Letters to the Editor
-
The irony is...
Retailers like Whole Foods are loath to venture into some census tracts, and people cite the higher prices as a barrier.
Here's the thing, though: People in isolated 'food deserts' already pay a premium over supermarkets, and the prices for comparable foodstuffs (when you can make a comparison) are more or less what you'd find at a more 'upscale' place--so the upshot is that they're paying through the nose for vastly inferior quality. (The gap gets more stark when one remembers that it's not just the absolute price that determines affordability, but the proportion of income that goes towards purchase.)
Most people in these areas are forced to go to mom 'n pop stores and bodegas, where the prices are, frankly, shocking. They tend to be packaged smaller, so they pay more per pound for basic foodstuffs, expiration dates are dicey, the brands offered tend to be inferior generics, and the selection, what there is of it, is laughable.
As to the article, while it may be true that it can be a challenge buying food that children will actually eat, it's also true that kids are not the main food purchasers--even in lower income households. Ultimately, they eat what's in front of them. The parents I've spoken to in my city, San Diego, would gladly support a good store--or a farmer's market.
It's tougher to feed a good diet in the barrio. But the same HFCS processed dreck is in upscale markets too; someone is buying it. It's not all kasha and keifer and (yes) jicama. The difference is that the higher variety, lower prices (both in actual as well as relative terms) and accessability makes it easier to have some balance.
As to the foods themselves, one debatable 'advantage' to processed foods is that they stick around longer. Too often, even in the most aware families, fresh foods turn into science experiments in the crisper. If you're relatively well off, you can afford to just sigh and throw it into your compost pile; not so for people who watch their pennies.
There's also the time factor. Years ago, as an excercise in simple living, I lived on a poverty level food budget. One, it's damned hard (and I cheated--the budget was for a family of four; at the time there were just two of us), and damned labor-intensive. Even for 'easy' recipies. At the end of it, I had a better understanding of and admiration for those who have to do it daily, instead of the month I dabbled.
We as progressives perhaps need to do a better job of advocating for (and especially with) those we don't see, whom we have the privilege not to see. This is just one aspect of the 'poor tax' that should be front and center in discussions about policy and agenda going forward.
Cities could insist that for every supermarket or upscale market planted in a more affluent area, one has to get planted in an 'impacted' area. Retailers could be held accountable, not just for the small percentage of their profits that go towards 'community service' but for how well they take their responsibility to serve and feed the entire community, not just a carved-out segment. We need to make noise; to talk to the store managers fill out those comment cards, and give this issue the attention it deserves. Everyone deserves good tomatoes.