Based on our reading of Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation and viewing of King Corn, what in your opinion needs to be done to change how our society feeds itself? Should local and state governments consider banning or taxing various harmful "foods" as some governments have banned trans fats?
Or, should we change our farm program (agricultural subsidies) to encourage more high nutrition, sustainable foods as opposed to low nutrition crops like corn & soybeans? In other words is it better to change the system at the producer end or at the consumer end? Give a thoughtful response of your own and then respond to at least two other posts.
9 comments:
I think that the goverment should so both actions, change crop production to what is demanded, and ban the more harmful "foods." Either we should be a real democracy, or we should be a better socialist state. So much corn created, so much corn wasted, so much corn is killing us. Where is this country going?
It wasn't too long ago that the US Government paid farmers to stop producing certain agricultural products, and seeing as the demand is not meeting up with the supply, I don't see why this shouldn't be affected to the point where the cost of corn syrup products (and other unhealthy products of course) goes up slowly until people no longer want to pay high prices for unhealthy products. If this plan were to work, however, the government would most likely have to pay farmers to grow healthier, more natural foods as well, so they were encouraged to grow more of these types of food, thus lowering the price for consumers.
Part of the problem with this system, however, is the fact that American society has become centered around the fast-paced service of the McDonalds and Burger Kings, and the introduction of healthier food options would necessitate longer preparation times. If we want to eat healthier, we are going to have to willingly fork over the time it takes for workers to prepare food in healthier methods.
It's hard to accept, but I think unless the sheeple that make up the American public grow a couple more brain stems, nothing is going to change in the near future. We know tons about AIDS, but that hasn't stopped the rates from climbing steadily, and the same applies to the obesity, heart disease, and other maladys that should be listed under "Possible Side Effects" on every McDonalds wrapper. In the end, it is our responsibility to make the choice on an individual level, and hopefully, if more awareness can be spread, there'll be a chance that, a few generations down the road, we won't settle for bland, useless garbage in our stomachs.
The government shouldn't outlaw any specific ingredients. I'm sure that that works in other countries, but Americans must have their 'freedoms!' Rather then do that, we should change the products that are being produced and made available to the public. It would make more sense for our government to make an assortment of crops that would require a larger amount of people. That would help our economics twofold by employing more people, and offering healthier foods for cheaper. Concerning what the otter said, I don't think that the corn is being wasted, I think that it's being put to use in it's time in a way that isn't very healthy. I'm sure that there is a shelf life for such an item, but it isn't wasted. If there is too much corn, which there is, then why not improve the quality of it? Corn may not be nutritious, but if there is less of it at a higher quality it could actually be acceptable.
Anarchist: The problem is that there is very little demand for high-priced, high-quality foods. We eat what we eat because it's cheap and it keeps our engines running (though not very well). And changing crop production isn't as simple as just planting new seeds the next year, there's a lot of planning that goes into it. You need to consider what nutrients are in the soil, what kinds of fertilizer you have access to, and what kinds of crops you can get your hands on. There are most likely hundreds of hybrid varieties of corn at this time, and identifying the healthiest isn't as easy as it may seem.
Resh:
Employing more people to create a product would actually raise the price of the product, because to pay those people's wages, you have to raise the cost of the product until your profit is high enough. I agree that employing more people by creating a better food industry would have countless benefits, but you have to look at the negative side of that kind of decision as well.
I think people should take a more nutritious way of life because the US is the most obese nation in the world. Whenever people want to eat they go to the nearest fast food place instead of getting something healthy. If state and local govenments did ban unhealthy foods it would force people to make healthier choices. It would close down alot businesses but new types of business geared towards healthy living could open. As far as agriculture I think organic farming would be a better idea. It would be better for the economy and the health of the people. We wouldn't be exposed to chemicals and antibiotics put in our bodies. Foods grown healthier would make us healthier. Changes need to be done at the produce and consumer somehow there needs to be a balance.
I don't think that chemicals and fillers should be added to foods that we eat. If people know about what goes on in the food industry but still eat the product, it is up to society to change. People keep eating this stuff, get exposed to bacteria and chemicals but continue to eat. It is hard to say if the government should control the food industry. People can't blame fast food places because they don't have to eat there everyday. I don't think there is anything the society itself can do to stop and even if government puts restrictions on unhealthy foods people will still eat it. What is the government going to do arrest people for eating a Big Mac? As far as agriculture what about the government offering money for organic farming in a larger picture. Advertising would be another way government could stand in and show orgaincally grown foods as appealing to kids and Ronald McDonald did for hamburgers. That one good way society could be made to change their outlook on food. Change in both the producer and consumer ends would be best because it isn't just up to the farmers to change but also society should care enough not to kill themselves with bad food. It is not up to the farmers or government to take care of you it is up to you.
In response to AnarchistOtter19 I kinda agree because the government should step in a little bit to eliminate harmful chemicals in foods and make the consumer more accountable for what he/she puts in his/her body. In response to Resh Ujill and Clint's comment about it... if Americans have as many freedoms as they have now we'll continue to be overweight. Fast food is too cheap and accessible to our younger generations and if they keep having the freedom to choose they'll be even more overweight than today's adults.
I think the government should ban harmful foods, and encourage more people to grow their own crops. As a nation, we are doing a poor job of making cheap good food. we are poisoning a new generation. Changes need to be made. Personally,I think, there is a lot that should be banned, like feeding cows growth hormones before killing them. Growth hormones in general should be banned no matter what. and making so much corn into sweetners. There is too much that needs to be changed, and somehow, I don't think Obama is going to change squat.
i agree with sarah that the government should encourage more people to grow their own crops. because it would be better and they would no were its came from and what was put on it
Post a Comment