A McDouble costs 1.49 and has 400 calories. A two-breakfast burrito meal costs 4.79 with tax and has 750 calories plus the soda.
When I was in DC, I saw several truly poor people in Wendy’s in line in front of me, buying exactly one dollar burger and water. For the poor, food is fuel, nutrition is secondary.
Everyone pays for gas, but the poor don’t change their oil until something breaks.
I don’t gamble. But I’ll gladly hope that you’re wrong. 
Often Government can spend more trying to save small per tax payer sums.
It is just bad math to pretend that any service that deals with MILLIONS of people will be cheap when you look at it from miles away.
True, but does a rumbling belly know this? And if your choices at the corner store are donuts versus Cheetos, Yoohoo versus Coke, and you’ve got thirty minutes for lunch on a day when you’re pulling a double-shift, then suddenly what is so apparent to other people becomes much harder for you to discern.
It is worse than that, Humans in general don’t know that.
Historically sweet and fatty foods were rare and we needed to take advantage of them when we found them.
It is hard wired in our brains and we have to teach ourselves that it is not in our best interests.
But that would require admitting that evolution is real…which is anti-conservative 
So do you think that poor people will automatically buy better foods if its available?
Do you have any cites to back up your thinking?
Yes, you can get that many calories from a combo meal at McDonald’s. Especially if a person gets multiple re-fills from the soda machine.
I don’t possibly see how 1200 calories in one meal or distributed across an entire day is relevant either to the point I raised about cost per calorie or the general discussion.
I, for one, don’t think it will happen automatically.
I do think it will happen more often if it is available, than if it is not.
:dubious:
Do you think poor people make bad food choices because they are stupid orges who beat their wives?
Do you have any cites to back up your thinking?
Well, it’s my contention that even though the stores offer this food, few people will actually take advantage of it. This is a prediction consistent with other studies where similar ideas have been tried.
What is your prediction?
Simple.
I don’t favor it. And I regard it as foolish elevation of ideology over reality.
Intelligence has nothing to do with it, nor does their wife beating status.
Humans are creatures of habit. If you grew up not eating fresh fruit you probably won’t put down the Cheetos and grab an apple the first time you see a fresh apple in the corner store.
My prediction is that it will increase, to some amount, the amount of healthy food consumed. The level of which is dependent on a lot of factors. Also, as a pilot program, I think it is a worthy thing to experiment with, especially at the low price.
I admit, your revolutionary idea to* do nothing* is probably cheaper. But considering the level of obesity among the poor, this is worth examining.
The idea is that at least they will have the choice, which they do not have right now.
Let’s say you are right and this green grocer idea is a waste of money.
Isn’t there some benefit to actually finding out that it doesn’t work then presuming it wouldn’t without even trying? One benefit that I can see is that it would inform other, more practical solutions (that “middle ground” I mentioned earlier). Another is that you’ve got a sound argument for not doing something like it ever again. There is some value in being able to say to the angry mob, “We tried that already, remember?”
I eat a ton more healthy now than I did as a kid. And I didn’t even grow up poor, just with parents who didn’t know any better. Fresh vegetables? Ha! I didn’t know that spinach isn’t naturally slimy, salty, seaweed-looking stuff until I became an adult. At dinner we always ate two or three starches (rice with cinnamon toast AND canned corn…yum!) Salads were always tossed. I loved all of it, too.
I guess it’s hard for me to assume that other people are so robotic in their food choices since my own history doesn’t bear this out. The only reason I don’t eat canned spinach is because I was exposed to the fresh stuff. And once you eat fresh, there’s no going back.
It is also important to point out that if we do find a program that does work, if the individuals do not have access to those foods it will be moot.
Personally I think they need to learn from the anti-smoking movement, social pressure+access would probably work over time.
We do know the best way to ensure your child is active, and thus will have good cardio health (one of the main issues with obesity is not the weight but this) is to try and steer them towards peer groups who are active.
I would image the same could be said with food. The main benefit i see for all the slow food and organic movements is not their claimed benefits but that encourages people to think about what they are eating and to realize and to develop a pallet for better foods.
Do you regularly cherry-pick threads? I mean, Bricker already provided cites. But according to your logic, just because these programs don’t work elsewhere doesn’t mean it can’t work in Philly.
Right.
(Where’s that sarcastic thumbs smiley when you need it?)
I supported the movement to fill food deserts up here in Denver until I read up on it.
I still do, but in a different way. Oddly enough, Wal-Mart may be the answer. That kind of answers the ‘people not make the best decisions but they have options’ thing.
I mean, you can lament how awful the Big Bad Mart stores are because they kill mom and pop businesses, but mom and pop businesses in food deserts kind of operate on overpriced food, liquor, and Fritos. Bribing them to sell bananas and squash is kind if elitist…and it apparently doesn’t work.
Bricker: Did you notice that this program was started before the studies you cited were published?
Also, is there some reason you didn’t link to the article?
n.b.: I’m no fan of such programs, preferring to let people make their own choices. I’ll also note that the Philadelphia experiment was partially funded with stimulus money. That was supposed to get the economy back on track, not fund social experiments.
And you assume that people buy food based on calorie content. They don’t. They buy based on servings. When you compare food cost on servings, healthy food is cheaper.
Http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-16/news/31732164_1_junk-food-healthy-foods-cheap-food
Now, lets look at a family. $5 x 4 is $20 at McDonalds. (Note, McDs is usually more per person because of supersizing)
At my local Vons i can get a head of lettuce, two cucumbers and carrots for a buck a piece. That is $3. Dressing is another $2. A pound of pork chops is 2.49. Call it two pounds. That is another 5. Add in a pasta, mac and cheese is a buck a box and we will use 2. A gallon of milk is $3. For a grand total of $20. And that is way heaalthier than McDs. On a side note, I used Vons becuase they had prices online even though they are not cheap.
One is healthy, one is not and the price is the same.
Slee