Maybe better to educate people regarding nutrition than to ban sales of some foods, snacks or treats. Growing up in the deep south, we ate lots of starch because it was easy to grow and cheap to buy. Healthy? No. As our area was industrialized we got more money. Did we get better food - yes. Also more "co-cola". Many families still chose to eat starchy foods and chug cokes. It was what we were used to. Beans and fried potatoes and corn, fried squash and coke.
What I am trying to convey is that education is better than bans.
Poor people want what others have. Even in the depression people would still buy a coke. Poor often means uneducated or poorly educated. There are also choices, if you grew up eating a certain sort of food, you still want it, but a soda makes it even better.
Oddly, before colas were common every day drinks rather than a treat, we made do with Southern sweet tea. It tastes like tea syrup. The really poor kids had koolaid. They really wanted cokes. When they got money, they bought them.
Besides, they should have it if they want it. Big whoop. The Prohibition did not work either. Saying no is often a red flag to want it more.
Eh, jmo.
Souggy - I agree that healthy, unadulterated food should be affordable to everyone.
Schools should educate about nutrition by both book and preparation, like the old home ec. days. That way kids would learn what to do with the good foods once they have them and to better manage monies.