And guess who owns Coca Cola? Berkshire Hathaway aka Warren Buffet. I wonder if whoever got campaign donations from them voted yes on the spending bill?
There should be a website that traces these connections. Too bad GAW is just a rapid feed only and doesn’t have categories so we could do something productive with this research instead of letting it vanish into the memory hole every 24 hours. Maybe it’s by design?
Yeah, it's a bit more complicated than that. What you said is true, but consider this (as I understand it from living in northern Iowa and Illinois corn country for several decades of my life).
In the 1970s, the Green Revolution in fertilizers, pesticides, and later, genetically modified/selectively bred corn created highly efficient corn cultivars that were able to produce ~10x more yield than previous varieties. As a result, we've been able to cheaply feed the world. We fed the Soviets back in the cold war. We've fed Africa for several generations now, and we eat cheap here in the US. All because of massive advances in crop science that have made all of that possible. We produce a HUGE amount of corn and other staple crops.
Of course, in order to do that, we had to adapt farming technology as well, including moving to factory farming to take advantage of economy of scale when owning and maintaining the necessary heavy equipment, land, facilities, labor, etc. When I was 14 I detassled corn in the summer. That's not really done now. It's automated. Machines do it. And as a result, quality reflects the handling that a machine gives to the corn. A certain amount of the harvest will be high quality and fit for human consumption. A certain amount won't quite meet that standard, but it's excellent for livestock feed. And the left overs that aren't fit for use as livestock feed ends up being processed into secondary products, most notably high fructose corn syrup which is the "demon" we find in so many food products today as a sugar substitute. Finally, lets not forget that something like 30% of the yield ends up as corn ethanol you're required by law to put in your car's fuel tank.
On paper, this is all smart business. Capitalism and the free market have minimized waste, driven incredible innovation, and allowed us to provide enormous amounts of food at rock bottom prices even to the world's poorest people. It's an incredible success story, frankly, when you think about it.
Now, of course, people aren't perfect. And government often provides perverse incentives to encourage bad behavior. We've since found that HFCS isn't great for the body's digestion in large quantities. It's ultra-high octane fuel that many bodies with low metabolic needs (ie sedentary lifestyle with low calorie needs, or people who are already overweight) don't need. But, because it's the cheap food and the tasty food, people disproportionately choose it over healthier options. Some of that is the individual's fault. Some of it isn't. If you can't afford better, you take what you can get or go hungry, and if you have kids in the picture, the latter's not an option.
Ultimately, government plays a role. Options it could do:
Regulate the amount of HCFS that can go into food - this would drive prices higher, reducing sales, but what is available presumably would be debateably healthier.
Regulate what can be purchased with EBT/SNAP - this would limit how much junk food those who need help are getting and encourage healthier eating choices, and frankly should've been done a long time ago. It's just an administrative nightmare, so they haven't done it.
Create labeling requirements for HFCS - this is probably the easiest solution. The idea here is to just require that products made with HFCS put a special icon on the front of the package like they require for GMO to identify it. It won't stop people from buying it, but education can move the needle.
I know there's the suggestion from time to time that we get rid of farm bill and crop insurance. This would be disastrous for family and small-size farms. The industrial farms could absorb the risk if they had a bad harvest, floods, droughts, whatever, but the small operators couldn't. Such a change would only help the Bill Gates' of the world, and I'm not the least bit interested in that outcome.
You pay for the Ozempic because paying for the acute care for hyperglycemic emergencies, diabetic infections, diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy/blindness, cardiovascular disease, failing kidneys, dialysis 3x/week for the rest of their lives, etc is a LOT more expensive.
Now if only we could find a way to pay them to eat healthy and exercise so it doesn't get to that point, we'd be in real business. /soapbox
you're right about the eating healthy, whole, non-processed foods, activity and hydration, but ozempic and wegovy dont even work in the longterm (most patients started gaining weight back at the end of the 30 week trial), and have black box warnings for tumors. if you know anyone who needs help controlling their appetite, might I suggest Nomorbidity supplement instead
Sodas, Gatorade, alcohol, wine, beer, potato chips (other empty calories: pretzels, cheese curls), ice cream, cakes, cookies, donuts, sweetened juices should not be covered. I don’t think alcohol is covered, but so that doesn’t change, I am listing it. Only meat, poultry, fish, beans and legumes, cheese, vegetables and fruits should be covered. The government should do infomercials on quick, nutritious meals: roasted chicken, cheaper roasts with vegetables cooked around, macaroni and cheese from scratch, tuna casserole, turkey tetrazzini, beef stew, homemade soup. It is far cheaper, more nutritious to fix from scratch and stretches further than frozen dinners.
Step one is to get Americans actually cooking for themselves again.
Most Americans eat out most of their meals, followed by frozen microwaveable shit. And, possibly worst of all, a "home cooked" meal to most Americans nowadays is still just a bunch of prepared stuff, just with a slight increase in effort.
A "home cooked Thanksgiving feast" to most Americans, for example, consists of a box of pre-made stovetop stuffing, a can of cranberry sauce, a can of corn, a jar of gravy, and a turkey, usually unseasoned or seasoned with a bought spice blend. And they'll make this for their family and talk about how crazy it was to "pull it all together."
I don't know if America was always like this, or if there was a time where scratch cooking wasn't incredibly rare.
Perhaps it is correlated with women entering the workforce and becoming unwilling to actually work for their home.
Exactly true. My husband used to be a teacher in the inner city Cleveland schools. The home ec. teacher taught the children how to bake cookies: sliced frozen cookie dough! Now I could understand time constraint or test comparison. Mix all the ingredients pre-measured, and add your eggs and butter. Bake the from scratch ingredients and bake the sliced frozen and ask children to do a price comparison and taste analysis.
That is such bullshit. And it's sad that we even need to teach how to make prepackaged shit per the instructions, because that's still one step above just going out to eat.
This year our family did Thanksgiving at my mom's on the Sunday prior to the holiday, which meant it would just be me and my wife on the holiday proper. So I decided to make Thanksgiving dinner for ourselves. I decided to take the approach my mom always did, which was pretty much exactly as I described in my first comment.
I couldn't believe how stupidly easy it is. Despite being a wide variety of foods with a lot of options, it was lightyears easier than a typical dinner I'd cook on a typical night. I couldn't believe this is what Americans (including my family) consider "cooking" nowadays. I thought it would be at least a little challenging juggling the dishes, but it's not.
My typical dinner consists of a meat, a vegetable (sometimes two), and a bread. I make the bread from scratch (breadsticks, rolls, buns, toast, etc.) and I always marinate or brine the meat (most important thing to do in order to get food that doesn't taste like what Americans consider "home cooked" and tastes "restaurant style"). And then I usually treat the vegetables like I would meat (most people are accustomed to boiled peas, steamed broccoli, etc., but if you just pan fry or roast them in a little fat with generous seasoning, they become good).
But I always have leftovers, which I try to incorporate into future meals to save time. Breadsticks, rolls, etc. keep in the fridge well and warm up good by steaming in the microwave wrapped in a damp cloth. Cooked leftover meats can be used in wraps, salads, on pasta, etc.
Ultimately, nearly all of my dinners are made from scratch, restaurant style, and complete. And once you get into doing it, it's really not hard or even much of a time commitment. And looking outside of my little bubble, that's when I realize how fucked modern society is.
This is why obesity, diabetes, and heart disease is running rampant. No one cooks these days. When I was young, there was only one fast food place : McDonalds. It was a treat if we ate out every few months. Now just in our locale we have: 5 sub shops, 1 roast beef, 4 chicken fast foods, 3 burger joints, 3 pizza (not counting mom and pop pizza shops), 2 donut, 4 Mexican, 4 miscellaneous fast food restaurants (Applebee’s, Panda Buffet, Chili’s, I-Hop). This is a relatively small suburban community. So you see why people are enticed to eat out, instead of cook. This not only is horrible for you, but also very costly.
Back in the 70's while in college, I collected WIC payments for my son. There were strict limits guiding what I could buy. The food was healthy. Seems like the gov't should make sure those with SNAP benefits buy healthy food for their families.
red team v blue team, us v them thinking is not going to solve problems. If you're one of "us", you'd understand the support of the free market and corporations' role in that free market. It's complicated and I'm not going to write a thesis here, but corporations have done a lot of good in this world by bringing you the products and services that you rely on every single day at an affordable price. They create the jobs that run this country, keep people employed and off the streets, and which drive innovation. All of those are good things. Yes, they come with some bad things too... but if you're not dealing in nuance, if you're not thinking about operating with a surgeon's scalpel instead of a bloody hacksaw, when dealing with corporations, you're doing yourself a great disservice. You'll draw poor conclusions and end up screaming stupidity like the radical communists.
Great point. Unfortunately, later on in the thread the OP makes a comment saying SNAP benefits should be doubled so people stop buying cheap sugary shit. No. SNAP needs to work like WIC, with limits on what you can and can't buy. There should also be like a 5 year limit on receiving these benefits, long enough for one to get a degree so they aren't dependent on government bucks. EBT is out of control in this country!
The fattest people on earth today seem to be the poorest. They do nothing but eat all day. Those who are laziest on welfare and food stamps are about as sedentary as a sedimentary rock.
So we are forced to support the companies that are destroying...
Its even worse than that. Food Snap rules are bundled into the same Ag bill that subsidizes corn, soy bean, etc.
So we're paying farmers to grow the ingredients and then paying food processors for the finished product.
And guess who owns Coca Cola? Berkshire Hathaway aka Warren Buffet. I wonder if whoever got campaign donations from them voted yes on the spending bill?
There should be a website that traces these connections. Too bad GAW is just a rapid feed only and doesn’t have categories so we could do something productive with this research instead of letting it vanish into the memory hole every 24 hours. Maybe it’s by design?
Yeah, it's a bit more complicated than that. What you said is true, but consider this (as I understand it from living in northern Iowa and Illinois corn country for several decades of my life).
In the 1970s, the Green Revolution in fertilizers, pesticides, and later, genetically modified/selectively bred corn created highly efficient corn cultivars that were able to produce ~10x more yield than previous varieties. As a result, we've been able to cheaply feed the world. We fed the Soviets back in the cold war. We've fed Africa for several generations now, and we eat cheap here in the US. All because of massive advances in crop science that have made all of that possible. We produce a HUGE amount of corn and other staple crops.
Of course, in order to do that, we had to adapt farming technology as well, including moving to factory farming to take advantage of economy of scale when owning and maintaining the necessary heavy equipment, land, facilities, labor, etc. When I was 14 I detassled corn in the summer. That's not really done now. It's automated. Machines do it. And as a result, quality reflects the handling that a machine gives to the corn. A certain amount of the harvest will be high quality and fit for human consumption. A certain amount won't quite meet that standard, but it's excellent for livestock feed. And the left overs that aren't fit for use as livestock feed ends up being processed into secondary products, most notably high fructose corn syrup which is the "demon" we find in so many food products today as a sugar substitute. Finally, lets not forget that something like 30% of the yield ends up as corn ethanol you're required by law to put in your car's fuel tank.
On paper, this is all smart business. Capitalism and the free market have minimized waste, driven incredible innovation, and allowed us to provide enormous amounts of food at rock bottom prices even to the world's poorest people. It's an incredible success story, frankly, when you think about it.
Now, of course, people aren't perfect. And government often provides perverse incentives to encourage bad behavior. We've since found that HFCS isn't great for the body's digestion in large quantities. It's ultra-high octane fuel that many bodies with low metabolic needs (ie sedentary lifestyle with low calorie needs, or people who are already overweight) don't need. But, because it's the cheap food and the tasty food, people disproportionately choose it over healthier options. Some of that is the individual's fault. Some of it isn't. If you can't afford better, you take what you can get or go hungry, and if you have kids in the picture, the latter's not an option.
Ultimately, government plays a role. Options it could do:
I know there's the suggestion from time to time that we get rid of farm bill and crop insurance. This would be disastrous for family and small-size farms. The industrial farms could absorb the risk if they had a bad harvest, floods, droughts, whatever, but the small operators couldn't. Such a change would only help the Bill Gates' of the world, and I'm not the least bit interested in that outcome.
It’s pretty amazing how fat everyone quickly got with cheap food.
Just like our government.
and then we get to pay for their diabetes medication and ozempic shots because of socialized healthcare. thanks obama.
You pay for the Ozempic because paying for the acute care for hyperglycemic emergencies, diabetic infections, diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy/blindness, cardiovascular disease, failing kidneys, dialysis 3x/week for the rest of their lives, etc is a LOT more expensive.
Now if only we could find a way to pay them to eat healthy and exercise so it doesn't get to that point, we'd be in real business. /soapbox
What if we stop paying them to make themselves sick? Bc paying them to buy soda etc is paying them to be sick.
you're right about the eating healthy, whole, non-processed foods, activity and hydration, but ozempic and wegovy dont even work in the longterm (most patients started gaining weight back at the end of the 30 week trial), and have black box warnings for tumors. if you know anyone who needs help controlling their appetite, might I suggest Nomorbidity supplement instead
Sodas, Gatorade, alcohol, wine, beer, potato chips (other empty calories: pretzels, cheese curls), ice cream, cakes, cookies, donuts, sweetened juices should not be covered. I don’t think alcohol is covered, but so that doesn’t change, I am listing it. Only meat, poultry, fish, beans and legumes, cheese, vegetables and fruits should be covered. The government should do infomercials on quick, nutritious meals: roasted chicken, cheaper roasts with vegetables cooked around, macaroni and cheese from scratch, tuna casserole, turkey tetrazzini, beef stew, homemade soup. It is far cheaper, more nutritious to fix from scratch and stretches further than frozen dinners.
Step one is to get Americans actually cooking for themselves again.
Most Americans eat out most of their meals, followed by frozen microwaveable shit. And, possibly worst of all, a "home cooked" meal to most Americans nowadays is still just a bunch of prepared stuff, just with a slight increase in effort.
A "home cooked Thanksgiving feast" to most Americans, for example, consists of a box of pre-made stovetop stuffing, a can of cranberry sauce, a can of corn, a jar of gravy, and a turkey, usually unseasoned or seasoned with a bought spice blend. And they'll make this for their family and talk about how crazy it was to "pull it all together."
I don't know if America was always like this, or if there was a time where scratch cooking wasn't incredibly rare.
Perhaps it is correlated with women entering the workforce and becoming unwilling to actually work for their home.
Exactly true. My husband used to be a teacher in the inner city Cleveland schools. The home ec. teacher taught the children how to bake cookies: sliced frozen cookie dough! Now I could understand time constraint or test comparison. Mix all the ingredients pre-measured, and add your eggs and butter. Bake the from scratch ingredients and bake the sliced frozen and ask children to do a price comparison and taste analysis.
That is such bullshit. And it's sad that we even need to teach how to make prepackaged shit per the instructions, because that's still one step above just going out to eat.
This year our family did Thanksgiving at my mom's on the Sunday prior to the holiday, which meant it would just be me and my wife on the holiday proper. So I decided to make Thanksgiving dinner for ourselves. I decided to take the approach my mom always did, which was pretty much exactly as I described in my first comment.
I couldn't believe how stupidly easy it is. Despite being a wide variety of foods with a lot of options, it was lightyears easier than a typical dinner I'd cook on a typical night. I couldn't believe this is what Americans (including my family) consider "cooking" nowadays. I thought it would be at least a little challenging juggling the dishes, but it's not.
My typical dinner consists of a meat, a vegetable (sometimes two), and a bread. I make the bread from scratch (breadsticks, rolls, buns, toast, etc.) and I always marinate or brine the meat (most important thing to do in order to get food that doesn't taste like what Americans consider "home cooked" and tastes "restaurant style"). And then I usually treat the vegetables like I would meat (most people are accustomed to boiled peas, steamed broccoli, etc., but if you just pan fry or roast them in a little fat with generous seasoning, they become good).
But I always have leftovers, which I try to incorporate into future meals to save time. Breadsticks, rolls, etc. keep in the fridge well and warm up good by steaming in the microwave wrapped in a damp cloth. Cooked leftover meats can be used in wraps, salads, on pasta, etc.
Ultimately, nearly all of my dinners are made from scratch, restaurant style, and complete. And once you get into doing it, it's really not hard or even much of a time commitment. And looking outside of my little bubble, that's when I realize how fucked modern society is.
This is why obesity, diabetes, and heart disease is running rampant. No one cooks these days. When I was young, there was only one fast food place : McDonalds. It was a treat if we ate out every few months. Now just in our locale we have: 5 sub shops, 1 roast beef, 4 chicken fast foods, 3 burger joints, 3 pizza (not counting mom and pop pizza shops), 2 donut, 4 Mexican, 4 miscellaneous fast food restaurants (Applebee’s, Panda Buffet, Chili’s, I-Hop). This is a relatively small suburban community. So you see why people are enticed to eat out, instead of cook. This not only is horrible for you, but also very costly.
You have to cover all that goyslop don’t you get it that’s not a flaw it’s a feature.
You think that is bad? What about Nabisco?
SNAP is what holds together a lot of the junk food industry in the US.
Back in the 70's while in college, I collected WIC payments for my son. There were strict limits guiding what I could buy. The food was healthy. Seems like the gov't should make sure those with SNAP benefits buy healthy food for their families.
They should have to buy generic products.
Or healthy products!
I just love all the Commies in that thread white knighting for one of those evil, multinational corporations they claim to despise.
The left went from despising mega corporations and the pharmaceuticals to sucking their literal dicks I've noticed.
red team v blue team, us v them thinking is not going to solve problems. If you're one of "us", you'd understand the support of the free market and corporations' role in that free market. It's complicated and I'm not going to write a thesis here, but corporations have done a lot of good in this world by bringing you the products and services that you rely on every single day at an affordable price. They create the jobs that run this country, keep people employed and off the streets, and which drive innovation. All of those are good things. Yes, they come with some bad things too... but if you're not dealing in nuance, if you're not thinking about operating with a surgeon's scalpel instead of a bloody hacksaw, when dealing with corporations, you're doing yourself a great disservice. You'll draw poor conclusions and end up screaming stupidity like the radical communists.
That's a whole lot of words to respond to me pointing out that the Left is nothing but hypocrites.
Great point. Unfortunately, later on in the thread the OP makes a comment saying SNAP benefits should be doubled so people stop buying cheap sugary shit. No. SNAP needs to work like WIC, with limits on what you can and can't buy. There should also be like a 5 year limit on receiving these benefits, long enough for one to get a degree so they aren't dependent on government bucks. EBT is out of control in this country!
I agree
We need a great awakening on the dangers of corn syrup
Think of a can of Coke like this...
In its concentrated form it has POISON labels.
The FDA allows them to water down Poison to an acceptable level for their sheep.
Wait until you hear about alcohol in its concentrated form.
The fattest people on earth today seem to be the poorest. They do nothing but eat all day. Those who are laziest on welfare and food stamps are about as sedentary as a sedimentary rock.
If there is a severe economic downturn and more are expected to receive SNAP benefits, then it's time for me to invest in KO.
Flavored corn sugar poison
the other 59.8% from Trump's diet coke addiction
I get what he's trying to say, but there is so much wrong in his assumptions.
He equates sugary drinks and soda drinks, assumes that all money spent on a product (eg coca cola) goes directly into their bank accounts.
So, the us taxpayer subsidizes the beetus.