Mark Gritter (markgritter) wrote,
Mark Gritter

Los Angeles Newspeak

Moratorium on construction of fast food restaurants = "greater food options".

Fast food restaurants in poor areas = "Food Apartheid". (As the Slate columnist points out, McDonald's building in a minority-population area isn't racist. The government telling McDonald's to only build in white areas is.)

Treating the poor like children = "an important public statement on how planning intersects with food health".

It's a worthy goal to ensure everybody has access to fresh fruit and other healthy foods. But this has got to be one of the worst ways of going about it. It doesn't provide any incentives for "fast food" restaurants to offer healthier alternatives (as they are already doing) because it bans them based on their service model rather than their food offerings. A restaurant that serves premade veggie dishes in disposable containers? Banned. A sit-down restaurant that deep-fries everything in sight? No problem!

And as a bonus, existing fast-food restaurants get protection from competition moving in for a year! I'm sure local franchise owners are laughing all the way to the bank. If there really is a negative externality hiding here, this certainly isn't addressing it.
Tags: food, politics, rant
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment