Government can't get us off sugar

Government can't get us off sugar: Glenn Reynolds

Glenn Reynolds brings up an important question, "Should food stamp programs allow people to buy sugary drinks and snacks with taxpayer money?  Reynolds mentions that he is fine with the program banning those products and move towards just approving essential foods. He backs his argument with the book The Case AgainstSugar by Gary Taubes. Taubes mentions the increase of sugar caused an increase of diabetes. In the 1980's with the help of lobbyist, the sugar industry made "fat" the villain; which made "fat free" the thing to be but with less fat in your products more sugar was added for flavor. 

It may be a socialist view to have the government regulate what the people eat but if it's a government program supported by taxpayers is it bad? Obesity is becoming an epidemic and our health as a nation is deteriorating. The solution may seem easy and obvious also a perfect way to get people on board to a better life. The answer is a lot more complex. This nation runs on the color green. Not veggies or green smoothies but money. Healthier options are not cheap and cannot sustain a family. Therefor, increasing the budget for the program and taking money from other programs. Buying hot dogs, burger patties and “just-add water” meals are cheaper and can longer sustain a family, spending less government money. I’m for food stamps being restricted to essential and healthy options but without raising taxes and depleting other government programs.