paradox of lower-income households

supersudo

Purple Belt
Joined
May 27, 2004
Messages
1,819
Reaction score
0
recently i got to thinking about how lower-income ppl usually have very poor health due to very poor diets... mainly because cheaper food is usually full of hydrogenated oils, artificial sweetners/flavors, preservatives, chemicals like MSG etc, sugar, and usually high amounts of fat and cholesterol like in fast food..... and while thinking about this.. i thought about something that seemed like a catch-22 to me..

let's say it's lunch time.. and u only have 1 dollar.. Is it better to eat a burger, or skip lunch?

or better yet.. how about, eating 3 unhealthy meals a day vs. eating 1 healthy meal a day?...

both seem unhealthy to me, first bcuz unhealthy meals are well.. unhealthy.. and second bcuz eating only 1 meal a day is unhealthy even if it's a healthy one..

what do u guys think? :wink:
 
supersudo said:
recently i got to thinking about how lower-income ppl usually have very poor health due to very poor diets... mainly because cheaper food is usually full of hydrogenated oils, artificial sweetners/flavors, preservatives, chemicals like MSG etc, sugar, and usually high amounts of fat and cholesterol like in fast food..... and while thinking about this.. i thought about something that seemed like a catch-22 to me..

let's say it's lunch time.. and u only have 1 dollar.. Is it better to eat a burger, or skip lunch?

or better yet.. how about, eating 3 unhealthy meals a day vs. eating 1 healthy meal a day?...

both seem unhealthy to me, first bcuz unhealthy meals are well.. unhealthy.. and second bcuz eating only 1 meal a day is unhealthy even if it's a healthy one..

what do u guys think? :wink:

I live by this dogma: "It is better to eat badly than to not eat at all." However, that applies to me, in that I am eating healthfully the majority of the time. Generally, eating poorly has less to do with income and more to do with convenience, taste, and lack of information.

Which is more cheaper: (1)Eating a Big Mac and fries every day for lunch, or (2)Roasting turkey and preparing frozen vegetables? Option number (2) is considerably cheaper, but most people won't go to the trouble of planning ahead in their diet. I do my weekly cooking on Sunday and Wednesday of each week, stewing chicken, boiling veggies, steaming rice,... It is actually quite inexpensive, aside from the sheer quantity that I actually eat on my 4000kCal diet. It isn't about the money; it about people going after the most convenient option.

As for 1 healthy vs. 3 unhealthy meals, the subject is a bit too subjective. It would have much to do with the contents of the actual meals. If the three unhealthy meals consist of soda and cheesecake, then just about any remotely "healthy" option would be an improvement, even a single meal. However, there are many confounding variables. As I said before, I always opt for eating not-so-great over skipping food altogether. However, I am an extraordinarily active person, and I eat quite well most of the time. It is all about knowing what to eat when on a budget. It is certainly do-able; it just takes some planning (something which many are unwilling to do).
 
i don't know any poor people. generaly when i think of proverty, it's not north america that comes to mind but parts of south america, africa & parts of asia & the middle east. i don't think they worry much about the nutritional value of what they eat.
 
Terumo said:
I live by this dogma: "It is better to eat badly than to not eat at all." However, that applies to me, in that I am eating healthfully the majority of the time. Generally, eating poorly has less to do with income and more to do with convenience, taste, and lack of information.

Which is more cheaper: (1)Eating a Big Mac and fries every day for lunch, or (2)Roasting turkey and preparing frozen vegetables? Option number (2) is considerably cheaper, but most people won't go to the trouble of planning ahead in their diet. I do my weekly cooking on Sunday and Wednesday of each week, stewing chicken, boiling veggies, steaming rice,... It is actually quite inexpensive, aside from the sheer quantity that I actually eat on my 4000kCal diet. It isn't about the money; it about people going after the most convenient option.

As for 1 healthy vs. 3 unhealthy meals, the subject is a bit too subjective. It would have much to do with the contents of the actual meals. If the three unhealthy meals consist of soda and cheesecake, then just about any remotely "healthy" option would be an improvement, even a single meal. However, there are many confounding variables. As I said before, I always opt for eating not-so-great over skipping food altogether. However, I am an extraordinarily active person, and I eat quite well most of the time. It is all about knowing what to eat when on a budget. It is certainly do-able; it just takes some planning (something which many are unwilling to do).

great post.. u bring up some really good points here..
 
I think it's more comlex than just them not having the cash to eat healthy. I think it also has to do with the poor being less educated in the area of nutrition. I went to school in Phoenix AZ and the amount of information I was given in the area of nutrition was pretty damn piss poor, and I didn't even grow up in a "poor" neighborhood. In fact, my hs was considered to be pretty preppy and kinda on the rich side and even then I received close to zero good nutritional info.

So for poor people to be informed enough to actually know how to eat healthy for cheap is probably not super realistic. I'm not saying to doesn't or can't happen, but just that being poorly informed on nutritional topics + not having the cash to buy protein shakes and other expensive shit probably lead together to malnourishment.
 
blownards said:
i don't know any poor people. generaly when i think of proverty, it's not north america that comes to mind but parts of south america, africa & parts of asia & the middle east. i don't think they worry much about the nutritional value of what they eat.

The poster here is obviously discussing comperative poverty. Yes we all know abject poverty exists in many places in the world but that is another discussion since it does not exist in any measurable numbers in the US or canada.

Even on the subject of abject poverty they do worry about the contects of their foods or at least the governments do since i many african countries will refuse to allow their citizens to eat wheat grown in america since it has been selectivly bread to produce superior growing times, and resistance to disease and bugs. Loads of it are left to rot reather than feed teh starving populace.
 
desertbake said:
I think it's more comlex than just them not having the cash to eat healthy. I think it also has to do with the poor being less educated in the area of nutrition. I went to school in Phoenix AZ and the amount of information I was given in the area of nutrition was pretty damn piss poor, and I didn't even grow up in a "poor" neighborhood. In fact, my hs was considered to be pretty preppy and kinda on the rich side and even then I received close to zero good nutritional info.

So for poor people to be informed enough to actually know how to eat healthy for cheap is probably not super realistic. I'm not saying to doesn't or can't happen, but just that being poorly informed on nutritional topics + not having the cash to buy protein shakes and other expensive shit probably lead together to malnourishment.

Your point on educaton is valid. The differece between afflutent and poor on nutritional education however does not involve the school system but the family structure and the experiances of your parents because that is where almost everyone learns what and how to eat.

On the money though i am a student atm (poor) so I eat alot more protein shakes for meals than i have previously since they cost right at 75c a peice with some milk. That is significanly cheaper than any other alternative i konw of aside from skiping meals and that is a habit I am trying to get out of.
 
i dont care to think about things like this too much. i just eat well.
 
desertbake said:
I think it's more comlex than just them not having the cash to eat healthy. I think it also has to do with the poor being less educated in the area of nutrition.

This is the crux of it, right here.

Poor people are more religious, less healthy, less tolerant... everything. Why? Because they don't have access to information and education to know better.

It's like giving a guy a fish vs. teaching him to fish. If you can't afford internet access you can't get on this forum and learn how to eat better, plus you have to work three jobs to make 19,000 a year so you eat what's fast and easy on breaks.

Life sucks if you're poor. It always has and it always will, I'm afraid.
 
Tommy Seoul said:
This is the crux of it, right here.

Poor people are more religious, less healthy, less tolerant... everything. Why? Because they don't have access to information and education to know better.

It's like giving a guy a fish vs. teaching him to fish. If you can't afford internet access you can't get on this forum and learn how to eat better, plus you have to work three jobs to make 19,000 a year so you eat what's fast and easy on breaks.

Life sucks if you're poor. It always has and it always will, I'm afraid.

Libraries usually have internet access, but if you don't value education, chances are you won't be in the library anyways, I guess. Its a lot cheaper to eat frozen veggies and canned meats like tuna or mackerel, or even chicken thighs or so, than to eat fast food. But less education wrecks not only nutrition but financial savvy as well.....

I ate tuna and mac and cheese/rice a lot as a poor student. I couldn't afford fast food. Tina was 25cents and the box of mac and cheese was like $1.29. The box plus 2 cans of tuna equaled 2 meals for $2.00! MickyDee's wasn't that cheap....
 
eljamaiquino said:
Libraries usually have internet access, but if you don't value education, chances are you won't be in the library anyways, I guess. Its a lot cheaper to eat frozen veggies and canned meats like tuna or mackerel, or even chicken thighs or so, than to eat fast food. But less education wrecks not only nutrition but financial savvy as well.....

I ate tuna and mac and cheese/rice a lot as a poor student. I couldn't afford fast food. Tina was 25cents and the box of mac and cheese was like $1.29. The box plus 2 cans of tuna equaled 2 meals for $2.00! MickyDee's wasn't that cheap....
I agree that it's often cheaper not to get fast food, contrary to the opinion that states people eat fast food because it's cheap, I'd say it has more to do with ease than cost. As a student I used to order a lot of takeaway pizza's and they cost me about
 
sometimes i buy mcdonalds mcchicken sandwich on the dollar menu for my protein. each of those contains a whopping 15g protein. assuming you eat healthy most of the time, sometimes eating things like these could benefit in some ways.
 
Back
Top