[avancemos]

Instead of seeing the bright side of life, in which this person clearly vastly improved their situation in life, all they can see is what they don’t have.

“I knew I was the only poor person at my tech startup because I had the only fat body in the building.”

I’m sorry, but no, being poor doesn’t make you fat. Your eating choices make you fat. Poor people have agency too. Agency is not something you buy. This is coming from someone who probably makes half of what you make in a year.

[DigitalSea]

There are quite a few papers out there on the subject. As someone who has studied a little bit of sociology, I can tell you there are numerous sociological factors which basically determine that wealthier people have access to better food, better medical care and live healthier lives in comparison to lower-socioeconomic people. Where you live alone determines your health equity, if you live in a remote area or small town away from a large city, your access to fresh and non-processed foods is heavily reduced.

This is a great paper I suggest you read: https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/29/1/29/433380 -- this is a good starting point, there are others spanning back the last three decades or so.

It is also worth noting that it's not necessarily how much money you have that is the contributing factor, it can be other factors. The lack of green areas or pathways to walk/exercise (especially prevalent in remote Australian communities), the number of hospitals or doctors close by. But, ultimately, lack of health services and fresh food are correlated to obesity both of which are determined by your location which, in turn, is determined by your financial status.

[kardianos]

> if you live in a remote area or small town away from a large city, your access to fresh and non-processed foods is heavily reduced.

Do you really think this? I know the sticks. You apparently don't. You can live off potatoes, eggs, and oatmeal and not be fat. Those are available anywhere.

There is a "poor" culture, there is an "elite" culture, and then there is a "responsibility" culture. I grew up financially poor in a manufactured home in the sticks, but my culture of my parents was that of "responsibility". Know the difference.

[LAC-Tech]

"The Road to Wigan Pier" had a great bit about this, which hits the nail on the head based on my experience being working class:

The basis of their diet, therefore, is white bread and margarine, corned beef, sugared tea and potatoes—an appalling diet. Would it not be better if they spent more money on wholesome things like oranges and wholemeal bread or if they even, like the writer of the letter to the New Statesman, saved on fuel and ate their carrots raw? Yes, it would, but the point is that no ordinary human being is ever going to do such a thing. The ordinary human being would sooner starve than live on brown bread and raw carrots. And the peculiar evil is this, that the less money you have, the less inclined you feel to spend it on wholesome food. A millionaire may enjoy breakfasting off orange juice and Ryvita biscuits; an unemployed man doesn't. Here the tendency of which I spoke at the end of the last chapter comes into play. When you are unemployed, which is to say when you are underfed, harassed, bored and miserable, you don't want to eat dull wholesome food. You want something a little bit 'tasty'. There is always some cheaply pleasant thing to tempt you. Let's have three pennorth of chips! Run out and buy us a twopenny ice-cream! Put the kettle on and we'll all have a nice cup of tea! That is how your mind works when you are at the PAC level. White bread-and-marg. and sugared tea don't nourish you to any extent, but they are nicer (at least most people think so) than brown bread-and-dripping and cold water. Unemployment is an endless misery that has got to be constantly palliated, and especially with tea, the Englishman's opium. A cup of tea or even an aspirin is much better as a temporary stimulant than a crust of brown bread.

So yeah quite irrational, but it is comforting.

[Aunche]

>The ordinary human being would sooner starve than live on brown bread and raw carrots.

The only people who think that have a very privileged upbringing. My SO worked in an archaeological site in central Asia, and the vast majority of the hosts meals were just raw onions and stale flatbread.

[devchix]

Not irrational at all. I've often wondered at some ascetic values of the very rich: cold showers, building a cabin with your own hands, short duration of rough wilderness living, and in your quoted case, abstemious diet. Humanity spent generations trying to escape those conditions, poor people will never willingly engage in them. Is it because the rest of rich people's lives are elevated away from those conditions, so it's a choice to embrace it, and thereby redefining the thing's perceived values?

Yet another data point on why the poor are playing the lottery, eating crisps and not virtuously buying and cooking rice and lentil, there's a game-theory-ish idea that the poor understands that as much hard work and lentil they could shovel, they stand little chance of getting out. So with the money they have they buy the best value thing possible, discounted for future possibilities; and those best value things are junk food, lottery tickets, sometimes expensive (relative to their circumstance) and flashy things like clothes or phones.

[giantg2]

"if you live in a remote area or small town away from a large city, your access to fresh and non-processed foods is heavily reduced."

This simply isn't true. Most food deserts are in the poorer areas of the cities because nobody is bringing fresh produce in there to sell. If you live in the country or small town, many of these places have farm stands, farmers markets, and local farmers providing seasonal produce to the local stores.

Not to mention, lower density housing generally means that there is enough land to have a veggie garden, depending on the specific circumstances.

[ryanbrunner]

Rural areas being chock full of farmers markets is mostly nostalgia, anyone I know who lives in the country is far more likely to shop exclusively at Walmart than anyone in the city, and likely to prefer more non-perishable food (i.e. processed) because daily or multiple times a week shopping trips are infeasible.

The farms in rural areas are generally focused on growing a single thing (either one type of livestock, or all corn, etc.), entirely for wholesale, farmers markets are a distraction for most of them, outside of smaller farms that are more of a lifestyle / hobby thing a lot of the time.

Farm stands sometimes exist, but they're an exception rather than the rule in most places, and unless you're in an area known for growing fruit or something like that (and primarily selling to tourists driving by) it'll be one-off things like sweet corn in season or eggs.

[throwaway0a5e]

You're both kind of right here. The farmers market stuff is mostly BS.

In the rural areas the weekly/biweekly shopping routine involves everyone (rich and poor alike) dragging their butts to the one strip mall in a 1-2hr radius and that strip mall will have at the bare minimum a super-walmart with a good fresh produce section or a Walmart with a grocery store beside it because that's the place where rich middle and poor from the entire area shop and it needs to cater to them all in order to get them to drag their butts there and do business. The poor will buy less and fill in the gaps with Dollar General food (which is bad food at a bad price).

The poor urban areas which can't economically support supermarkets and who's residents can't economically justify traveling the range they'd need to travel to get to those supermarkets (because the run down not always running cars that underpin the transportation of the rural poor are not as economically viable in cities) so they're stuck buying food at CVS, the bodega or whatever convenience store is accessible.

If you draw the food desert line at "no Whole Foods and no farmers market" then they both suck. But if you zoom in on the area below that the rural areas have a slight edge.

[giantg2]

Why are farmers markets BS?

"If you draw the food desert line at "no Whole Foods and no farmers market""

I don't think anyone is claiming that.

[ryanbrunner]

The idea that farmers markets are commonplace in rural areas is mostly BS. They exist in cities for sure, but you pretty much need an urban population (and probably a fairly well-off population) to really support a farmers market.

Just because farms exist in an area doesn't generally mean the people in that area are getting their food from those farmers (at least directly). That's mostly a relic of an old vision of farms that grew every type of produce and had a variety of livestock instead of the corporate monoculture farms that dominate today.

[giantg2]

"because daily or multiple times a week shopping trips are infeasible."

Do they not have a refrigerator? Once per week trips (maybe even less) were the norm for me growing up, and I had plenty of fresh fruits and veggies.

I've lived in multiple rural areas. Yes, many people do get food from Walmart. I can see some of the more remote people preferring some processed food. I can also see those remote people growing and processing their own (canning, like I do). Many people use frozen veggies, which I don't consider processed and are nearly as good as fresh. Most of the "fresh" stuff you see is actually months old due to the way the supply chain works. It arguably loses as much or more nutritional value than the frozen stuff. This situation is completely different from the actual food deserts you get in the city. The rural people have the option to buy fresh but may choose not to. These people living in food deserts in the city don't have the option of fresh produce in the stores they go to. They generally don't have space to grow their own either. This lack of choice is the big issue.

Every area I've lived in has had farm stands and farmers markets. It has also had local stores that contract with local farmers for seasonal produce. Individual vendors/farmers do tend to have limited selection by focusing on one or two crops. But there are usually multiple farmers focusing on different things (and coordinating through the local grange). Yes, the majority of farms are monoculture soy or corn. These other farms are usually 90% that but maybe 10% other crops, like pumpkin, corn, watermelon, tomato, cantaloupe, onion, potato, honey, hops, etc. There are also CSAs that you can join for a variety of produce, including meat and dairy. My parents live in an area where the local dairy still has delivery service - that's right a good old fashioned milk man.

[ryanbrunner]

> Do they not have a refrigerator? Once per week trips (maybe even less) were the norm for me growing up, and I had plenty of fresh fruits and veggies.

Yeah, I think we're agreeing - I'm saying that going to the grocery store once a week or less is probably going to result in purchasing a smaller percentage of fresh produce (certainly not none, but for meats in particular any less than once a week is starting to get sketchy in terms of keeping things fresh when refridgerated.)

CSAs for sure exist, but I see way more usage of them in urban areas. You're certainly not prevented from using them in rural areas (although delivery might not be available and pickup might be far less convienent than it would be in an urban environment).

This might be a function of where we're from, but in the countryside here hobby side farms by actual farmers are relatively rare and usually aren't producing enough to be considered much more than an in-season treat. I've never heard of milk delivery still being a thing (despite knowing a bunch of people living on farms), so I suspect you just have a different regional experience.

[webmaven]

> The farms in rural areas are generally focused on growing a single thing (either one type of livestock, or all corn, etc.), entirely for wholesale,

And most of the farms are not only going to be growing just one thing, but the same one thing as other nearby farms (of which there won't be very many, since farms have been consolidating into ever larger operations for many decades).

[ecshafer]

I grew up in a rural area and I think I can count on 1 hand how many times I saw a farm stand. People do not shop at farm stands and farmers markets in rural areas that often.

[kingsuper20]

I'm in a very small town right now and it's a reasonable driving distance from farms. It looks to me like the average farm stand is simply some clever person buying crates of produce at the wholesaler.

No shortage of healthy food at the local grocery stores of course.

I expect that people who wave their arms about 'food deserts' could probably stand to visit either small towns or urban areas and form an opinion based on actual experience.

[tomtheelder]

Conjecture here because I don't honestly know, but I think some of what you're observing might just be that food deserts are very regional. If you look at this image [1] you can see that it's basically just the Southeast/Appalachia. Rural Midwest, West, etc don't seem to have this issue nearly as much.

[1] https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/assets/4565435/food_deserts_map.jpg

[giantg2]

What area do you live in? I've had the opposite experience in a few states.

[CountDrewku]

>ost food deserts are in the poorer areas of the cities because nobody is bringing fresh produce in there to sell.

Talking about things that simply aren't true.... Every major city in the US has a large farmer's market present and typically more than one happening in neighborhoods all over the city. These cities also have free/cheap public transportation to get people to the farmer's market. Additionally, you don't need a farmer's market to obtain healthy food, supermarkets are just fine.

The is just trope along the same lines of black people can't get their own ID's or figure out the internet. It's an incredibly racist way of thinking. They're not stupid or incapable people. If they want to they can certainly obtain healthy food.

[giantg2]

"The is just trope along the same lines of black people can't get their own ID's or figure out the internet. It's an incredibly racist way of thinking."

I never said black people. That's your own bias talking.

I agree that people can travel to a supermarket (and that supermarkets have healthy food). It's much more difficult to take a weekly trip for a family's needs in public transportation as opposed to loading up a car. More frequent trips tend to incur higher opportunity cost due to the commute times.

IDs are a completely different matter. The need for those trips are about once every 4-6 years and generally lower expense too.

[CountDrewku]

>I never said black people. That's your own bias talking.

I made a comparison to it being similar, I did not say it exclusively affected black people and this is why I used the terms "along the same lines". Reading comprehension please.

>It's much more difficult to take a weekly trip for a family's needs in public transportation as opposed to loading up a car. More frequent trips tend to incur higher opportunity cost due to the commute times.

I disagree. All the elites and hipsters in big cities live this way on purpose so it can't be that hard. I find it ironic that the same people who push for more public affordable transportation will turn around and say it's too hard to use and personal transportation is better when it comes to minorities. Additionally, if we follow your logic then rural people are vastly more affected by this than anyone living in the inner-city since they have to travel much longer distances and don't even have public transportation available.

[8fGTBjZxBcHq]

It's normal and cool actually that we can take something that affects a MAJORITY of Americans and is tightly correlated to poverty and make it a matter of individual responsibility and moral weakness.

[Aunche]

It only counts as moral weakness if you're blaming your own obesity on somebody other than yourself. Most people people who are fat are quite happy with eating a bunch of junk food, so they just have different priorities.

If you have have access to $1 frozen veggie bags, $2/lb chicken thighs, and assortment of different legumes, you have it better food options than the majority of the world. You can certainly achieve a healthy diet if you really want to.

[emteycz]

It is correlated, not caused by poverty. Rich people are often fat too, and the reason is poor education (not even rich people schools teach this) and poor self-control.

[muglug]

It’s not just food education. If you’re poor in the US you’re much less likely to live near a source of fresh meat and produce, which makes calorie-rich fast food more tempting. You’re more at the mercy of many multi-billion-dollar industries that serve unhealthy food to the masses.

[Applejinx]

There's an opportunity cost and a time cost (and an attention cost) to making food properly and eating right.

Opportunity: if your area cannot give you produce (raw materials to cook with) that's pretty direct. Time: I'm fortunate enough that I can blow at least an hour a day just cutting up meat for stir-fry or preparing my omelet and oatmeal, and a lot of this is really time-optimized but it's still way more than the microwave-box lifestyle. That hour (at least, and distributed among all my meals for the day) is also an attention sink that I can't skip, even though I make the same stuff over and over. If I couldn't do that, I'd have to not only be getting different foodstuffs, but also figuring out different recipes every time I got bored.

You can let corporate America do that stuff for you and just pick different enticing boxes of microwaveable stuff, but you will get bombed with combinations of sugar and salt because competing in the supermarket aisle is serious business and those who fail are lost. They'd be putting fentanyl in the Hot Pockets if they dared. Anything to make the sale, it's that or perish.

Then, that's what you eat, if you're poor and can't spend hours doing it yourself and doing it right. And if you're poor enough… the selection at Cumberland Farms is going to be strictly kept to whatever the other poor people in your neighborhood are addicted to, because that's what will sell.

[goodpoint]

> poor in the US

That's it. There's a huge difference between US and many other countries

It also compounds with the social/cultural context of a living in a city full of very wealthy people.

[kungito]

I'm from a developing country where these things are affordable and less wealthy people spend money on cigarettes rather than salads. Here it definitely isn't about money but about having proper food culture

[istjohn]

When you have a hard life and can't afford comparatively costly luxuries like a vacation or air conditioning, you find cheaper pleasures.

[jjdin14]

“Less likely”, “more at the mercy”, it still comes down to the individuals choices, it’s not that hard to not be obese when poor.

[MattRix]

“it’s not that hard to not be obese when poor.”

The statistics make it quite clear that it is hard, maybe your assumptions are wrong.

[jjdin14]

I'm not particularly interested in some "studies" that come out with statistics saying its hard not to be obese when poor. The fact of the matter is that it's possible to eat relatively healthy affordably (e.g. rice, potatoes, food on sale/discount), and that if you were truly poor you should be saving money by eating less food.

[username90]

Or your assumption wrong. Here is a reasonable explanation: People are poor since they got bad self control, which also makes them fat. People who lack self control are easily tempted with shitty fast food, so their areas mostly serves it rather than real food creating these "food deserts".

If there was demand for food in those areas people would sell it, but there isn't.

Edit: A strong piece of evidence is that people aren't getting poorer, but they sure are getting fatter.

[emteycz]

If we're talking about the obesity rate, statistics make it clear that it's easy to be obese when poor, not that it's not easy to not be obese for the poor.

Or are you talking about statistics that asked if poor people tried to not be overweight but couldn't do it? If so, could you please send link to that - as I'm not aware of any such large-scale study and quick search didn't reveal anything significant?

[8fGTBjZxBcHq]

If it's not hard to avoid being overweight when poor, and most poor people are overweight... what is happening? Do you see the obvious conclusion here? Do you endorse it?

[username90]

People are getting fatter and fatter. It is much worse now than 20 years ago, and even much much worse than 40 years ago. Any explanation you can come up with needs to be able to explain this as well. Does poor people have worse access to food today? Do they have less money for food today?

If we put poor people in the same conditions they had 40 years ago they would be slimmer than rich people today.

[Jochim]

Your environment and mood affects self-control. Stress is a huge factor and poverty typically increases levels of stress.

[npwr]

As someone who does not live in the US, it is often discussed in my social circles. To us, it appears that this cultural propaganda is a political necessity to stay far from communism. The cultural conception of the extent of the free-will impacts notably justice (individual responsability vs. psy impact of the environment) and wealth redistribution (welfare vs. meritocracy).

The conception that most of the bad things that happen to an individual is because of poor choices makes perpetuating inequalities easier. Notably thoses that stem from free market capitalism.

In France we have a strong cultural awareness of our low/inexsitent free-will. This translates readily into state welfare.

[8fGTBjZxBcHq]

Yes this is exactly my understanding as well, from inside the US.

[est31]

There are food deserts in the USA, where you literally can't buy high quality food like vegetables in a large area, and have to resort to only eating the highly processed and highly unhealthy food. These food deserts usually are located in the poorer neighbourhoods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert

[CountDrewku]

Which supermarket chains in the US do not provide vegetables, fruit, meat and only offer processed food? Please find us a 'food desert' where there are no supermarkets nearby.

This is a myth that's easily refuted. There's an argument to be made that poorer people aren't educated on healthy food choices but the idea that they don't have access to anything but processed food is just silly.

[Kharvok]

Food deserts mostly myth. I'm looking for the study in my notes but there is only a very slight difference in diets between tax brackets.

[monoideism]

Food deserts are a big problem. Most of the urban food deserts developed after major riots burned down existing grocery stores in the late 60s (and then again in the 80s in LA).

New food deserts now exist in Minneapolis (and likely other cities as well) after the recent rioting and burning there:

https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-longfellow-neighborh...

https://www.marketplace.org/2020/06/04/neighborhoods-where-s...

Ironically, in the most recent riots, many - perhaps most - of the destructive rioters were middle-class "activist" kids who don't have to live with the results of their actions.

[andrewnicolalde]

TIL, thank you!

[jgtrosh]

Obesity is significantly correlated with lower income. However, in an individual case it is not sufficient to draw conclusions.

Edit: also you seem to present the author's formulation as meaning that they believe poverty caused them to be fat. As far as I can tell she is merely pointing out a series of correlations to both prove that she, in fact, stood out as poor, and to show how this distinction affected her furthermore. Btw I'd say the only actively harmful behaviour from the company she pointed out was making her suggest a salary rather than them making an offering.

[htamas]

Exactly my thoughts. This person just wants to make herself feel good about victimizing herself. Justifying unhealthy behaviour and habits by being poor earlier in her life? Come on. Yes, some of her colleagues seem to be on the other extremes, but many of her examples are just ridicolous. Eg: adult soccer leagues are one of the cheapest activities I can think of, besides running (which is also done by "rich" people).

I'm also coming from a poor family and area, and I also had a few revelations, but nothing like this. My very first of these experiences was at a company paid dinner, where the waiters rolled out a trolley of beverages next to our a table and went away for a couple of minutes. I joked to my colleagues at the table that we could just steal that trolley and nobody would notice it. Nobody laughed, of course and I realised that at that point in my life I could buy a truck of those beverages on my hourly wage. That was nearly 3 months into my career and I just moved on right away.

[FriedrichN]

I must say I was rather triggered by that statement. I'm 100% sure that at one point my earnings were much lower than hers and I wasn't "a fat body". I had a second hand road bike that consisted of many different parts and I loved that thing, I've put thousands of kilometers on that old frame. And guess what, I still use it to this day, even though I could buy a fancy new one.

As a matter of fact, not having a lot of money only emphasizes the fact that your health is one of the things you can influence.

[MattRix]

Did you grow up poor, as she did? If not, then you are missing the important context of what it’s like to grow up in a food scarce environment.

[FriedrichN]

We never had much money, but we ate well. And I ate a lot, but I was also very active. Being active is free.

I know this will upset people, but if poor people are fat, food is not scarce. The quality of food may be low, but low food quality does not make one fat, a surplus of calories does.

To be absolutely clear, I know there is a strong correlation between socioeconomic status and obesity. It's much more complicated than "just eat less", many factors play into this. Including food IQ. It's much more easy to overeat on Cheetos than it is on potatoes and green beans. A persons social environment will have a big influence on how and what they eat, how much they will move, etc.

[CRConrad]

> The quality of food may be low, but low food quality does not make one fat, a surplus of calories does.

That low quality food is food with a surplus of calories. That's a large part of what makes it low quality.

[MattRix]

Low quality food absolutely can make you fat because it makes it harder to eat properly. Unhealthy food isn’t just “easier to overeat” but also messes with insulin to make you feel more hungry than you actually are.

[proxyon]

> Did you grow up poor, as she did? If not, then you are missing the important context of what it’s like to grow up in a food scarce environment.

Yes I did and I'm still not obese.

[MattRix]

Statistically it’s much more likely that you are.

[proxyon]

Because statistically poor people who remain poor have poor impulse control, prioritize short term pleasure and make bad decisions. Like many people who escaped poverty, I am not poor because lacking these traits elevated me out of poverty.

[lelanthran]

> Did you grow up poor, as she did? If not, then you are missing the important context of what it’s like to grow up in a food scarce environment.

I did, poorer in fact. I only stopped being thin when I got a good salary.

She's full of it[1].

[1] 'It' being 'victim complex'.

[teachingassist]

Food insecurity is an aspect of poverty and is not uncommon in the United States.

"Your eating choices" as a poor person might be to eat what and when and where you can afford to.

[username90]

Why could people manage to stay slim 20 years ago but not today? It isn't like the poor are more insecure now than back then.

[teachingassist]

The last 20 years has probably made (much) less difference than you appear to think.

From Wikipedia: "The rate of increase in the incidence of obesity began to slow in the 2000s".

But, to attempt to answer your question: e.g., the expectation that both adults in a household will work means that people/parents are more likely to be time-poor and not able to cook. Cooking skills have been lost.

[fmajid]

Eating choices are not really choices (or Hobson's choices) when you have to work multiple jobs to make ends meet and have no time left for food prep.

[darkerside]

This one was odd. And why didn't she "belong" to the gym? This woman has impostor syndrome on steroids.

[istjohn]

She states that she was made to feel unwelcome at the gym.

[darkerside]

What did she want, a Christmas card?

[indymike]

> Instead of seeing the bright side of life, in which this person clearly vastly improved their situation in life, all they can see is what they don’t have.

I think there is a self-deprecating humor to the article, and I enjoyed it. Life in tech world is strange sometimes.

[throwaway0a5e]

Everyone replying is saying various things about how it's not the poors fault that they've been taken advantage of and have crappy food options and that's why they're fat.

They might be right about the bad food options but what these people don't get is that if you're poor you have a lot of bigger more time pressing, more tractable problems to solve than being fat. Most of these people would still be fat if they had more ready access to "good" food because good food wouldn't magically make being fat jump to the top of their priority list.

When you have little money you can very easily justify skipping lunch everyday or something like that. Skipping breakfast or lunch, having a very minimal meal for the one you don't skip (think PB&J, maybe with a fruit cup if you're feeling like a high roller) and then having your big meal at dinner so that your hunger is focused on the parts of the day when you're working and distracted and you go to sleep full is a very, very, tractable form of dieting and cost cutting rolled into one.

But if you have enough money to indulge in food/beer then why not do it, it's about the only luxury you can afford.

[istjohn]

This is true in a superficial sense. But healthy food is generally more expensive than junk food. Gym memberships, exercize equipment, personal trainers, and outdoor recreation costs time and money. It's hard to prioritize self-care when you're struggling with the day-to-day stresses of poverty, like how do I get to work after my car broke down for the third time this month. Poverty is stressful and stress-eating is a thing.

Sure, there is no law of physics that makes poor people overweight, but it is much easier to have a thin waistline when you have a fat bank account. And indeed we observe that in the US, poor people are heavier than wealthier people.

[websitescenes]

Victim blaming is THE classic tactic used to ignore the very real situational plights of many, if not most, Americans.

[isoskeles]

Counterpoint: Playing the victim is THE classic tactic used to rationalize and excuse the behavior of many, if not most, Americans.

(If you found this point incorrect, dumb, or worthless, consider that is how many people feel about the point I am replying to.)

[websitescenes]

The only difference is that if I’m wrong, some people got free stuff but if you’re wrong, people are languishing in despair with little to no lifeline. Are you willing to bet other peoples lives on the idea that your experience is truth? It’s not something I am willing to do; I value human life too much.

[cosmodisk]

Being poor doesn't make you fat per se, but if you look at most stats, higher social levels(whatever that means in each country) usually means less obesity. When I worked in construction, most people were eating an absolute crap and were often overweight. Then I joined a professional services company and I literally walked into an office of 50 or so people, where everybody was slim and most people ate pretty healthy, home made food.

There are lots of factors why that's the case,but to say it's not happening like this wouldn't be right either.

[leoc]

It seems that much of Chapter 6 of Wigan Pier is still pretty relevant: http://www.george-orwell.org/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier/5.html

[istjohn]

Would it not be better if they spent more money on wholesome things like oranges and wholemeal bread or if they even, like the writer of the letter to the New Statesman, saved on fuel and ate their carrots raw? Yes, it would, but the point is that no ordinary human being is ever going to do such a thing. The ordinary human being would sooner starve than live on brown bread and raw carrots. And the peculiar evil is this, that the less money you have, the less inclined you feel to spend it on wholesome food. A millionaire may enjoy breakfasting off orange juice and Ryvita biscuits; an unemployed man doesn't. Here the tendency of which I spoke at the end of the last chapter comes into play. When you are unemployed, which is to say when you are underfed, harassed, bored, and miserable, you don't want to eat dull wholesome food. You want something a little bit 'tasty'. There is always some cheaply pleasant thing to tempt you. Let's have three pennorth of chips! Run out and buy us a twopenny ice-cream! Put the kettle on and we'll all have a nice cup of tea! That is how your mind works when you are at the P.A.C. level. White bread-and-marg and sugared tea don't nourish you to any extent, but they are nicer (at least most people think so) than brown bread-and-dripping and cold water. Unemployment is an endless misery that has got to be constantly palliated, and especially with tea, the English-man's opium. A cup of tea or even an aspirin is much better as a temporary stimulant than a crust of brown bread.

[leoc]

Yes, but before that excerpt Orwell pointed out that the financial margins involved in eating healthily on the minimum income were much narrower than the "why don't they just" contingent knew or admitted. That doesn't carry over to the contemporary US as self-evidently as the psychological point does, but I suspect that it does carry over somewhat.

I do encourage anyone who hasn't already to read the whole chapter http://www.george-orwell.org/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier/5.html : it's not really very long though I felt that the relevant parts were a bit too long, all together, to fit in a comment.

[LAC-Tech]

Ah we posted this at almost the same time :)

I'm glad I didn't read that book when I was still "poor", it's so relatable and hits hard. I recommend it for anyone kind of wondering (he's not exactly kind to the working class, but he does try hard to understand it all and does have insight).

[umeshunni]

Am I the only one who realizes that this is a work of fiction. This is the author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Elison

[xsmasher]

Some elements, like being fat and going to Berkeley match up; what makes you conclude it is a work of fiction?

[hacker_newz]

If you think this person "clearly vastly improved their situation in life" you may need to read the article again.

[CountDrewku]

Are you suggesting that she chose to be employed at a start up and is actively choosing to stay there because it's a worse situation than she had before?

[watwut]

> Instead of seeing the bright side of life, in which this person clearly vastly improved their situation in life, all they can see is what they don’t have.

First, I dont think this accurately describes the list at all. Second, it is ok for people to express negative feelings or observations. Forced positivity is toxic.

[Cthulhu_]

wow never thought about it like that thanks im cured

[benatkin]

Thinking about it like that (my eating choices) is actually how I lost 15 pounds once, haha.

I gained it back.