5 ms·

I'd argue it's unfixable for low income workers. Excessive sugar in all the cheap food is a trap they can't avoid. They don't have money to buy better food and

I'd argue it's unfixable for low income workers. Excessive sugar in all the cheap food is a trap they can't avoid. They don't have money to buy better food and don't have time to shop and cook for themselves. That's assuming they recognize this problem at all.

jacobush 6y ago
A) don’t subsidise sugar B) tax sugar
- dominotw 6y ago
  > B It was tried and rolled back in chicago because it was deemed as unfairly targeting the poor.
  - jacobush 6y ago
    Did Chicago stop corn subsidies in the US?
    - dominotw 6y ago
      no? but wouldn't it have the same effect of burdening the poor more?
      - jacobush 6y ago
        No
  - hagy 6y ago
    Since there is a higher incidence of smoking among poorer folks[0], couldn't the same argument apply to the massive sin tax on cigarettes? We justify such sin taxes as being to the benefit of discouraging a harmful health behavior and personally I see the same link with higher sugar consumption. [0] https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/targeted-communities/tobacco-social-justice-issue-low-income-communities https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/targeted-comm...
  - ebg13 6y ago
    > It was tried and rolled back in chicago because it was deemed as unfairly targeting the poor. There's no reason why you couldn't pair taxing sugar with price-subsidies on non-sugary foods. The US already knows how to subsidize food production. Just stop subsidizing corn syrup and shift the subsidies to something less clearly destructive.
    - dominotw 6y ago
      > price-subsidies on non-sugary foods. That makes a big assumption that people aren't buying more spinach because of price of spinach. beans and rice are already super cheap. Much healthier and cheaper option than mcdonalds.
      - ebg13 6y ago
        > beans and rice are already super cheap. Much healthier and cheaper option than mcdonalds. Why are you slyly shifting from "sugar" to "mcdonalds"? Minus drinks and desserts, McDonalds' offerings are not high in sugar. > That makes a big assumption that people aren't buying more spinach because of price of spinach. The price per calorie of spinach is extremely high. Micronutrients are great and all, but you can't live off micronutrients alone.
        dominotw 6y ago
        > Why are you slyly shifting from "sugar" to "mcdonalds"? Minus drinks and desserts, McDonalds' offerings are not high in sugar. Aren't carbohydrates sugar though? Why is the distinction between sugar in drinks and sugar is burger buns relevant to the discussion. > Micronutrients are great and all, but you can't live off micronutrients alone. Why did you slyly ignore 'beans and rice' in my comment. I wasn't suggesting people get their calories from spinach, what a weird interpretation. my mexican family of 5 ate this combo every single day ,growing up. spinach + rice+ beans and occasional meat was afforable on one gardner's salary.
        jacobush 6y ago
- vertbhrtn 6y ago
  You assume good faith here. I'd argue that the "system" is intentionally set up this way.
mobilefriendly 6y ago
More than 40 million Americans are on food stamps (govt food support). In reality, many food basics like milk, rice and beans are healthy and affordable.
- losteric 6y ago
  Affordable, yes, but require more time and skill to cook a meal that hits the same reward centers as the edible junk sold in cheap restaurant chains... often both short in supply among those on food stamps.
- DangitBobby 6y ago
  Plenty of people are low income or otherwise cash poor by reasonable standards, but not low enough to qualify for food stamps.
- barrenko 6y ago
  Milk is not healthy, rice barely can qualify but I guess it's food. Beans are.
AuryGlenz 6y ago
Vegetables are cheap. Beans are cheap. Chicken and turkey are cheap. McDonalds is not cheap, but it’s easy. It astounds me how many people eat out almost every meal.
- vertbhrtn 6y ago
  Beans and all that isn't cheap overall: it takes will, effort and time to figure out what to buy and how to cook it. If that was packaged into cheap ready to eat burgers, spiced with something to make it more tolerable, then poor folks would switch to it. This approach isn't economically sound, though: it has 0 profit margins and it cuts deep into the fastfood & healthcare owners.
- amelius 6y ago
  Quality vegetables aren't cheap. At least not for the consumer.
- jogjayr 6y ago
  Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
- mschuster91 6y ago
  They are cheap if bought in bulk (which many poor people can't do because of upfront cost or lack of freezer space) and if there actually is a place to buy at least decent-quality vegs.

jacobush 6y ago

A) don’t subsidise sugar B) tax sugar

dominotw 6y ago
> B It was tried and rolled back in chicago because it was deemed as unfairly targeting the poor.
- jacobush 6y ago
  Did Chicago stop corn subsidies in the US?
  - dominotw 6y ago
    no? but wouldn't it have the same effect of burdening the poor more?
    - jacobush 6y ago
      No
- hagy 6y ago
  Since there is a higher incidence of smoking among poorer folks[0], couldn't the same argument apply to the massive sin tax on cigarettes? We justify such sin taxes as being to the benefit of discouraging a harmful health behavior and personally I see the same link with higher sugar consumption. [0] https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/targeted-communities/tobacco-social-justice-issue-low-income-communities https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/targeted-comm...
- ebg13 6y ago
  > It was tried and rolled back in chicago because it was deemed as unfairly targeting the poor. There's no reason why you couldn't pair taxing sugar with price-subsidies on non-sugary foods. The US already knows how to subsidize food production. Just stop subsidizing corn syrup and shift the subsidies to something less clearly destructive.
  - dominotw 6y ago
    > price-subsidies on non-sugary foods. That makes a big assumption that people aren't buying more spinach because of price of spinach. beans and rice are already super cheap. Much healthier and cheaper option than mcdonalds.
    - ebg13 6y ago
      > beans and rice are already super cheap. Much healthier and cheaper option than mcdonalds. Why are you slyly shifting from "sugar" to "mcdonalds"? Minus drinks and desserts, McDonalds' offerings are not high in sugar. > That makes a big assumption that people aren't buying more spinach because of price of spinach. The price per calorie of spinach is extremely high. Micronutrients are great and all, but you can't live off micronutrients alone.
      - dominotw 6y ago
        > Why are you slyly shifting from "sugar" to "mcdonalds"? Minus drinks and desserts, McDonalds' offerings are not high in sugar. Aren't carbohydrates sugar though? Why is the distinction between sugar in drinks and sugar is burger buns relevant to the discussion. > Micronutrients are great and all, but you can't live off micronutrients alone. Why did you slyly ignore 'beans and rice' in my comment. I wasn't suggesting people get their calories from spinach, what a weird interpretation. my mexican family of 5 ate this combo every single day ,growing up. spinach + rice+ beans and occasional meat was afforable on one gardner's salary.
        jacobush 6y ago
vertbhrtn 6y ago
You assume good faith here. I'd argue that the "system" is intentionally set up this way.

mobilefriendly 6y ago

More than 40 million Americans are on food stamps (govt food support). In reality, many food basics like milk, rice and beans are healthy and affordable.

losteric 6y ago
Affordable, yes, but require more time and skill to cook a meal that hits the same reward centers as the edible junk sold in cheap restaurant chains... often both short in supply among those on food stamps.
DangitBobby 6y ago
Plenty of people are low income or otherwise cash poor by reasonable standards, but not low enough to qualify for food stamps.
barrenko 6y ago
Milk is not healthy, rice barely can qualify but I guess it's food. Beans are.

AuryGlenz 6y ago

Vegetables are cheap. Beans are cheap. Chicken and turkey are cheap. McDonalds is not cheap, but it’s easy. It astounds me how many people eat out almost every meal.

vertbhrtn 6y ago
Beans and all that isn't cheap overall: it takes will, effort and time to figure out what to buy and how to cook it. If that was packaged into cheap ready to eat burgers, spiced with something to make it more tolerable, then poor folks would switch to it. This approach isn't economically sound, though: it has 0 profit margins and it cuts deep into the fastfood & healthcare owners.
amelius 6y ago
Quality vegetables aren't cheap. At least not for the consumer.
jogjayr 6y ago
Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
mschuster91 6y ago
They are cheap if bought in bulk (which many poor people can't do because of upfront cost or lack of freezer space) and if there actually is a place to buy at least decent-quality vegs.