Comments on: Hunger, Obesity, and the Farm Subsidy

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:05:15 +0000

On further reflection, I have realized that the changes I talked about to the SNAP reminded me a lot of grocery store “advantage” programs for tracking purchasing. Just think how much the government could offset the cost of SNAP by selling the purchasing habits to people on the program to advertisers. Really, I am just kidding with that, but it was a thought that crossed my mind in a semi-serious fashion for a few minutes.

By: Kat

Kat — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 01:01:09 +0000

I think that your suggestions for modifying SNAP are definitely worth considering. After having spent two years, though, trying to change Sean’s and my eating habits to be more whole foods and less processed, I have to admit it’s an uphill battle even with us wanting to make the change. I can’t imagine trying to change a child’s eating habits when they’ve been raised on health poor but well advertised foods. We have to start somewhere, though, and that’s a good place to start.

By: Geof F. Morris

Geof F. Morris — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:57:51 +0000

The main reason that the farm subsidies stay in place is because of non-proportional representation in the Senate. I am generally in favor of that, but this is an unfortunate consequence.

By: Morgan

Morgan — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:21:28 +0000

An industrial process could probably be created to turn just about any carbohydrate into simple sugar, so subsidizing a different crop would have an effect only as long as it takes factories to retool. Wikipedia points out another factor promoting corn syrup is high US tariffs on imported sucrose.