3 ms·
> beans and rice are already super cheap. Much healthier and cheaper option than mcdonalds. Why are you slyly shifting from "sugar" to "mcdonalds"? Minus drink
by 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 agoI think a multipronged approach is needed. Many families in the food deserts lost the know how to cook properly. But it’s very unfortunate that the most subsidised crop is corn. If beans were, I am sure it would be perverted too somehow but maybe not as bad. My general point is that the incentives today are all wrong. Many things need to be fixed and subsidies of corn syrup is one egregious thing.