Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rob74 1069 days ago
Many of the examples given in the article are complete rubbish:

> The French are eating less foie gras and drinking less red wine.

foie gras involves torturing animals, and drinking less alcohol is healthier, so good for them!

> Across Germany, meat and milk consumption has fallen to the lowest level in three decades

yes, more people are eating less meat - good for them and for the environment!

> TooGoodToGo, a company founded in Denmark in 2015 that sells leftover food from retailers and restaurants, has 76 million registered users across Europe

using food at or past its sell-by date instead of throwing it away? Now we can't have that, can we?

At this point, I was waiting for a line about how so many of these poor, poor Europeans are now forced to use bicycles or public transportation, which must surely be because they can't afford a car or the gas prices. But luckily it didn't come (except for the poor woman who has to "share a car with her partner’s father").

5 comments

I assumed the article was playing on clichés to make a point; as a French, I spoke with my mother yesterday about how people buy lesser-quality food and sometimes skip meals more often.

She's volunteering at a food and clothes bank and noticed the increase in demand; even from the working class, the struggle is real. And, pardon me for the directness, but your patronising tone really isn't helping workers get on the side of what you see as "good".

> TooGoodToGo, a company founded in Denmark in 2015 that sells leftover food from retailers and restaurants, has 76 million registered users across Europe

I am a registered user and never used the service. I just forget.

So according to your "analysis", not going on holydays anymore, or to the restaurant, or having smaller houses, is not the sign of being less wealthy... "because it is good for the planet". Green-leftism summarized righ here !! :D
No, I just wanted to suggest that some of the things mentioned in the article may also have other reasons than simply not being able to afford them. I am not in any way in dire straits financially, but I also look at the "reduced price" (due to sell-by date or for other reasons) shelf in the supermarket - not because I can't afford anything else, but in order to have more money for other stuff. And I also try to go more by foot, bicycle or public transportation than using the car - partly because of increased fuel prices, but partly also because it's healthier, better for the environment and I generally arrive at the destination less stressed out than if I take the car. Reality is more complex than the simplistic spin articles like this one try to put on it!

As for "having smaller houses", that's not as much because people are earning less, but because housing prices have exploded recently - that's a real problem that the article completely fails to mention, because it doesn't fit into its narrative (it also happens in the US).

It’s not for you to decide what is good for the others.
The real rub is that neoliberalism exists in Europe too. Just it hasn't completely captured or replaced existing systems... yet.

The struggle is real for non-wealthy everywhere as more and more is owned by fewer and fewer people. To paraphrase William Gibson: "the future is here, just unevenly distributed".