The Instigator
mongoose
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points
The Contender
porkbunlover
Pro (for)
Losing
27 Points

America's cheap food is good for Americans

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 11 votes the winner is...
mongoose
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2009 Category: Health
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,646 times Debate No: 7902
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (11)

 

mongoose

Con

I thank my opponent in advance for accepting this debate.

Because of our abnormally low-priced restaurants (double cheeseburgers for as low as $1.00), and our low-priced foods, Americans are becoming worse off. I will continue this after my opponent's responds.
porkbunlover

Pro

Hi, thanks for creating this debate.

I think that America's cheap food is, in turn good for Americans.

Based on your second sentence: "Because of our abnormally low-priced restaurants (double cheeseburgers for as low as $1.00), and our low-priced foods, Americans are becoming worse off. I will continue this after my opponent's responds.", I will assume you are talking about fast food restaurants, correct me if I'm wrong. If not, a recent TIME magazine study showed that because of America's current financial crisis, less and less people are eating out at non-fast-food resturaunts. 56% to be exact. That's 133,682,841 LESS people who are eating out.

Take for example Subway. The fast-food chain has lowered prices mainly because to the high demand their getting. Now, a five dollar footlong with healthy greens and whole wheat bread? How is that bad for Americans? In this financial crises, many people have cut back spending for various things such as entertainment, clothes, even doctors' visits. This presents one conclusion; Americans are keen on saving money in every possible way. So if a fast-food resturaunt is serving 5 dollar footlongs enough to feed two people, the people will probably choose that. Because these healthy, not to mention cheap, items are available, Americans may be mentally and physically happier, with the thought of knowing you spent little money for such a healthy meal. Happiness would probably be considered "good", and since happiness is contagious, the cheap food fast-food resturaunts are serving make the buyer happy, which in turn make other people happy and so on. All in all, America's cheap food is good for Americans.

Now, you're probably wondering about the "other" fast-food resturaunts like McDonald's and Burger King. Lasting pressure from health officials have prompted many fast-food chains to create healthier, cheaper foods and nutrition charts as well. Take for example Wendy's, which has over 25 food choices with under 400 calories and 15 grams of fat. Included in this selection is the Grilled Chicken Sandwich, Jr.Hamburger, and Jr.Cheeseburger. These items are not only cheap but are not extremely fattening, etc.

In conclusion, America's cheap food is not only physical but mentally good for Americans. It provides the buyer with a sense of accomplishment that they have managed to find such a great deal, both money and nutrition wise and all the while is not extremely bad for your health.
Debate Round No. 1
mongoose

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Yes, I am talking about fast food restaurants in that statement, though I am also referring to other cheap foods.

The reason this food is so cheap is because these food companies purchase them for low prices from corn farmers. The only reason the corn farmers sell them for so little is because the government subsidizes the costs, thus increasing taxes. Because of this, the "cheap" food is not as cheap as it seems. It comes out of everyone's pockets, including those not eating the meal. Higher taxes are a large part of today's problems and depression.

Secondly, this cheaper food, such as double cheese burgers, and Big Macs, are not healthy. This is what a large amount of people do order, so it is bad for a large number of people. If a large part of our population is overweight or obese, this leads to more problems, which I will explain further if asked to. Getting a combo meal, it can easily add up to over 1,000 calories (soda being almost 10 calories per fluid ounce, and fries being almost 100 per ounce). So, a large fries and a large drink are already over 800 calories! And that doesn't even include the main meal! Because this food is so ridiculously cheap, people can buy more of it, often buying the larger ones to get a "better deal".
http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com....

I await my opponent's response.
porkbunlover

Pro

1) Can I see proof? (:
and also, because these people are spending less on food, they have a better chance of buying a house, getting a job, etc. etc., and rebuilding the economy.

2)If it is too unhealthy, where do you suggest Americans buy cheap, fast, food?
Also, Americans don't nesscicarily have to buy either double cheese burgers or Big Macs. Many fast food chains have cut down on trans fats, etc. and are advertising healthier products. Because of this, today's Big Macs are somewhat healthier than Big Macs ten years ago.

In concluion, America's cheap food is good for Americans one) so they have a little more money to use to help pay the bills, and rent (eating out every day has got to save some money), 2) because they ARE getting healthier, and 3) becasue the buyers know they are buying cheap, healthy food and get a little happier because of it, thus making it "good" for Americans.
Debate Round No. 2
mongoose

Con

"1) Can I see proof? (:
and also, because these people are spending less on food, they have a better chance of buying a house, getting a job, etc. etc., and rebuilding the economy."

"The Omnivores Dilemma", by Michael Pollan. It is a book about human eating, and includes facts about how corn is taking over the world. That's right. We are being controlled by corn. It is in most of the food we eat every day.

http://michaelpollan.com...

"2)If it is too unhealthy, where do you suggest Americans buy cheap, fast, food?
Also, Americans don't nesscicarily have to buy either double cheese burgers or Big Macs. Many fast food chains have cut down on trans fats, etc. and are advertising healthier products. Because of this, today's Big Macs are somewhat healthier than Big Macs ten years ago."

I recommend that the government stops subsidizing corn, so that food companies must raise the prices to what they really are to make a profit. This does not make them more expensive, but means that the government doesn't control it anymore. And clearly, government control does not help. When you say that today's Big Macs are "healthier", that still doesn't mean "healthy". For example, Jupiter is smaller than the sun. Does that mean that Jupiter is small? No, it's humongous. And even though they don't have to buy them, they will buy them anyway, because it "looks" cheap.

In conclusion, cheap food is bad for Americans because it will not make them spend less, it will make them eat more. This is the way that food companies sell more food than people need: by packaging it into amounts you wouldn't otherwise eat if it was so cheap. People will eat up to 30% more than they would otherwise if they see the food in front of them. They are NOT getting healthier by eating this. Lastly, being fat usually makes someone sad, pay more medical bills, and continue the stereotyping of America as the Fat Republic.
porkbunlover

Pro

All in all, I have one problem with your arguement: Eating cheap fast-food will make us fat. This is untrue one because there are plenty of cheap, healthy choices out there and two you don't know that they will choose the double cheeseburger or Big Mac, as you mentioned before.Your arguement is not viable because eating cheap food will not fatten people up; it will save them money and keep them at least as healthy as they were before they ate. As I said before, in this economy, people are bacoming more aware of foods and their costs, etc. Thus they will most likely choose a Subway foot long and end up healthier 1)the sandwiches are healthy and 2)their happiness from eating the sandwich (subtle but there) also increases their health.

"I recommend that the government stops subsidizing corn, so that food companies must raise the prices to what they really are to make a profit."

If the government does stop subsidizing corn, chances are people will eat the cheap, unhealthy items because the other ones have become more expensive. Also, perhaps the cause of rising taxes is because of Ethanol 85. Corn farmers know they can get more money off of that and maybe that is why the government is subsidizing corn.

Also, the price for a Subway footlong has gone down drastically mainly because more poeple have been buying it. Becuase more people are buying these healthy, cheap sandwiches, it is, actually, "good" for Americans. Before, the cost was from 6.49 to 7.99. Now, it is an affordable five dollars.

Thanks for this debate! Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
I agree with PRO, but am too lazy to read this one...
Posted by ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
I think Con could have demolished by pointing out explicitly that an adult is NOT going to get by off a Jr. Cheeseburger. Those things are tiny.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
A calorie of oil plus some corn makes a calorie of ethanol.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
How so?
Posted by sorc 7 years ago
sorc
"Ehtenol is a bad idea. It just uses more corn, causing farmers to grow more corn, using more resources, then using the extra corn for nothing. They should get to sell the corn they have for more. Also, a double cheeseburger seems to be a better deal than a foot long. 5 double cheeseburgers or only 1 foot long."

Are you serious? Have you even looked into the potential benefits of ethanol? While I don't necessarily think it should be used, this is quite honestly full of ignorance.
Posted by pewpewpew 7 years ago
pewpewpew
Common sense, fast food is never good for you and seeing how many different types of artificial ingredients are put into the stuff it's safe to say that it's never healthy either. Even foods that attempt to be healthy like Subways fresh fit meals have still more calories and fat than what was advertised about it.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
C: PRO and CON were both good, both thanking eachother and everything. Points go to TIED.
S&G: PRO had many spelling errors, misspelling because, argument, people, conclusion, and more. Points go to CON.
A: PRO didn't refute all of CON's points, and posted irrelevant information. Points go to CON.
S: PRO provided no sources. CON provided nutrition info and a book. Points go to CON.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
The still-cheap supersize option is the reason for so many fat Americans. It just looks like such a great deal to most.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
Ehtenol is a bad idea. It just uses more corn, causing farmers to grow more corn, using more resources, then using the extra corn for nothing. They should get to sell the corn they have for more. Also, a double cheeseburger seems to be a better deal than a foot long. 5 double cheeseburgers or only 1 foot long.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
porkbunlover didn't refute mongoose's last paragraph, which was one of the more important arguments in this debate.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Madoki 7 years ago
Madoki
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by porkbunlover 7 years ago
porkbunlover
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by asiansarentnerdy 7 years ago
asiansarentnerdy
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:43 
Vote Placed by brycef 7 years ago
brycef
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by The_Booner 7 years ago
The_Booner
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by sorc 7 years ago
sorc
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Marine1 7 years ago
Marine1
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Lazy 7 years ago
Lazy
mongooseporkbunloverTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03