“Historically, people of limited means have tended to scrape by on what’s locally available, while the wealthy have used their resources to draw in fancy food from far away. Now, that situation has turned upside down.” --from an article in Grist by Tom Philpott
Dawn (Frugal for Life) has picked up the discussion about low incomes and healthy food. Since I feed my family on a tight budget, this is a topic near and dear to my heart. I thought the Grist article had a few good points, but its discussion about low income nutrition is as far from reality as the $90 Farmer's Dinners it describes.
Yes, people with motivation can find healthy food on any budget. All kinds of creative people online have demonstrated that fact. However, many people on a poverty level income lack adequate resources for healthy shopping. (And I am not including the families who have chosen to live below poverty level as a form of self-sufficiency or downsizing here.) Let's face it, if your family is hungry, a loaf of white bread is not so objectionable. If you get most of your information from television, you don't stand a chance in the grocery. Reading skills may be poor or nonexistent; picking up a copy of Superfoods at the library is not an option. If you don't have a computer or you work while the library is open, you can't just click away at the thousands of whole foods recipes online. If you lack transportation, the grocery with good produce may be reachable only once a month. Even if you have a yard to grow your own food, you need tools and energy to make a garden happen.
People in poverty can overcome these obstacles. I'm simply trying to point out that it's not as easy as the organic-fed, well-educated liberals would have you believe. At least not for everyone, and certainly not for an economic class of Americans whose healthy survival skills have been bred out by generations of "helpful" social programs. Let them eat cake, right?