I have to disagree. My personal shopping bill never exceeds £100 per month. I'm a lousy cook and my meals never take longer than 25 minutes to make. Meat takes a good long while to cook, and the fast food which is so popular in food deserts is expensive
If we're speaking about after the fact, we can argue that a bad diet compounds and forms a pattern of behaviour; that consumers have been duped into becoming "addicted to sugar;" that poor creates poor mental health and subsequently, bad choices, but then you're robbing the
-
-
consumer of any kind of agency
-
Agency can be manipulated by superstimuli. Those with the most life stress are the least able to "exercise agency", because it takes SIGNIFICANT effort to break cycles. Corporations are incentivized to make superstimulus foods (and make them cheap), read about the "bliss point".
-
And food companies aren't the only ones who attempt to design their products as superstimuli. "Live in a food desert? Shoulda made better choices." treats human agency in a similar way as attached.pic.twitter.com/e9jbydF84u
-
Nobody's denying that food manufacturers manipulate customers agency through the bliss point or marketing, but, short of a top-down solution, (which is undesirable in my opinion, except maybe for sugar taxes and the like) the battered and bruised agency of the consumer is his
-
only means out of this mess and we ought not convince him that he's entirely subservient to those (admittedly pernicious) external forces if we want to get anywhere without having to call in the state
-
That's an ideological stance you're allowed to hold if you'd like, but I disagree. I personally see Food as one of the coordination/incentivization failures of capitalism, which is typically where state intervention is necessary. Instead, the US govt subsidizes corn production.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.