|
|
|
|
|
|
by ItsMe000001
2939 days ago
|
|
|
> I think you are failing to grasp the price differences and my argument. Thank you very much! I think I DO understand your argument, but I have the suspicion that you fail at understanding my very first reply already, which sums it up quite nicely. Your "argument" is none because it addresses an issue that does not exist. You countered something that you yourself invented, an issue that does not exist. Please, just read my original reply. This is just plain silly: As I already said, if you don't care one bit what I wrote, why did you (and still do) bother to reply? Again and again? |
|
|
Do you know any poor people? People that grew up in poor families? Just like everyone else when overweight their body wants to maintain that weight. That's going to take food, and in some cases a lot of it which is a real cost.
Eating cheap calorie dense food can cover based nutrition requirements. It's not optimal for health, but it's cheap, really really cheap.
Poor people also indulge in nutrition free food like soda when they can afford it, but then they still need to cover nutrition and the cheapest way to do that is high caloric foods. After a while they need to eat just as much to maintain that weight. But, at no point in that viscous cycle are veggies more than a garnish.
Would a lifetime of 3 servings of veggies a day help avoid weight gain while allowing for some indulgences? Of course, but it would also cost significantly more especially when raising a family which starts up the cycle again.