As I mentioned in another comment, today’s food economics are not written in stone. There are all sorts of tax and subsidy levers in the public policy toolbox. One reason, say, soybeans and soybean oil are so cheap in the U.S. today is farm subsidies.
But humans being drawn to fatty and sugary foods is written into our DNA. Unless you find some way to ban fried food, people are still going to eat it. A lot. You would need a massive cultural shift away from fatty and sugary foods and that would take more than taxes and subsidies because things like fried chicken and waffles are now considered part of someone’s culture.
It’s about frequency and quantity. Sure, people will always have a taste for unhealthy food. But until sugar/corn was massively subsidized in the U.S., people didn’t eat nearly as much sweet junk. It took a massive cultural shift to get to where we are today. Massive cultural shifts happen.
It sure would take a massive cultural shift for black people to give up a lot of soul food staples since, again, it’s a big part of their culture.
And I have no idea why you think less subsidies would make people who make soul food eat less fried food. They were eating fried food when they had to make it with pig fat and had no choice and they’re still making it now, often still with pig fat. Subsidies are not involved.
I think you need to do a little exploration into soul food and also how important it is. This is a lot bigger than just “we need to stop eating this stuff, it’s unhealthy.”
In regards to subsidies, I was talking specifically about sweets, not fried food. Did you know that ~20% of calories in the American diet are from corn syrup? It’s an epidemic, and it’s in large part due to subsidies. People aren’t going to lose their sweet tooth, but they’d buy soda less often if it wasn’t so heavily subsidized.
As for fried food, granted, it’s a huge part of many cultures. But the fries at McDonalds aren’t. And taxes, for instance, are a real lever that can impact how often and how much certain foods are consumed.
Let me ask you something. Do you consider yourself a progressive? If so, why are you so convinced progress in certain areas is impossible?
I agree, but switching people to less unhealthy frying oil is easier than stopping them from eating so much fried food.
As I mentioned in another comment, today’s food economics are not written in stone. There are all sorts of tax and subsidy levers in the public policy toolbox. One reason, say, soybeans and soybean oil are so cheap in the U.S. today is farm subsidies.
But humans being drawn to fatty and sugary foods is written into our DNA. Unless you find some way to ban fried food, people are still going to eat it. A lot. You would need a massive cultural shift away from fatty and sugary foods and that would take more than taxes and subsidies because things like fried chicken and waffles are now considered part of someone’s culture.
https://50kitchen.com/culinary-history-chicken-and-waffles/
It’s about frequency and quantity. Sure, people will always have a taste for unhealthy food. But until sugar/corn was massively subsidized in the U.S., people didn’t eat nearly as much sweet junk. It took a massive cultural shift to get to where we are today. Massive cultural shifts happen.
It sure would take a massive cultural shift for black people to give up a lot of soul food staples since, again, it’s a big part of their culture.
And I have no idea why you think less subsidies would make people who make soul food eat less fried food. They were eating fried food when they had to make it with pig fat and had no choice and they’re still making it now, often still with pig fat. Subsidies are not involved.
I think you need to do a little exploration into soul food and also how important it is. This is a lot bigger than just “we need to stop eating this stuff, it’s unhealthy.”
In regards to subsidies, I was talking specifically about sweets, not fried food. Did you know that ~20% of calories in the American diet are from corn syrup? It’s an epidemic, and it’s in large part due to subsidies. People aren’t going to lose their sweet tooth, but they’d buy soda less often if it wasn’t so heavily subsidized.
As for fried food, granted, it’s a huge part of many cultures. But the fries at McDonalds aren’t. And taxes, for instance, are a real lever that can impact how often and how much certain foods are consumed.
Let me ask you something. Do you consider yourself a progressive? If so, why are you so convinced progress in certain areas is impossible?
No, I consider myself a realist.
Okie dokie.