Wisconsin is one of those states that really hates poor people. (Yeah, we know. Just like the other 49.) The state's Republicans are particularly obsessed with what poors eat, or don't eat, or where they buy food to eat, or whether they'rereallypoor enough to deserve to eat, or how best to humiliate them for wanting to eat. So in addition to
Again your ignorance shines so brightly. Walker didn't carry Milwakee and Dane counties, where the majority of the poor are concentrated. In other districts, he won by heavy gerrymandering (wait, that's probably way over your head) and convincingly won in the most affluent counties.
You are on about a particular pet peeve of mine. I used Planned Parenthood in college to get my beginning slut pills; I've been married to that guy for going on 17 years now. Never had an unintended pregnancy. I owe a whole lifetime of awesome good things, not to mention the kids we have now, to good choices enabled by what are Planned Parenthood's most frequently utilized services.
Checked our NJ list, and I see you are correct, MLF...I would be able to buy General Mills "Dora the Explorer" cereal, but my favorite Shop-Rite brand granola is a no-no. The specific cereal stipulations are outrageous. Who gets paid big gubmint bucks to make these lists?!
If you go by this list, BREAD has sugar added to it. People can't even buy basic bread , or meats. Geez, what are poor people supposed to eat? The EBT cards?
The jokers that wrote this must not have any relatives in rural Wisconsin... (farming communities)....Where do they think the food stamps go to?? They go to pay for food from farmers, hopefully WI farmers. Good lord, they can't even tell there's NO difference between a white egg and a brown egg? It's the same egg. I guess once you go and segregate people due to color, you might as well segregate eggs by color as well. Republicans just can't help themselves.
This article is conflating WIC and SNAP benefits, which are two different programs with two different sets of goals and eligibility. The list of prohibited foods comes from the WIC program, which is specifically geared to the nutritional needs of pregnant and nursing women, and young children. These limits are the same for the WIC program in every state and not unique to WI.
"Under this bill, DHS must require that not less than 67 percent of the SNAP benefits used by a recipient in a month be used to purchase any of the following foods: foods that are on the list of foods authorized for the federal special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children (WIC foods)"
Except... I have data to back up every last one of my assertions. Published, peer-reviewed studies every last one.
Abstract
A key issue in the debate on the contribution of organic agriculture to the future of world agriculture is whether organic agriculture can produce sufficient food to feed the world. Comparisons of organic and conventional yields play a central role in this debate. We therefore compiled and analyzed a meta-dataset of 362 published organic–conventional comparative crop yields. Our results show that organic yields of individual crops are on average 80% of conventional yields, but variation is substantial (standard deviation 21%). In our dataset, the organic yield gap significantly differed between crop groups and regions. The analysis gave some support to our hypothesis that the organic–conventional yield gap increases as conventional yields increase, but this relationship was only rather weak. The rationale behind this hypothesis is that when conventional yields are high and relatively close to the potential or water-limited level, nutrient stress must, as per definition of the potential or water-limited yield levels, be low and pests and diseases well controlled, which are conditions more difficult to attain in organic agriculture.
We discuss our findings in the context of the literature on this subject and address the issue of upscaling our results to higher system levels. Our analysis was at field and crop level. We hypothesize that due to challenges in the maintenance of nutrient availability in organic systems at crop rotation, farm and regional level, the average yield gap between conventional and organic systems may be larger than 20% at higher system levels. This relates in particular to the role of legumes in the rotation and the farming system, and to the availability of (organic) manure at the farm and regional levels. Future research should therefore focus on assessing the relative performance of both types of agriculture at higher system levels, i.e. the farm, regional and global system levels, and should in that context pay particular attention to nutrient availability in both organic and conventional agriculture.
You responded, with insults right off the bat, to an original comment I wrote, a step you could have VERY easily avoided by simply ignoring the comment, yet I'm the troll.
Typical pathetic response from a very poor thinker and first-rate dummy.
Somewhere some right wing dickheads sat in a room deciding that poor people cannot eat the stereotypical, quintessential poor people food, hobo pork and beans. Too fancy. The economic and societal meltdown that global warming will bring on cannot come fast enough.
Again your ignorance shines so brightly. Walker didn't carry Milwakee and Dane counties, where the majority of the poor are concentrated. In other districts, he won by heavy gerrymandering (wait, that's probably way over your head) and convincingly won in the most affluent counties.
You are on about a particular pet peeve of mine. I used Planned Parenthood in college to get my beginning slut pills; I've been married to that guy for going on 17 years now. Never had an unintended pregnancy. I owe a whole lifetime of awesome good things, not to mention the kids we have now, to good choices enabled by what are Planned Parenthood's most frequently utilized services.
Checked our NJ list, and I see you are correct, MLF...I would be able to buy General Mills "Dora the Explorer" cereal, but my favorite Shop-Rite brand granola is a no-no. The specific cereal stipulations are outrageous. Who gets paid big gubmint bucks to make these lists?!
Whenever I go to the store, the sharp cheese is the same prices as the same brand of mild or medium.
You are seriously arguing that Blue State Wisconsin doesn't have enough Democratic voters to defeat a Republican candidate in a state-wide election?
Seriously?
If you go by this list, BREAD has sugar added to it. People can't even buy basic bread , or meats. Geez, what are poor people supposed to eat? The EBT cards?
The jokers that wrote this must not have any relatives in rural Wisconsin... (farming communities)....Where do they think the food stamps go to?? They go to pay for food from farmers, hopefully WI farmers. Good lord, they can't even tell there's NO difference between a white egg and a brown egg? It's the same egg. I guess once you go and segregate people due to color, you might as well segregate eggs by color as well. Republicans just can't help themselves.
This article is conflating WIC and SNAP benefits, which are two different programs with two different sets of goals and eligibility. The list of prohibited foods comes from the WIC program, which is specifically geared to the nutritional needs of pregnant and nursing women, and young children. These limits are the same for the WIC program in every state and not unique to WI.
how much are these officials being paid to make all these 100% useless rules? now theres some serious welfare queens right there!
"Under this bill, DHS must require that not less than 67 percent of the SNAP benefits used by a recipient in a month be used to purchase any of the following foods: foods that are on the list of foods authorized for the federal special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children (WIC foods)"
They are placing SNAP recipients under WIC rules.
Except... I have data to back up every last one of my assertions. Published, peer-reviewed studies every last one.
Abstract
A key issue in the debate on the contribution of organic agriculture to the future of world agriculture is whether organic agriculture can produce sufficient food to feed the world. Comparisons of organic and conventional yields play a central role in this debate. We therefore compiled and analyzed a meta-dataset of 362 published organic–conventional comparative crop yields. Our results show that organic yields of individual crops are on average 80% of conventional yields, but variation is substantial (standard deviation 21%). In our dataset, the organic yield gap significantly differed between crop groups and regions. The analysis gave some support to our hypothesis that the organic–conventional yield gap increases as conventional yields increase, but this relationship was only rather weak. The rationale behind this hypothesis is that when conventional yields are high and relatively close to the potential or water-limited level, nutrient stress must, as per definition of the potential or water-limited yield levels, be low and pests and diseases well controlled, which are conditions more difficult to attain in organic agriculture.
We discuss our findings in the context of the literature on this subject and address the issue of upscaling our results to higher system levels. Our analysis was at field and crop level. We hypothesize that due to challenges in the maintenance of nutrient availability in organic systems at crop rotation, farm and regional level, the average yield gap between conventional and organic systems may be larger than 20% at higher system levels. This relates in particular to the role of legumes in the rotation and the farming system, and to the availability of (organic) manure at the farm and regional levels. Future research should therefore focus on assessing the relative performance of both types of agriculture at higher system levels, i.e. the farm, regional and global system levels, and should in that context pay particular attention to nutrient availability in both organic and conventional agriculture.
http://www.sciencedirect.co...
Oh dear. you think that Organic doesn't use pesticides... How cute. And ignorant.http://blogs.scientificamer...
I don't feed trolls.Carry on.
LOL
You responded, with insults right off the bat, to an original comment I wrote, a step you could have VERY easily avoided by simply ignoring the comment, yet I'm the troll.
Typical pathetic response from a very poor thinker and first-rate dummy.
No...no...make that third-rate.
Seriously? Wtf, Wisconsin? I remember when you had a reputation as a somewhat progressive state. Does the Koch really taste that good now?
Somewhere some right wing dickheads sat in a room deciding that poor people cannot eat the stereotypical, quintessential poor people food, hobo pork and beans. Too fancy. The economic and societal meltdown that global warming will bring on cannot come fast enough.