You are right about the UK although it varies a bit by industry and also if in public service or not (heavy weighting to the 'public school network and Oxford /Cambridge and yes class and accent ). Ireland and some other European countries arenât really like that generally . Maybe France to a degree is similar with their elite colleges .
.The US mutinationals also operate in a very elitist manner with ivy league networks, the difference is they are more open to immigrants but you STILL need that top level ivy league degree in most industries.
Thereâs a massive dose of woo-woo in all that, and I canât be doing with that âplant-basedâ bollocks; my diet is plant-based, but that doesnât mean I avoid meat like itâs kryptonite. Paltrowâs diet is basically good (and affordable) food though.
Oh, thereâs another big lie that people are starting to believe:
âVeganism is the ultimate healthy diet for humans and itâll save the planet tooâ.
I suppose when youâve got a shitload of cash you need to invent random things to spend it on. I can think of worse choices than food.
Hereâs another big lie: âI donât have much money so I have to eat crap food; I donât have any choiceâ. Almost anyone (in the West at least) can eat a healthy diet. You donât need to buy $20 unicorn poo smoothies or âclean turkey burgersâ and whatnot. IIRC, Paltrow tried to show how you could feed a family on $50 for a week and she was panned for it in the media. Not because she got it wrong (her food selection was a bit bizarre) but because she had the temerity to even try, and didnât check her privilege.
Itâs true that farm subsidies (for very specific products, like corn and soy) are a huge part of the problem. They make junk food artificially cheap. The obvious solution, of course, is to remove the subsidies. But if you proposed that to the politicians theyâd laugh you out of the room. Too many of their friends benefit from those subsidies. A âjunk food taxâ basically means people are being taxed twice, in order to give more money to the privileged - once to fund the subsidies, and again when they buy the subsidized products.
That doesnât alter the fact that healthy food is affordable even for people on low incomes. âMore expensiveâ is not the same thing as âout of reachâ. If you earn minimum wage (~$1200 a month) you canât afford Gwyneth Paltrowâs organic avocado toast with fairy dust, and you have to deny yourself certain things - say, the latest iPhone and a premium cable TV subscription - but it can be done. For example, Aldi (Indianopolis, picked at random) are selling pork loin for $4/kg, and veg are around $1-3/kg. Which suggests a pork roast or stew for six people for sub-$10. Thatâs insanely cheap. Itâs only a shade more than the same number of calories from cheap-and-nasty instant ramen ($1 per 800kcal, most of which from carbs).
The other part of the problem is the sheer volume of nutribollocks promoted by dieticians, Kelly Rippa, and videos like the one in the link. Fruit, for example, is not an essential component of a healthy diet - in fact diabetics would be best advised to avoid it. So the examples in the video (apples and strawberries) are meaningless. The choice between donuts and apples is also meaningless (who the hell frames the decision to buy donuts in that way? I certainly donât). People with no money think they have to follow all those stupid rules, so they just say âeh, whateverâ and buy the ramen.
in Taiwan pork is really expensive. At Costco they are a minimum of about 8 US dollars per kg, and thatâs for ground pork. Most are way more than this. I hope the influx of racto pork will change this, but where do I buy these racto American pork?
In fact you save nothing cooking at home. So how are restaurants making money?
I find itâs a lot cheaper to eat healthy. Even when buying 7/11 meals I just stick with the âSimple Fitâ meals. But if you have the time, buying your own ingredients and cooking is much cheaper than any type of restaurant food. Even in Taiwan.
It takes self-control to eat healthy. Too many people blame their situation on bad genes, not having enough money/time, corporations oppressing them with their âaddictiveâ fast foods ⌠etc.
Ultimately its a choice, but some people are gently but firmly prodded into making bad choices by an avalanche of carefully-targeted PR along the lines of âbecause youâre poor, youâd better buy this cheap shit that weâve made especially for you. Donât worry, it has zero cholesterol so itâs really really healthy!â
As I mentioned elsewhere, I participate in a weightloss forum based in the UK, and Iâve noticed that people who donât have much education are very vulnerable to nutribollocks. They post pictures of disastrously bad meals that theyâve made for themselves, always with titles like âhealthy such-and-suchâ, which theyâve concocted by taking an unhealthy recipe and adding more unhealthy ingredients to it (and/or taking away perfectly innocuous ones). They justify this with a garbled mishmash of pseudoscience that theyâve picked up from Facebook, and feel pleased with themselves. Every so often they post a despairing message asking why theyâre not losing weight. Itâs sad. Life would be a lot better for those at the bottom if the nutritionists would STFU.
She is panned for everything she does. For some reason Goop is the second coming of Satan, more harmful than Monsanto, and Gwyneth Paltrow is an inexcusable bitch for being associated with it. A ton of male celebs have done way worse things and never get called out on. Itâs good olâ sexism.
Because most people buy meat at markets, not supermarkets.