5 ms·

> So if you take that and realize there's more money in palatants for humans than in animals, that'll explain an entire obesity epidemic entirely without any ot

> So if you take that and realize there's more money in palatants for humans than in animals, that'll explain an entire obesity epidemic entirely without any other explanations. Well, that's what you get when the economy's health is measured by broad and sweeping measures like GDP. In the current American economy, the fries company makes 20% more, the doctor treating the obese person eating too many fries or the surgeon doing their lap band surgery gets paid, and a lot of insurance companies and middlemen make money. So everything is happening as planned. Without socialized healthcare, there is no incentive for food manufacturers to make their foods not addictive. I wonder if there will ever be regulation regarding this as there is for alcohol and cigarettes. Mandatory calorie counts on fast food menus and such are barely scraping the surface.

hombre_fatal 7y ago
How does socialized healthcare change food manuf incentives? I do also wonder about where it makes sense to draw the line when it comes to nutrition policy. We all share finite healthcare resources, especially as it becomes more socialized. I think at the very least it becomes even more obviously predatory for you to make money off peddling addictive junk food to the masses. I would start there when thinking of helpful policy. Though things get ethically questionable very quickly. Might be more helpful to look into why 7/11 in Japan is full of so much healthy food compared to 7/11 in USA where you're lucky to find a shrink-wrapped apple, and what kind of cultural shift is needed to bring about that change. I feel like that difference summarizes why we are so screwed. We've lost the plot somewhere along the line.
- adventured 7y ago
  It doesn't change much in fact. That's why several prominent socialized healthcare nations are extremely obese just like the US. That includes: Britain, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Greece, Israel. All have adult obesity levels around or over 25%. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Britain are among the most obese nations on the planet - despite having world-class socialized healthcare systems. When it comes to adult obesity among major nations (ie not Tuvalu or Tonga), New Zealand is #11, Canada is #13, Australia is #14, Britain is #20. The only way you can really control that as the parent was trying to imply, is through direct government control of all food consumption and production.
  - quadrifoliate 7y ago
    > through direct government control of all food consumption and production This is an alarmist representation. Incentives can work just fine in a market-driven economic system, witness the most recent tax cuts that were passed into law. Would a generous tax cut for stores that sell mostly fresh food be that bad?
  - NikolaeVarius 7y ago
    Man its a shame New Zealand has such bad obesity figures. The outdoors activities are great. Tons of great trail running/backpacking/hiking to be done
  - wahern 7y ago
    France, too, seems to have hit a cultural inflection point. Obesity rates are quickly climbing. Maybe it's bias, but over the past several years I've also noticed several stories about how McDonalds is becoming more popular in France, as well as the flight of the middle-class out of traditional towns into suburban homes, shopping in suburban malls.
njarboe 7y ago
I agree the government trying to optimize to increasing GDP is not great for society, but it does also optimize for maximum tax revenue increase, so I understand why its done. I don't see any reason why one needs to socialize healthcare in order to regulate foodstuffs. Food manufacturers are going to make their foods stuffs addictive if people buy them more because of that, not whether a country has socialized medicine. One might even argue that people have less incentive to work on being healthy when their healthcare is paid by someone else.
- kikoreis 7y ago
  I think the point being made is that when the government bears the cost of the externality it is more incentivized to address root causes, as it is a direct driver of savings. I am always looking for this sort of alignment of incentives when structuring a project, and it takes some effort but when you can find it it's dynamite.
  - true_religion 7y ago
    With prisons the government bears the cost, and would benefit if fewer people were in prison. In practice, it has lead to for profit prisons and judicial corruption.
    - quadrifoliate 7y ago
      This is due to revolving door lobbying inherent in the political system, which is why states have started banning contracts with private prisons.
  - quadrifoliate 7y ago
    > I think the point being made is that when the government bears the cost of the externality it is more incentivized to address root causes, as it is a direct driver of savings. Thank you, this is indeed the point that was intended. It's not a direct case of the food manufacturer saying "Hey we have socialized healthcare, let's make healthier chips", it's the government thinking "Damn, we have a lot of obese people, let's have incentives or rules that make manufacturers produce healthier foods".

hombre_fatal 7y ago

How does socialized healthcare change food manuf incentives? I do also wonder about where it makes sense to draw the line when it comes to nutrition policy. We all share finite healthcare resources, especially as it becomes more socialized. I think at the very least it becomes even more obviously predatory for you to make money off peddling addictive junk food to the masses. I would start there when thinking of helpful policy. Though things get ethically questionable very quickly. Might be more helpful to look into why 7/11 in Japan is full of so much healthy food compared to 7/11 in USA where you're lucky to find a shrink-wrapped apple, and what kind of cultural shift is needed to bring about that change. I feel like that difference summarizes why we are so screwed. We've lost the plot somewhere along the line.

adventured 7y ago
It doesn't change much in fact. That's why several prominent socialized healthcare nations are extremely obese just like the US. That includes: Britain, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Greece, Israel. All have adult obesity levels around or over 25%. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Britain are among the most obese nations on the planet - despite having world-class socialized healthcare systems. When it comes to adult obesity among major nations (ie not Tuvalu or Tonga), New Zealand is #11, Canada is #13, Australia is #14, Britain is #20. The only way you can really control that as the parent was trying to imply, is through direct government control of all food consumption and production.
- quadrifoliate 7y ago
  > through direct government control of all food consumption and production This is an alarmist representation. Incentives can work just fine in a market-driven economic system, witness the most recent tax cuts that were passed into law. Would a generous tax cut for stores that sell mostly fresh food be that bad?
- NikolaeVarius 7y ago
  Man its a shame New Zealand has such bad obesity figures. The outdoors activities are great. Tons of great trail running/backpacking/hiking to be done
- wahern 7y ago
  France, too, seems to have hit a cultural inflection point. Obesity rates are quickly climbing. Maybe it's bias, but over the past several years I've also noticed several stories about how McDonalds is becoming more popular in France, as well as the flight of the middle-class out of traditional towns into suburban homes, shopping in suburban malls.

njarboe 7y ago

I agree the government trying to optimize to increasing GDP is not great for society, but it does also optimize for maximum tax revenue increase, so I understand why its done. I don't see any reason why one needs to socialize healthcare in order to regulate foodstuffs. Food manufacturers are going to make their foods stuffs addictive if people buy them more because of that, not whether a country has socialized medicine. One might even argue that people have less incentive to work on being healthy when their healthcare is paid by someone else.

kikoreis 7y ago
I think the point being made is that when the government bears the cost of the externality it is more incentivized to address root causes, as it is a direct driver of savings. I am always looking for this sort of alignment of incentives when structuring a project, and it takes some effort but when you can find it it's dynamite.
- true_religion 7y ago
  With prisons the government bears the cost, and would benefit if fewer people were in prison. In practice, it has lead to for profit prisons and judicial corruption.
  - quadrifoliate 7y ago
    This is due to revolving door lobbying inherent in the political system, which is why states have started banning contracts with private prisons.
- quadrifoliate 7y ago
  > I think the point being made is that when the government bears the cost of the externality it is more incentivized to address root causes, as it is a direct driver of savings. Thank you, this is indeed the point that was intended. It's not a direct case of the food manufacturer saying "Hey we have socialized healthcare, let's make healthier chips", it's the government thinking "Damn, we have a lot of obese people, let's have incentives or rules that make manufacturers produce healthier foods".