Ethical Freeloading

I seem to recall the days when food stamps and similar government programs (anyone remember surplus cheese, peanut butter, and crackers?) were intended as a safety net to ensure that no one starved. Somehow they have morphed into give-aways where recipients can use our tax dollars to purchase all sorts of items that have little or no relation to basic nutrition. In fact, there is no resemblance between America's grossly obese freeloaders waddling down the aisles of stores filled with all manner of edibles, and those emaciated stick-figures from third-world hellholes that are literally starving to death.

We have now reached the point where some people object to even the mildest of restrictions being placed on government give-away programs.

Is it Ethical to Ban Food Stamp Users From Buying Soda?

In another move aimed at improving New Yorkers' health by regulation, mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced  a proposal to bar food stamp users from buying sodas with city funds. The proposed two-year ban, which is currently under consideration by the Department of Agriculture, is intended to combat obesity and diabetes. The mayor, who already banned trans-fats from restaurants and lobbied against excessive salt in foods, says the "initiative will give New York families more money to spend on foods and drinks that provide real nourishment." Though 57 percent of the city's adults are overweight or obese, the plan has met with skepticism from critics who it see as a paternalistic gesture.

I share the paternalistic concern to some extent, in that I don't think the government has any right to restrict what vendors sell or consumers purchase, as long as there is full disclosure of the contents. But it's one thing to be concerned about government interference with a private transaction between two consenting entities. It's another thing altogether to place reasonable restrictions on people receiving governmental largess.

Is This Really the Best Way? Time's Meredith Melnick details the opposition to the ban: "Not everyone agrees that restriction is the best solution. Advocates for the urban poor suggest that such a move would patronize and alienate an already stigmatized population. In 2004, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) rejected a similar Minnesota proposal to bar people from buying candy and soda with food stamps, because it perpetuated the stereotype that food stamp-users make bad food choices."

GMAFB.

We can't prevent food stamps from being used to buy candy and soda because it might hurt someone's feelings? What a crock of shit. And the fact that those porkers do in fact use food stamps for that purpose is not 'perpetuating a stereotype,' but rather confirming the notion that they do make bad food choices.

If people in a public program continually and demonstrably make poor choices, then it's time to limit those choices.

I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but for God's sake whatever happened to common sense?