the food stamps for real nutrition for the kids.
1
1
u/LilEddieDingle 13h ago
Friendly reminder that Gunther Eagleman’s real name is David Freeman and he was fired as a police officer in Harker Heights, TX. He REALLY doesn’t like when people mention it on his Twitter.
0
u/Eazy12345678 12h ago
i mean soda is bad for you. if you are going to get assistance should only be for healthy foods.
anyone getting assistance at any level should have restrictions
-1
u/MurphyBacon 14h ago
both are true in my opinion
2
u/Endereye96 14h ago
My issue with the “people on food stamps shouldn’t get treats” thing is that a lot of disabled people are on food stamps. In a lot of cases it’s their only budget for food. It’s not that they don’t work-it’s that they can’t work.
Are disabled people less deserving of the same food options as you just because they can’t work? They can’t have some cake with their groceries, or some soda?
2
u/MurphyBacon 13h ago
Of course they are deserving of cake, sodas, and occasional treats. I think the argument that they are always trying to make is the purpose of the SNAP program, rather than the perceived deservingness of the people receiving the benefits. "SNAP shouldn't pay for soda" is a smooth-brained comment they make. I think its a reasonable argument to make that sodas and cakes provide little to no nutritional value though. Its about what the program is intended to accomplish. "You don't deserve to have a soda" and "SNAP shouldn't necessarily pay for soda" are two entirely different arguments.
1
u/chomperstyle 13h ago
When its the most reasonable way for some people to have those sodas then they are the same argument. The situations people on snap are in are so drastically different that when you think of any rules for it you have to make them with the most worst case edge scenario in mind. The best course of action is always to just day “let the people receiving the grocery money buy whatever groceries they want”. We shouldn’t be micromanaging what poor people eat. We give grocery money so poor people can afford to not starve, they dont have to eat boiled chicken and rice, they just have to not starve. If they do nothing but eat cake and drink soda then thats their own problem they should have the ability to make that choice. Just because they are getting money from the government doesn’t mean they should (really any) autonomy.
1
u/MurphyBacon 13h ago
So then just hand them cash at that point. What would be the difference between the SNAP program as it is now, and unrestricted cash assistance?
3
u/chomperstyle 12h ago
Because at its core its just really a grocery budget. Unfortunately if you dont give them a food only budget they will starve themselves while putting the money towards other bills. How they choose to feed themselves is their own business at that point.
2
u/MurphyBacon 12h ago
OK but now you're actually making the same argument I've been making. You're saying SNAP needs restrictions because otherwise people might spend the money on things that defeat the purpose of the program. That's exactly the reasoning behind questioning whether certain foods should qualify. So you are for restrictions, as am I.
You went from, and I'm paraphrasing, 'we shouldn't restrict and micromanage how poor people spend their benefits and they should have the autonomy to decide what they need'
to .... 'we need to restrict SNAP to food because otherwise recipients might spend the money on bills and go hungry'
0
u/chomperstyle 9h ago
If thats what you got from my comment then you missed the point of the comments
1
2
u/Current-Wealth-756 11h ago
Or, just hand them an instant pot, some cast iron cookware, and a box of chicken breasts and vegetables and rice and legumes and seasonings. Why not cut out the middle man?
And I guess the answer might have something to do with Coca Cola and PepsiCo and Frito-Lay not wanting to give up billions of dollars that reliably flows from taxes, to government, to assistance programs, to low-income recipients, and then straight into their pockets.
1
2
u/Current-Wealth-756 11h ago
it's not that they shouldn't get treats, its a few things:
* SNAP is Supplemental NUTRITION Assistance Program. A Big Gulp of Sprite is the opposite of nutrition.
* High sugar consumption is directly and incontrovertibly linked to all sorts of expensive medical problems, which will also need to be subsidized by the government / the rest of the population if they develop
* there's nothing at all wrong with saying yes, of course we'll help you buy food, but you can't use the money to poison yourself and create even greater burdens for society down the road
0
0
u/Marsupialize 13h ago
Why the fuck isn’t welfare directly tied to education, mental health, substance abuse and job training?
Why?
This is an easy fix to make a stronger society and mend a huge part of the problems this country has.
Why?
5
u/Flenke 12h ago
Plenty of legit reasons that go against your statement. For example, People often give up work to care full time for elderly relatives or children. Also, a huge chuck of people on welfare are children. What exactly do you expect them to do otherwise?
-2
u/Marsupialize 11h ago
So forget the whole idea for millions of healthy adults because of those groups?
I mean, if people are disabled or what have you that’s an entirely different thing.5
u/Flenke 11h ago
The majority of adults on welfare do work. Nearly 40% of welfare recipients are children. 80% of households have either an elderly person or a child. Learn better
-2
u/Marsupialize 11h ago
Education and further job training and substance abuse/mental health treatment would not benefit these people?
I don’t understand your take, you feel them being stuck on welfare forever is a good thing?3
-2
u/ArubaAdultFun 14h ago
Billionaires use their own money. Food stamps are funded by taxes we pay. I hope this helps you understand why this is not a clever comeback
5
u/Lavender_Willo 13h ago
Mad at a poor kid buying a $1 soda but quiet when a billionaire writes off a $65M yacht. Priorities.
-3
u/ArubaAdultFun 13h ago
That billionaire pays more tax than 99.99% of people. Sales tax on that boat alone is probably more than you or I pay in our lifetime
3
u/Flenke 12h ago
They pay a lower rate than the rest of us, that's the issue
0
u/ArubaAdultFun 12h ago
Not true at all but whatever you tell yourself
4
u/Flenke 12h ago
Guess that's what you tell yourself, but since you're not one of them I can understand why
0
u/ArubaAdultFun 12h ago
I have worked for a few of them and believe me they pay more tax than any of us peasants
3
u/Flenke 12h ago
Not at the rate "us peasants" do. They don't make wages the same as we do and they don't pay on their wealth like we do. Read a book now and then and stop sucking up to people who don't care about you
0
6
u/Everheart1955 13h ago
Billionaires rarely use their own money, they leverage options and borrow against them.
-2
u/ArubaAdultFun 13h ago
Yes thats just smarter. I do the same to avoid insane taxes. I think we should worry more about where our government spends our money as oppose to how can we tax people more
3
u/Imightbeworking 14h ago
I think you missed "writing off" meaning they didn't pay taxes on them since they were used for "business".
-2
u/ArubaAdultFun 14h ago
How does writing off work? Im pretty sure you dont know
6
u/jpsreddit85 13h ago
The billionaire buys a "company" jet then uses it to travel wherever they want regardless of if it's business related. By doing this they can expense it and not pay income tax on the money they'd need to buy it.
So they get to buy billionaire toys without paying tax on the money they used.
Regular people do not get to expense things like their car even if they use it to get to work so the government has taxed them on their income. So therefor the poor person is paying for food stamps through taxes on their transportation costs and the billionaire is not.
I can't draw it in crayons on Reddit so if you still don't get it I can't help.
-1
u/ArubaAdultFun 13h ago
I bought my car too under my business and use it for regular life. Does that make me evil? Thats just smarter.
5
u/jpsreddit85 13h ago
I don't think it makes you evil. I don't think it makes you smarter either. It's just a tax break you get that others don't have access too. Which is the point. That using tax loop holes to avoid paying taxes on stuff you buy is a way of avoiding taxes. The scale at which you don't pay is inconsequential compared to a billionaire on his jet. So worrying about soda on food stamps and not the ridiculous situation with jets being writen off is ridiculous.
1
u/ArubaAdultFun 12h ago
They dont need soda. Water is good enough. Does Coca Cola need more money from your taxes?
3
u/jpsreddit85 12h ago
Can billionaires not afford taxes on their jets? Why don't they take first class like the rest of us.
2
u/ArubaAdultFun 12h ago
They can but why would they? If you can not pay it? Think about how much the fuel the jet uses is taxed? Landing rights too.
2
u/Imightbeworking 12h ago
The jet fuel and landing rights can also be written off to lower their tax burden. You keep coming back with well that is smart of them, which is fine, but it misses the whole point of the post.
The regular person should be more mad about Billionaires writing themselves a tax code with loop holes a regular person does not have access to (utilizing lobbying) where they can pay millions less in taxes, than a poor person buying a soda.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Imightbeworking 13h ago
Well seeing as you just needed someone to tell you how writing off expenses works. I would assume it does not make you smarter because you probably did not write it off.
1
1
u/6EyesNinja 14h ago
We pay for bailouts and subsidizes infrastructure building (stadiums), but the profits get privatized.
Typically the people receiving food stamps are paying taxes, so they are essentially getting their money back.
2
0
0
u/Excellent_Extent7648 14h ago
There are pedophiles in the White House. Let’s deal with that first before we all debate if we should pay for water in the first place. Seems honestly like a dumb ass distraction
-3
u/SkellyboneZ 14h ago
It's possible to be upset or disagree about more than one thing.
4
u/EjaculatingAracnids 14h ago
Sure but the people upset about food stamps are engaging in bad faith. They dont give a fuck about the cost, they have a fabricated idea of what the people who use them look like and are using the issue to rail against those people for politcal gain.
Propose a tax on soda and see the same people rail against it. No one gives a fuck if people on foodstamps are healthy. They could all be eating only cornmeal and the same bad faith actors would claim they shouldnt be able to get salt with it .
2
-1
u/somerandomguy1984 13h ago
Who are the billionaires flying on government funded jets?
Do you mean that you’re mad they get to keep any of their earnings? …yeah… it’s that, we know it’s that.
4
u/Flenke 12h ago
You're never going to be a billionaire and none of them even know you exist.
0
u/somerandomguy1984 8h ago
Correct.
I’m still wondering which ones are getting government funding for their jets.
62
u/WorldlinessBulkyy 14h ago
The ‘outrage is as cheap as that soda’ line is perfect.