Post: #1

Many people here seem to love the idea of the Free Market.

Yet look at our health, and you see that some of the most successful "food" companies out there make their dollar by providing nutritionally void fare that has helped to provoke a national obesity epidemic.

We are the fattest country in the history of the human species. This is a public health crisis unlike anything we've ever seen before.

In light of this, I feel that our government has a responsibility to act. Junk food taxes, and outright bannings, seem more than justified in the fight against obesity. Subsidizing natural produce and meat, while taxing junk, seems like the most obvious and simple step.

Our food prices are already wildly distorted by various subsidies and taxes. We subsidize the shit out of corn to the point that high fructose corn syrup is an insanely cheap, even as it costs incredible amounts of tax-payer dollars to produce. We just need to start re-weighing it in a direction towards healthful food and away from promoting the excess consumption of sugar and shitty fats.

This is one point that is often not brought up. Even though we nominally have a "free market" our government subsidizes food like crazy in this country.

Or are people here really content with the status quo and feel like the only change should happen at the level of individual choice?

Post: #2

Is it a free market? Is it?

is it a free market where high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is heavily subsidized as an offset to the absence of natural sugar in the country, a byproduct of an ancient cold war-era embargo on cane sugar, originally intended to punish Cuba? I think you answer your own question.

I don't disagree with the points you're making. Nothing makes me sadder than seeing fat children walking hand-in-hand with their unhealthy parents. But let's make sure we're putting blame in the right place. If you want individual liberty, wanting regulation and taxation to offset government subsidies is an inconsistent response. Encouraging people to shame and ridicule behaviors they dislike at the personal level, however, is not.

Post: #3

It is all screwed up beyond repair. From the govs food pyramid to farm subsidies. You'd have to end all of it, tweaking bits isn't going to help. And as long as Iowa has the caucas corn will be well fed pun intended. There are tons of lobbyists in every bit of food policy. The only thing we can do as individuals is try and live healthy and look good and never fail to fat shame. If a fatty asks give them diet and exercise resources. Live well and mock.

Post: #4

This is an interesting topic because it broaches the subject of market choice.

I think a lot of obesity is because sellers have limited the scope of choices available to buyers in order to maximize sales.

In my life this has been clearly visible in soda and other portion sizing. I am 57.

In 1965, the standard Coke bottle in the USA was 6 oz (18 cl), which was 5 cents.

It then became 12 oz (32 cl), then 16 oz (47 cl).

Now it's the 20 oz (59 cl) bottle which is most often available. You can still get the 12 oz can, but not in every convenience store and in few vending machines.

Obviously they are charging more money for more soda, with more profit.

Mayor Bloomberg was criticized for limiting soda sizes in movie theaters in NYC, but there is never any criticism of the theater chains' offering limited choices - with the smallest size being around 32 ounces (95 cl).

When did a small soft drink become 32 ounces?

Popcorn at the movies used to be a small box - now a huge tub doused with some kind of yellow fat.

Of course, I have made my own market response - I don't drink soda anywhere or buy popcorn at the movies anymore.

Post: #5

I've posted about this multiple times on this forum. These people running the government are fucking brilliant. They have the masses convinced that government intervention is needed to cure the ills that government created.

It's not just our diets either. Poverty, public education, and health care are just a few of the many areas where intervention on the governments part has either hindered progress, or magnified the problems.

Post: #6

Government is already intervening. And doing a bad job in food policy.

I'm arguing they should do a good job. You're arguing that they shouldn't even try.

Dunno what you prefer, the status quo? Even government completely getting out of the food subsidizing game would basically amount to huge new costs imposed on the junk food industry. Which itself would be a plus, though we could easily do more.

Post: #7

Market is working its magic. Separates the weak from the strong.

WIA

Post: #8

(12-17-2013 05:49 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  Government is already intervening. And doing a bad job in food policy.

I'm arguing they should do a good job. You're arguing that they shouldn't even try.

Exactly. Based on the government's track record, it shouldn't even try. It will only make things worse. Guaranteed.

Only when the government wins the war on poverty, or the war on drugs, or the war on government waste, should we allow it a war on eating-stupidity.

Post: #9

The free market solution is this:

1)Remove all crop subsidies, quotas, etc.

2)End the war on real food. People selling raw dairy and other products deem verboten are regularly raided and have their good destroyed. See here.

3)Remove the laws prohibiting chickens and other animals in suburban areas. In traditional towns it is common for chickens to peck around all day. In the suburbs this is illegal.

4)Remove the laws prohibiting selling produce to people without a license. In most states it is illegal to sell tomatoes to your neighbor without permits, inspections and other regulations.

5)Stop the massive disinformation campaign that has been waged since the 80s. Animal fat is good for you and will keep you skinny effortlessly. Load up on steak, eggs, coconut oil, olive oil, chicken, fish, etc.

6)Allow women to return to their natural role of nurturing the family by cooking instead of nurturing strangers for a salary.