Comments on: Dear Megan McArdle,

By: littlem

littlem — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:13:11 +0000

One of my degrees is from IU, so chalk this up to school rivalry if you must.

Pay no attention to the … being … behind the Purdue Attorney curtain. The articles … it … cites refer to a situation where a man and his wife apparently survived on 2.47 per day of food-stamp food.

The articles provide no information as to whether there were more people to feed in their family.

The articles provide no information (they mentioned that the couple “cooked at home”) as to what the couple’s working schedule hours were so as to permit supportable sustenance on such a budget.

Without such information, I submit that whatever conclusion Purdue Attorney is trying to assert/imply doesn’t stand up to comparable circumstances for families that receive Food Stamps.

We’re not even going to get into regional differences for food pricing.

(Especially since some of my best friends are descendants of some of those HFCS-subsidized Indiana farm families, by gum.)

Carry on.

By: Teke

Teke — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:58:46 +0000

Most foods contain sugar,corn syrup,high fructose sugars, etc. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is so much obesity and diabetes in the USA. Now everything contains some sort of soy in it. That will be next on the health issues giving it time to show up.
When I was growing up, my brother and I stayed outdoors most of the time.
We were poor. We did very little sitting in front of the tv. We didn’t have x-box or p.c.’s. We climbed trees and rode our bkies.
The food stamp allotment today is very little for anyone to survive on.
I get $81 per month for 2 people in household.
I am 52 yrs old and 100% totally disabled, get $996 S.S.I. Disability per month to live on.
With milk being $4 per gallon, bread $2.50 a loaf, eggs $3 a dozen,
$81 buys very little. And yes I do buy mac & cheese, hot dogs, and fish sticks, because that food will go further than a head of lettuce, or any costly Niman beef.
And let’s not forget how much gas costs.
God Bless all of those who are trying to make it with the help of food stamps.
Write our Congressmen to get higher food stamp allotments so we can eat fresh and try to maintain a healthier lifestyle.

By: Sniper

Sniper — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:12:41 +0000

Ugh. It is insane that foodstamps don’t pay for everything, just insane. I remember being in line behind a young woman with a toddler who had a handful of canned goods and a little container of stuffed cabbage or something from the deli. The clerk was explaining that she couldn’t have the cabbage on “the program” so she was trying to scrap up the cash for it. She looked embarrassed and exhausted. Would society really fall into ruin if someone could buy ready-made food with government assistance? Cripes.

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:12:13 +0000

What always gets ignored on the topic of junk food and policy is the massive agricultural subsidies that promote it. (not to mention the worldwide economic distortions that result, the impoverishing of farmers in poor countries that can’t compete with subsidized agriculture, etc.) All that glop contains and gets substantial proportions of its calories, at some point in the chain of production, from corn and soy products: corn syrup in soft drinks and sweets, soy texturing in meat and potato products, corn fed to feedlot beef, the list goes on and on. Those crops are heavily subsidized, and are among the “big five” of subsidies (corn, wheat, rice, soy and cotton) paid by the USDA. Part of the reason that the poor make unhealthy food choices is simple economics: those subsidies make junk food items artificially cheaper by comparison to healthier choices. Reforming the disgraceful mess that those subsidy programs represents really ought to be a no-brainer, particularly for a libertarian.

By: Mnemosyne

Mnemosyne — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 01:31:02 +0000

I’m with Becks; if you really think that poor people are fat simply because they make bad food choices, I’d suggest you take this challenge.

She claims that she already did, for a conveniently unsold article, but it didn’t make any impression on her.

By: Starve Them If They Can’t Earn a Buck « Jonestown

Starve Them If They Can’t Earn a Buck « Jonestown — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:04:32 +0000

[...] a great response, written by Jill at Feministe, to McArdle’s boneheaded Atlantic piece. I’m with Becks; if [...]

By: fishbane

fishbane — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:40:32 +0000

Maven –

As probably the most libertarianish* person here, I thought I’d explain what I take to be McMegan’s case. She isn’t saying that people should be forced to be skinny, but, to her mind, is suggesting policy that will improve overall health. (That she’s completely wrong doesn’t change this.) Many people with libertarian sensibilities care deeply about what happens to people, but disagree with progressive notions as to how to do something about it. That doesn’t make them right, but they (we) are not all Randian nutcases. Only most of us. :)

* I should explain, I suppose, but it is complex. Pro single-payer, anti drugwar, pro public assistance that actually assists, anti Kelo, huge fan of self-sufficiency, huge fan of entrepreneurial methods of self-help, pro choice, generally in favor of methods that allow people to do what they want, be that cutting red tape, assisting when needed, or organizing a potluck barn raiser type event.

I didn’t get the prep school (went to an unaccredited Southern high school), but I am moving from Brooklyn to the UWS next month. Not all of us who want to live there came pre-equipped with a silver spoon. Just so you know.

By: Miss Sarajevo

Miss Sarajevo — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:34:42 +0000

A few years ago, I took a political philosophy class with a bunch of really, really infuriating libertarians. At one point, I told one of the most extreme to, “Go live in Somalia if you think small or no government would be so awesome. I hear you might last a couple of hours.”

Unhelpful? Sure. Insulting to Somalis? Probably. Nicer than what I was actually thinking? You bet.

By: Maven

Maven — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 21:56:32 +0000

Just one more penny’s worth from me, if Libertarianism is a philosophy based in the individual’s liberty, what possesses McArdle to give a rat’s behind about who is fat and who isn’t, regardless of the root cause?

Funny how things go in cycles to indicate wealth. A hundred years ago, milled and fine soaps and bath stuffs were for the higher classes and was a sign of wealth; pale skin was a sign that you didn’t have to work hard outdoors for your living; then “having meat on one’s bones” was a sign of abundance. Now thin is a socio-economic indicator that one is wealthy enough to eat well and have the luxury of time to exercise.

It’s difficult enough in life to be a woman, without all the signals, correct and otherwise, which get tossed our way; from the way our bodies smell and look, it’s amazing more women don’t off themselves from the constant pressure to conform.

By: PhysioProf

PhysioProf — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 20:32:33 +0000

McCardle’s “libertarianism” is a crock of fucking shit. It’s because of massive governmental subsidies to the production of high-fructose corn syrup that the cheapest food to buy is poison that makes you fat. There is a reason why ranchers feed their cattle corn to fatten them up. She’s a vile, greedy twit who uses “libertarianism” as a cover for her hatred of everyone other than her Upper West Side prep school pals.