holy moly, guys! i think we all need to take a step back, a deep breath, and remember that this is a discussion of meeting American health goals, not a street fight. ::deep breaths::
Wifezilla said:
Having lived in apartments surrounded by section 8 cases, food stamp recipients and people on disability, I KNOW how they live. They drove nicer cars than I did. They didn't work while I was up till 3 am delivering pizzas. They ate everything from an instant microwave box.
i'm sure you know that this isn't how everyone in poverty lives. in the world of aid work, we call those folks 5th Ave poor. they are living below the poverty line but they obviously have resources. this is the target audience for much of the GREAT work that is going on in the inner city.
unfortunately, many many people don't have even the luxury of food stamps and a car. i'm talking people who are living on almost nothing. when your only source of income in a week is begging (it's not just the homeless that have to beg) and the money you have left over to spend on food is next to nothing, you are going to go for the most instantly gratifying bang for your buck. that's usually going to be jumbo sized processed foods that are cheap and terrible for you, but they meet your caloric needs and keep you alive another day. most of these people can't take a gamble on planting something that may or may not grow and produce. even if it only costs $2 to plant, if it dies, that is $2 worth of very needed food that has been lost.
hickerchick said:
Perhaps we should simply nuke the inner cities and get rid of all the annoying people who don't live up to your standards.
i know this came out of frustration, but i really don't think that what the others have said is suggesting that they think inner city poor are worthless. they just don't agree with our position that the situation is
immensely more complicated than a simple decision to eat better.
ScottSD said:
This reminds me of a discussion I had with my 7th grader after a tough basketball loss recently.
I coach his team and they lost....the officiating was NOT very good and he was blaming the ref's for the loss.
I told him that when he was blaming the ref's for the loss, it meant he was not taking responsibility upon himself for what HE could do to win that game. I told this to the whole team. That each of them must find it in THEMSELVES...asked what each of them could have done to win that game.
I told him....a man takes responsibility...a child blames others for their problems.
please don't equate 7th grade basketball with someone's life or death situation. it's extremely reductive. i mean, it's a great lesson to teach your child, one that is important, but it is not a blanket lesson for life.
admitting that you are struggling to feed yourself and your family, not even thinking about healthy foods, is not the same as blaming someone for your problems. no matter how much money you have (or don't have, as the case may be) you're first priority is keeping yourself and your family alive. "alive" does not come with any illusions of health, but alive nonetheless. if growing food means reclaiming the empty lot from a gang who would just as soon as shoot you, you don't do it. if growing food means that you get to spend even less time with your children because you can't risk them getting shot in a drive-by while you are gardening, you don't do it.
is it fair to people living in those conditions who say "i can't garden because of the violence in my neighborhood" to say they aren't taking responsibility or doing enough? i would say NO, it's not fair. and i wouldn't see it as them blaming others because they don't want to take responsibility. they just don't want to get shot.
