Corporate America - Can it be stopped?

[Busboy]

I think the food quality decline and the ritual importance of dining are two different, if related, issues.

I grew up in a traditional family in the 60s and 70s with a family dining ritual that I have done my best to pass along to my own children. That being said, family dinners often (I didn't say "always," mom) consisted of tasteless, over-processed convenience food. I never at a fresh green bean before I left home, fish sticks were an important part of my diet.

Public dining was for years a function of cost, not quality -- the only places I could afford to gather with my friends being cheap dives. But again, being among friends, in an atmosphere condusive to lingering and impassioned discussion was the more important part of the dinner.

If Industrial Food, Inc. can be blamed for dumbing down the quality of our food in an endless search for visual perfection and a storage life bordering on immortality, we, ourselves, share the blame for the destruction of the dining experience.

[Fat Guy]

a return to an artisanal past and meals cooked with care in your own home from whole ingredients and fresh herbs, romantic as it may be, is probably going to be limited, at least in the present, to the affluent or passionate, not the common man in America, and definitely not to the common man worldwide. As much as I would love to see canned corn and enriched white bread disappear, it ain't gonna happen - and really, it shouldn't.

I don't think anybody has suggested that the world can or should be fed by artisanal farmers, or that everybody should cook every meal at home from organic ingredients. From the beginning, the "pro-corporate-America" people on this topic have been saying that the goal should be to get the large producers to pay more attention to quality, primarily through consumer education. And we're only really talking about America and the Western industrialized world here; the parts of the world where starvation is a constant threat are a totally different question.

[bleachboy]

I don't see the view that food is important to culture as an irrational niche projection of overimportance

Maybe not historically, but let's talk about today.

You're making it more important than it is, because food is central to your life. Mine too, but there are a ton of people who don't see it that way. It's mostly an economic thing.

12.1% of Americans (and 16.7% of children) today live in poverty. They don't give a flying fuck about quality food. They care about using the small amount of money they have to get enough nourishment to sustain primary body function. They eat 99 cent loaves of white bread and jars of peanut butter. They don't "dine". (I've been there, I know).

Of the rest who possibly could afford to spend time making food interesting, the percentage that do are the ones for whom it's a hobby, or who have enough money so that it's not a problem to focus on food a little.

The rest spend their meager free time focusing on sports, or philately, or watch-collecting.

When you're working 40 hours a week for an income of $42,000 (the current national average), with a wife and a kid, you don't have a lot of spare time to pursue interests. Sure, you'll get food-crazy around Thanksgiving and Christmas, but you'd spend the rest of your spare time doing what you love.

For you and I, that may be cooking and dining out. But for most, I'm afraid, the key issue is -- get ready for it -- convenience.

[Nick]

I wonder how much of this has to do with people first moving to the city, and then to the suburbs. This has removed people from most any connection with the land and growing of food. For those of us who grew up in the country, and still live here, the kitchen remains the center, if not the heart, of the home, and good food and good cooking remain an integral part of our life.

[hjshorter]

Well said, especially this part:

12.1% of Americans (and 16.7% of children) today live in poverty. They don't give a flying fuck about quality food. They care about using the small amount of money they have to get enough nourishment to sustain primary body function. They eat 99 cent loaves of white bread and jars of peanut butter. They don't "dine". (I've been there, I know).

I tried to make this point on the Bayless thread and roundly dismissed.

[ExtraMSG]

I don't think it's possible to separate those things from the quality issue, because once you say quality is irrelevant you may as well just take the food pill and dismantle all the structures.

Never said quality isn't important, just that it often gets too much importance here.

I don't think anybody has suggested that the world can or should be fed by artisanal farmers, or that everybody should cook every meal at home from organic ingredients.

But by implying moral importance to artisinal and organic foods and saying that companies such as Wal-Mart and ADM are evil (which often saturates this site, especially on more political threads such as this one), I think one can conclude that many members here do believe that everyone should be cooking every meal from home using organic ingredients.

I'll try to deal with the Decline and Fall of the Culinary Empire later when I have more time.

[ExtraMSG]

When you're working 40 hours a week for an income of $42,000 (the current national average), with a wife and a kid, you don't have a lot of spare time to pursue interests. Sure, you'll get food-crazy around Thanksgiving and Christmas, but you'd spend the rest of your spare time doing what you love.

That's household income, not individual income. The average person makes even less. btw, great source of stats is the Statistical Abstract of the United States:

http://www.census.gov/prod/www/statistical-abstract-02.html

[Mayhaw Man]

I don't think anybody has suggested that the world can or should be fed by artisanal farmers, or that everybody should cook every meal at home from organic ingredients.

But by implying moral importance to artisinal and organic foods and saying that companies such as Wal-Mart and ADM are evil (which often saturates this site, especially on more political threads such as this one), I think one can conclude that many members here do believe that everyone should be cooking every meal from home using organic ingredients.

I'll try to deal with the Decline and Fall of the Culinary Empire later when I have more time.

I absolutely do not believe that everyone can or should be eating organic swellness from Whole Foods.

What I do believe, especially for people with limited incomes and to some degree limited time because the must work more to meet basic needs, is that MOST people are better off shopping well (at Wal Mart or anywhere else, as long as they are buying decent food, which is impossible at my local Wal Mart as far as meat is concerned) and preparing it in a healthy way. It is better for their families health wise and it is a damn sight better economically as far as stretching an already tight budget. And as far as time in preperation goes, things can be made ahead of time and frozen or meals can just be simple and good. I am absolutely not talking haute here, but I am talking about something better than McAppleback's (hell, with just a little effort and practice most people can learn to make anything, even desserts- Just think, Mom could practice and impress her family with a delicious Antarctic Red Delicious Apple Pie mmmmmmmmmmmm )

[Toliver]

When I was a kid growing up in San Diego, California, some 30 years ago, there were stores called Fed-Mart and later, Gemco, which were one-stop stores. My mom shopped at these stores for the convenience and also the prices (no matter how convenient a store is, if it doesn't have good prices they won't get the business). So the basic concept of Super Wal-Marts are nothing new to me. It is interesting to see, though, how Wal-Mart has taken the concept and run with it, so to speak.

Can Corporate America be stopped? Why would you want to do a thing like that? From a capitalist's point of view, it's just survival of the financially fittest. From a consumer's point of view, I look forward to the cheap groceries.

Super Wal-Marts and the corporate thinking behind them have become the proverbial 800 pound gorilla. I know the local grocery chains here in my city are scared witless with the arrival of the Super Wal-Mart. But if Von's (Safeway), Ralph's and Albertson's had low prices to begin with, they would have nothing to worry about. There is a "mom & pop" chain (2 stores) locally that might survive. They've positioned themselves as purveyors of the fine life (Harris Ranch beef, a good variety of wines, locally grown produce, etc).

Yes, there is some pretty cheap (bad) crap at Wal-Mart, but there is some good (cheap) non-crap, as well. The same can be said about Target, K-Mart, etc. Educating the consumer (as other posters have advocated) to be able to tell the difference between the two is what is needed. An educated consumer is a powerful thing.

[jhlurie]

Did anyone just watch the ABC news special which just aired on exactly this topic.

Well maybe not exactly, but really close. The special was on how the food corporations and their lobbies basically have a stranglehold on congress, which has kept the regulation agencies at bay, which has led to thirty years or so of unregulated advertising of junk food to children, federal subsidies to corn growers over other crops (to make corn syrup, of course) and other nasty stuff.

This link leads to a partial version of the report (a lot is missing). One of the best parts of the report is missing--the tale of how last time a federal agency proposed trying to regulate food advertising to children, the food industry lobbyists got their congressmen so worked up over it that the agency was almost disbanded as a result. So all of the other agencies have been scared witless since then.

[robyn]

<<McDonalds, Burger King and other fast food giants have, it seems, already reached their limits and are in decline.>>

Sorry Fresco - but McDonalds reported record monthly sales today. Robyn

[Mayhaw Man]

Did anyone just watch the ABC news special which just aired on exactly this topic.

No, sadly I was preparing a healthy homecooked meal for my family .

I think most of the people who saw it were eating tv dinners and bags of burger takeout with supersize fries and megawhammo sodas .

I am now preparing to watch The Hebrew Hammer on Comedy Central with the well fed Little Mayhaws. It looks like it could be great or really suck, could go either way

[jhlurie]

Mayhaw Man, different time zone, pal.

That said I didn't eat very healthy tonight. I bought into a corporate sales pitch.

[fresco]

<<McDonalds, Burger King and other fast food giants have, it seems, already reached their limits and are in decline.>>

Sorry Fresco - but McDonalds reported record monthly sales today. Robyn

I think you are wrong.

[robyn]

<<It can be done, and some grocers are doing it. But the one's who are invariably going to lose out are the middle of the road chains. Winn Dixie, Albertson's, Delchamps, etc. don't have a chance.>>

I agree. I too live in the south - in the neighborhood where the owners of Winn Dixie live. I have 6 chain grocery stores within 10 minutes of my house: Food Lion (yuck), Winn Dixie, 2 Publix stores (Florida's favorite store), Harris Teeter (1 of 2 experimental stores in Florida opened by more northern chain) and Fresh Market (a more northern pale imitation of Whole Foods). Much to the Davis family's chagrin - the Winn Dixie had to close about 3 years ago - it was doing terrible. As a matter of pride - they "spiffed up" the store and reopened it just about a year ago. It carries stuff you won't find in other Winn Dixie stores - and you can tell it's really trying hard. Pont L'Eveque? You'll find it at this Winn Dixie. But - judging from the traffic I see there (my main store is Publix - but I shop at Winn Dixie once in a while) - and the "buy 1 get 2 free" offers - it looks like another bust.

Overall - it seems that Walmart (along with places like BJ's and Costco) is taking market share from everyone. Only reason I don't have a Walmart close by is strict zoning rules in the beach communities in my area. But it's building just about everywhere else in the metro area. And I think it will eventually put about half the chains in Florida out of business (including Winn Dixie). Robyn

[ExtraMSG]

McDonald's economic news:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...alds_sales_dc_7

[Fat Guy]

I don't think anybody has suggested that the world can or should be fed by artisanal farmers, or that everybody should cook every meal at home from organic ingredients.

But by implying moral importance to artisinal and organic foods and saying that companies such as Wal-Mart and ADM are evil (which often saturates this site, especially on more political threads such as this one), I think one can conclude that many members here do believe that everyone should be cooking every meal from home using organic ingredients.

Let's see some quotes, then. Am I, for example, guilty of "implying moral importance to artisinal and organic foods and saying that companies such as Wal-Mart and ADM are evil"? If so, I'd like to see where I did that so I can retract it, because I absolutely do not believe anything of the sort.

[Fat Guy]

12.1% of Americans (and 16.7% of children) today live in poverty.  They don't give a flying fuck about quality food.

My personal experience is quite the opposite: I went to high school with numerous Asian immigrants who were in that economic bracket -- by every definition, they were the urban poor -- and in many cases I dined in their homes. And they cared mightily about food; they had very strong family dining traditions. They were some of the proudest people I ever met, with well kept (albeit modest) homes and beautiful (to me at least) dinner tables. Meanwhile, my rich Upper East Sider friends mostly ate pizza and burgers and never saw their families.

Not to generalize, I'm sure there are plenty of poor people who don't give a fuck about quality food. But there are plenty who do.

I think it's also important to note that what we call poverty in America wouldn't necessarily be considered poverty in much of the rest of the world. Poor people in America seem to have no trouble at all becoming obese, for example. So I think they (or at least many of them) have access to plenty of food, and have plenty of room for improvement in their eating habits.

[robyn]

<<McDonalds, Burger King and other fast food giants have, it seems, already reached their limits and are in decline.>>

Sorry Fresco - but McDonalds reported record monthly sales today.  Robyn

I think you are wrong.

You're right - took a look at the WSJ - and it was just record sales for a November. Robyn

[Busboy]

12.1% of Americans (and 16.7% of children) today live in poverty.  They don't give a flying fuck about quality food.

My personal experience is quite the opposite: I went to high school with numerous Asian immigrants who were in that economic bracket -- by every definition, they were the urban poor -- and in many cases I dined in their homes. And they cared mightily about food; they had very strong family dining traditions. They were some of the proudest people I ever met, with well kept (albeit modest) homes and beautiful (to me at least) dinner tables. Meanwhile, my rich Upper East Sider friends mostly ate pizza and burgers and never saw their families.

My mother's family was "poor" -- grandpa was a cotton mill worker, a day laborer and liquor store clerk over the years -- but family dinner was very serious. They didn't have much, but they had Japanese china and silver plate that came out evey Sunday, for chicken, biscuits and gravy.

Today, I'm in a Central American neighborhood and the families seem to take it very seriously, as well. My son, who goes to a private school with children of families much wealthier than ours, confirms your burger/pizza/absent parents observation.

Though love of family didn't keep the punk from whining about having to eat fresh cod and garlic polenta tonight.

Not to get too deep into politics ans sociology, but there's a huge gap between new immigrants (or other poor) with intact families who feel that they're on the way up, and poor or lower-middle class families which are frankly hopeless and/or dysfunctional. There's a level of discipline, support and cooperation in the former that isn't present in the latter, and the effects are obvious at a number of levels, dining habits among them.

[jschyun]

When I was a kid growing up in San Diego, California, some 30 years ago, there were stores called Fed-Mart and later, Gemco, which were one-stop stores.

Hehe, I remember Fedco, from my youth spent in Orange County, CA.

[robyn]

I think the food quality decline and the ritual importance of dining are two different, if related, issues.

I grew up in a traditional family in the 60s and 70s with a family dining ritual that I have done my best to pass along to my own children. That being said, family dinners often (I didn't say "always," mom) consisted of tasteless, over-processed convenience food. I never at a fresh green bean before I left home, fish sticks were an important part of my diet.

Public dining was for years a function of cost, not quality -- the only places I could afford to gather with my friends being cheap dives.  But again, being among friends, in an atmosphere condusive to lingering and impassioned discussion was the more important part of the dinner.

If Industrial Food, Inc. can be blamed for dumbing down the quality of our food in an endless search for visual perfection and a storage life bordering on immortality, we, ourselves, share the blame for the destruction of the dining experience.

Let's take it back a generation. My husband and I both grew up in the 40's/50's. And we all gathered around the dinner table every night to eat lots of tasteless overcooked food - main course was almost always beef - accompanied by mushy vegetables (to this day - my mother still refuses to eat fish - the white meat on her chicken is as dry as the Sahara - and she makes eggs you could play ball with).

Can't blame Walmart - or corporate America. Nope - blame our grandmothers- who were also lousy cooks - and passed that along to their daughters (thanks Grandmas).

As for restaurants - forget it. As with you - it was a function of money - and class (or lack of it). A truly festive dinner out was a "trendy" Italian meatballs and spaghetti place.

Reading through this thread - there is a lot of nostalgia for things that never existed. Yes we all ate many meals together. But it was crummy food. My husband and I didn't learn anything about food until we were in our 20's - and decided that there might be more to life than overcooked beef.

Was the quality of the ingredients better than it is now? Doubt it. And certainly there is much more availability and diversity now (even the worst grocery store in my neighborhood has maybe 10 kinds of lettuce - whereas 50 years ago - maybe if you were lucky you might find some romaine alongside the iceberg). "Expensive" foods are also more available - and cheaper in inflation adjusted currencies. Someone said a while back in this thread that there was nothing better than the fresh chickens his grandmother used to get. Many of you are probably too young to remember the phrase - "a chicken in every pot". Perhaps that chicken was fresher than what we have now - but it certainly wasn't everyday eating like the whole rotisserie chicken I can pick up at any grocery store for $4-5.

I am not a Walmart shopper (except for birdseed - they sell high quality birdseed for about half of what it sells for elsewhere). But I do shop at Costco for a fair number of items. Mostly items I use in bulk - like bottled water. Some of the biggest selling items at places like Walmart and Costco are bulk paper products - paper towels - toilet paper - diapers. Perhaps those of you who are single have never needed 100 disposable diapers - but there are lot of people who do. And while the quality of fresh produce may not be the best (don't know about Walmart -but Costco quality is usually pretty good) - what's the problem with saving 50% on stuff that's in can and jars? If I were feeding a family of 5 on a limited budget - I'd buy the huge jar of Hellman's mayo at Costco (instead of waiting for the 2 for 1 on the smaller jar at Publix ).

So - unless your objections to places like Walmart and Costco are purely political (elitist political I might add) - you really have to deal with it - and get on with your life. Seems to me the focus ought to be more on how to use the raw material that's available to us. How to cook decent meals. Our mothers and grandmothers didn't do it for the most part - and they had all the time in the world. Women (and men) have a lot less time these days (and for those guys out there who want to put the little woman back in the kitchen - all I can say is when you divorce us - it's nice to have a skill that's marketable in the labor force - and amateur cooking isn't one of them).

So how do you turn this cornucopia of available ingredients into meals given that most people don't even have time for "30 minute meals" (not to mention that if I tried to do all the chopping for one of those 30 minute meals on TV in 30 minutes - I wouldn't have any fingers left). Perhaps that new oven that both cooks fast and browns has some of the answers. What answers do you have? Robyn

[robyn]

One thing that is worth pointing out is that there are very good reasons why many of these "corporate foods" are the way they are.

In 1924, iodine was added to salt to prevent goiter. With that change, the rate of goiter in Michigan, for example, quickly fell from 39 to 9 percent.  Between 1906 and 1940 in the US, about three million cases of pellagra (symptoms: diarrhea, jaundice, dementia, death) were diagnosed before the government mandated that all flour be enriched with niacin, iron, thiamin, and riboflavin.  How many people have you known who have had pellagra these days?  Same goes for vitamin D (in milk) and rickets.

On a global scale, trying to go "natural" or "anti-corporate" for food is reckless and inhumane.  Agricultural researcher and Nobel Prize winner Norman Borlaug predicts that producing enough food on existing farmlands to feed an expected 2.3 billion more mouths by 2025 will require an astonishing 75 percent jump in productivity.  That type of productivity increase is absolutely impossible without large-scale factory farming and, probably, GM foods.

In America, yes, we have enough food.  The majority of the world does not.

This post may be almost as extreme as the "replacing food with pills" example, but it's worth noting that a return to an artisanal past and meals cooked with care in your own home from whole ingredients and fresh herbs, romantic as it may be, is probably going to be limited, at least in the present, to the affluent or passionate, not the common man in America, and definitely not to the common man worldwide.  As much as I would love to see canned corn and enriched white bread disappear, it ain't gonna happen - and really, it shouldn't.

You make some very interesting points about the connection between food and public health. I don't know how interested anyone is in pellagra. I am. For those who'd like an interesting web site on the subject try http://history.nih.gov/exhibits/goldberger/main.html.

I suspect a lot of the people who don't believe in these food enhancements also don't believe in childhood vaccinations (if they knew people with polio - like I do - I doubt they'd think that "natural" is "better"). Robyn

[smogle]

So how do you turn this cornucopia of available ingredients into meals given that most people don't even have time for "30 minute meals" (not to mention that if I tried to do all the chopping for one of those 30 minute meals on TV in 30 minutes - I wouldn't have any fingers left). Perhaps that new oven that both cooks fast and browns has some of the answers. What answers do you have? Robyn

The average American watches over 4 hours of t.v a day. It would seem like then we could find 30 minutes to make dinner.

[tommy]

The average American watches over 4 hours of t.v a day. 

can you point us to the source of this?

one has to wonder if these people are watching TV during the time that most are preparing/eating dinner, and instead of preparing/eating dinner. my guess is, umm, "no".

Edited December 9, 2003 by tommy (log)