“According to a study from the University of Washington, the rift between healthy grub and junk food is wider than it’s ever been. Researchers were able to buy 2,000 calories of junk food for $3.52 — that’s an entire day’s caloric intake — where nutritious foods cost them a whopping $36 for the same 2,000 calories.”
So, you know, STFU forever about “it’s cheaper to eat healthy LOL poor people don’t get how money works!” (via thebicker)
"Nutritious foods," that’s nice and vague. What, exactly, did they buy? Frozen veggies? Rice? Beans? Or did they blow it on fresh fruit and meat to make a point?
And how many meals did it buy? I can maybe buy a single taco for a couple of bucks, or I can buy a tub of oatmeal that will feed me for weeks. Yeah, 2000 calories of fast food might be “cheap” (no, not really, but let’s pretend for a second it’s cheap) but that’s also a meal and a half. (See? Expensive. Speaking of which, where the fuck are they shopping that fast food is so goddamn cheap? No fast food place where I live gives you a meal for much less than $10. I picked up several meals worth of groceries today for $25, I got veggies, dairy and some bagels, and I have enough money right now to not be desperately frugal about it either.)
Pretty much anyone who has actually lived on terrifyingly little money (food or rent? food or medicine?) knows perfectly well that if you waste your money on junk food you will starve.
I tracked down the actual study:
"Energy cost of foods in the bottom quintile of energy density, beverages excluded, was $18.16/1,000 kcal as compared to only $1.76/1,000 kcal for foods in the top quintile."
The original quote is a lie. The study did not compare “junk food” to “nutritious foods”. It compared energy-dense foods to low-calorie foods.
Junk food and beans are both energy-dense. Diet junk food and spinach are both low-calorie.