309
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

I would say this is almost certainly skewed by income, with the poorest Americans getting almost all of their calories from ultra processed foods, and the share decreasing with income. I would be curious to see that spread because one of the more fucked up things about this is that there are a lot of people who eat this stuff exclusively, and this number kind of hides that.

[-] 3abas@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

A tiny bag of chips is over $5 these days, and has less than 200 calories. Potatoes at fancy grocery stores are about $1/pound, and you can get them much cheaper if you go to "poor people" stores.

You can't get a double cheeseburger for $1 anymore.

It used to be true, they got people hooked on junk and fast food in the early 2000s, but those days are gone, people spend WAY TOO MUCH on junk food.

It's absolutely cheaper to buy fresh and eat healthy. It won't feel as good in your brain as good because it won't have all the addictive shit that makes junk food bad, but if you learn to cook it'll taste better.

Even lower income people have time to cook, but people would rather feed another addiction (spend hours on TV and TikTok, but one hour cooking is too much) and ordering delivery. Uber Eats sure doesn't profit off rich people only...

[-] trashboat@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago

people would rather feed another addiction (spend hours on TV and TikTok, but one hour cooking is too much)

I’d argue that people engage in these activities because people are tired from working too hard for too little for too long

[-] 3abas@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I have children and my wife and I are active present parents. we're not rich, we end my work day and begin my kids duty, when we put the kids to sleep we sometimes finish work that we couldn't because we spent time with the kids instead.

We cook their every meal, and we wake up early to pack them healthy snacks for school. And you know what we do to wind down? We watch some TV!

We also clean the house daily, clean laundry, shower the kids daily, and somehow I still have time to argue with people who can't find two hours a week to cook!

Cooking is not more exhausting than any other chore, and we've turned it into an enjoyable routine. You do what's important first, then you rest.

The vast majority of Americans you're referring to are not working construction 18 hours a day, they're working in an air conditioned building for 9 hours.

[-] pixelkitty@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Probably also skewed by the fact that ultra processed foods are by default more calorie dense, therefore most of a day's calories might come from that.

[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean maybe this used to be true, but it is most definitely not anymore, not even close. It is waaay cheaper to eat healthier.

[-] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It is, but that doesn't mean that poor people don't still eat more highly processed foods. Not smoking or using drugs is also way cheaper than doing those things, but both are more prevalent among poor people in the US.

[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Then you need to reframe your point. If heating healthy is cheaper, then it isn't about income, it's about something else. Your whole argument is about how it is more expensive to eat healthy, which is not true at all.

[-] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

You're imagining an argument and getting mad that I'm not making points in favor of said imaginary argument. .

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
309 points (100.0% liked)

News

31486 readers
2661 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS