2 ms·

> Kind of feels weird to act like people can't cook or prepare their own food from cheap ingredients, but I guess homeless people, for example, can't really. T

> Kind of feels weird to act like people can't cook or prepare their own food from cheap ingredients, but I guess homeless people, for example, can't really. This is a good start to understanding the correlation. Going further, poor people are often time- and energy-poor as well, whether working irregular hours or multiple jobs or simply doing themselves and their families what people with greater means might pay for. Add that being poor doesn’t afford the best kitchen conditions (space, cookware and other equipment, fuel/electricity), and working around those limitations is added drain on any available time and energy one might afford… like so many other things, it’s expensive to be poor. While it may be objectively possible to eat healthy, it’s often an unrealistic or at least demanding expectation given the circumstances.

jolmg 4y ago
> While it may be objectively possible to eat healthy, it’s often an unrealistic or at least demanding expectation given the circumstances. Wow. wow. Let's recap most expensive to least: ready-made healthy > ready-made junkfood > cooking. We're talking about the poor, and we're talking about whether they prefer ready-made junkfood over cooking. You're telling me that they're too tired and lacking of resources to cook, to eat healthy. Now, the bar to cooking more healthy than junkfood is very low, very easy. Cooking is a very flexible activity. You can even just make sandwiches and you're beating junkfood in both cost and healthiness. That takes no energy and no resources (maybe a fridge, though one can buy ham just for the day and keep it in a cool place for a single-meal day). If they can have a stove (which can be cheap and even portable), they don't need a fridge and eggs take like 5 minutes no matter the quantity of people they have to cook for. Like, what are you arguing? It's expensive to be poor, but cooking is not expensive. It's the cheapest option.
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  I’m exhausted just … not wanting to explain what I already explained, but okay. I’m not even poor, just finally about to eat my microwave leftovers after getting settled in after almost two months on the road trying to make sure my parents are cared for. I’m not arguing anything but I’m not cooking anything either, I’m tired and that’s all I’ve got to say.

jolmg 4y ago

> While it may be objectively possible to eat healthy, it’s often an unrealistic or at least demanding expectation given the circumstances. Wow. wow. Let's recap most expensive to least: ready-made healthy > ready-made junkfood > cooking. We're talking about the poor, and we're talking about whether they prefer ready-made junkfood over cooking. You're telling me that they're too tired and lacking of resources to cook, to eat healthy. Now, the bar to cooking more healthy than junkfood is very low, very easy. Cooking is a very flexible activity. You can even just make sandwiches and you're beating junkfood in both cost and healthiness. That takes no energy and no resources (maybe a fridge, though one can buy ham just for the day and keep it in a cool place for a single-meal day). If they can have a stove (which can be cheap and even portable), they don't need a fridge and eggs take like 5 minutes no matter the quantity of people they have to cook for. Like, what are you arguing? It's expensive to be poor, but cooking is not expensive. It's the cheapest option.

eyelidlessness 4y ago
I’m exhausted just … not wanting to explain what I already explained, but okay. I’m not even poor, just finally about to eat my microwave leftovers after getting settled in after almost two months on the road trying to make sure my parents are cared for. I’m not arguing anything but I’m not cooking anything either, I’m tired and that’s all I’ve got to say.