Recent orders
Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support free trade and open markets, economic liberalization, , privatization, deregulation, and increasing the role of the private sector in modern society while decreasing the size of the public sector . Neoliberals share a strong suspicion of any form of intense and combined power, and they see the state exactly as the epitome of such power. Without thorough checks, state interventions in the economy cause harm as they restrain economic inventiveness, protect and expand inefficiencies, and interfere with individual freedoms. Yet, unlike classical liberals, neoliberals do not support essentially reducing state power to the bare minimum of simply upholding the law and adjudicating among quarreling parties. Today’s neoliberals think that state power should be deployed (to provide forms of social insurance, increase human capital, mitigate the volatility of markets) so long as state power is held at bay, and for all time in the direction of bolstering rather than hampering market forces . More than a blind trust in markets, neoliberals share a deep distrust of economic interference by the state. For them, state failures are more frequent and insidious than market failures.
Neoliberals do not believe in blind faith in markets rather neoliberals share a deep distrust of economic interference by the state. For neoliberals, failures of states are more frequent and dangerous as compared to market failures. Neoliberals observe state participation as neither omniscient nor free of political bias. These flaws make states ill-suited to decide
For neoliberals, the major economic problems of present are — lack of competitiveness, inflation and unsustainable macroeconomic environments, financial crises, , inefficient public spending, poverty, and corruption—result from state interventions that deform incentives and bring unsustainable economic activities. If, according to Berman, the three main ideologies of the 20th century— fascism social democracy, and Marxism—share the similar mantra, that it is “the state’s right and duty to control capitalism,” then we can also said that neoliberalism is definitely a school that challenges all three ideologies. In economics, neoliberalism stands instead for disbanding or easing policies such as trade restrictions, price controls, and state subsidies to economic activities, particularly unprofitable ones. Neoliberalism must not be understood to be the economic liking of business firms. More likely, neoliberalism splits the business sector. Companies which are in position to compete at home and globally be likely to welcome neoliberalism; those that are uncompetitive and depend on protectionism tend to oppose neoliberalism. Neoliberals think that in majority of the statist economies, the latter type of firms is the norm, so it makes little sense to suggest that firms in developing countries welcome market forces as a majority.
Neoliberals believe that during 20th century, the economic and policy world, particularly in Latin America, focused extra on market failures to the neglect of state failures. And in a way, they are correct. Neoliberalism remains insignificant in the area until the late 1970s and reigned supreme for less than two decades. The rest of the time, non-neoliberal ideas have dominated. Between the 1930s and 1970s, people considered Neoliberalism as extreme and irrelevant, and as a result of which their influence in policy circles in Latin America was secondary as compared to the rival ideologies such as protectionism, Keynesianism, socialism, populism, and even Marxism. During this time, policy in Latin America’s largest economies (most of South America and Mexico) was characterized by inward-oriented statism or import-substitution industrialization (ISI). Based on dependency theory, which posited that there is a long-term decline in the value of commodity exports relative to manufactures, and the structuralism theory, which posited that local demand was inadequate to boost manufacturing, ISI was predicated on the idea that by offering subsidies to local manufacturers, restricting trade, , and defending labor, states could encourage home-grown industries. Typical ISI policies included: expansion in the number and scope of state-owned enterprises, labor codes that protected labor from firing, high tariffs, subsidized credits to local industry, especially in utilities, price controls, buy-national laws, , regulation of competition to protect nascent industries. In multiple was, these ISI policies contravened market economics.
A chain of developments at the point of ideas and world politics coalesce in the 1970s and 1980s to push neoliberal ideas to expand ground in Latin America. 1st the field of growth was revolutionized in the 1970s by advances in theories of state capturing and bargaining. Scholars were able to establish empirically that states turn out to be captured easily by organized constituencies, producers’ groups, or both. For either self-serving reasons, electoral or states were shown to use directive to furnish pressure groups, eventually converting them into the main drivers of policy. Anne Krueger especially showed how rent-granting, once it starts, becomes hard to control, encouraging the majority of new groups to jockey for power and ultimately overwhelming states with pressures. Once a state embarks on the path of protectionism, it induces non-winners to seek equal forms of protection, leading to a rising spiral of rent-seeking and rent-granting. In 1974 and 1976, respectively, two most important proponents of neoliberalism, Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek won Nobel prizes in economics, further boost the renaissance of neoliberal ideas. In Latin America, the 1980s also saw the rise of technopols—a new class of U.S.-trained Latin American economists who became disappointed with statism, often after having been strong statists themselves. These technopols came back home to make careers within state agencies, parties, or think-tanks, from where they became national advocates for pro-market ideas.
Neoliberalism was further boosted by the fall down of most Latin American economies subsequent the onset of the debt crisis in 1982. Latin America entered a process of high inflation, contraction, or hyperinflation, exchange rate instability, capital flight, , and underinvestment that last the entire decade and in some cases into the early 1990s. Since Latin America was the area of the world to have implemented ISI the deepest, the collapse of its economy proved too many that the model was misguided to begin with. For neoliberals, these outcomes (statism and economic collapse in the 1980s) were causally connected. In addition, the command economies of communist nations were also collapsing (the Soviet bloc) or changing in the direction of market reforms with positive results (China), further boosting the global trend away from statist economics.
Due to creditor incentives and price pressures majority of the governments in the region found themselves announcing neoliberal reforms by the late 1980s, in some cases such as ), Argentina (with its strict monetary policy, and the convertibility law), Mexico (with drastic trade opening to the United States, Ecuador (with its strict dollarization), NAFTA, Peru (with its massive privatization program), Colombia (with its sweeping banking liberalization), and Venezuela (with its profound decentralization reforms) going farther than the World Bank and the IMF were advocating.
In short, we can say that neoliberalism gained ascendance due to multiple factors, all coalescing at the end of 1980s: theoretical refinement, comparative studies, Nobel prizes, economic crises, model cases, smart packaging, rising technopols, and plenty of international sticks and carrots.
Neoliberalism benefited little section of peoples in the Latin America. As a result of the neoliberalism, rich got tax cuts in their profits, every one got service cuts, middle class got good job opportunities, working condition were improved, companies increased the salaries of the employees. The majority of the companies, which benefited were foreign as their products were more competitive to the other home companies. Consumers were also benefited as prices of the products decreased die to competition. As the new companies entered in the foreign market, consumers got more choices to buy same products from different brands.
Neoliberalism also had bad effects on some section of people and countries. The growth rates of Latin America which had been higher than other developing nations, dropped by over 60 percent after they embraced IMF-sponsored neo-liberalism in the 1980’s, and have now ground to a halt. Thus wage earners – rather than asset owners – have faced a persistent 30-year downward pressure on their standard of living. It comes as no surprise to learn that the golden age for the wage worker, expressed as a percentage share of GDP, was between 1945 and 1973, and not under economic liberalization. The neoliberal experiment has failed to combat extreme poverty, has exacerbated global inequality, and is hampering international aid and development efforts. Neoliberal ideology embodies an outdated, selfish model of economy. It has been formulated by the old imperial powers and adopted by economically dominant nations. Given the state of the global trade and finance structures, wealthy countries can maintain their economic advantage by pressurizing developing countries to adopt neo-liberal policies – even though they themselves do not. Understandably, many commentators have described this process as economic colonialism.
http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/financial/fin_dumenil.pdfhttp://www.stwr.org/globalization/neoliberalism-and-economic-globalization.htmlhttp://www.plataformademocratica.org/Publicacoes/22447_Cached.pdfProfit over people: neoliberalism and the global order By Noam Chomsky
Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction By Manfred B. Steger, Ravi K. Roy
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/rsw/research_centres/theory/conf/rg/harvey_a_brief_history_of_neoliberalism.pdfhttp://lasa-2.univ.pitt.edu/larr/prot/fulltext/vol39no3/walton.pdf
Neoclassical economies
Neoclassical economies
Name
Institution Affiliation
Date
Abstract
In the debate of economic theories, it is prudent to identify positive performing theories and those which are not performing on realism factor. For economists, the task is to identify whether the specified economics objectives prudently meet the expectations of the public on a social perspective. Significantly, the determination of the economic worth of a given jurisdiction is one that aims at maximizing social benefits and not necessarily benefits or utility. In this light, the commencing research will appoint neoclassical economics as vivid case study. The research will attempt to prove that the neoclassical economics are irrelevant and cannot be applied to explain the intrinsic worth of a given society in relation to economics. The research is distributed into two main sections. Firstly, the background of the theory, and secondly, the research will provide a critical analysis of irrelevancies of neoclassical analysis.
Background of the theory
Neoclassical economics can be defined as an economic approach that reinstates that prices are determined by output and income distribution or what is commonly known as a balance of demand and supply. A close factor in the neoclassical economy is mediated through hypothesized maximization of utility and income naturally becomes constrained as individuals attempt to maximize utility as a personal gain – a conflict factor since societies will never arrive at perfection. Backed by Keynesian economics, neoclassical economics endeavors to explain theories affiliated to consumption, utility, demand and supply. In the context, the theory assumes that households maximize utility and firms maximize profits. Secondly, the theory assumes that people have rational preferences when attempting to compare outcomes that can be associated with values. Thirdly, the theory assumes that people act independently on the basis of partial or full information. Previous studies have attempted to assess the rationality factor as applied in neoclassical economics. This study will prove that neoclassical economics is largely irrelevant based on their stipulations.
Lack of clarity
Firstly, it is positive to examine the social impact of neoclassical tabulations in assessing the mental factors in social organization. Dubbink (2003, p. 58) assesses that there is a clear distinction of neoclassical tradition and laissez-faire. In this comparison, it is worthwhile to reaffirm reexamine socio-political thinking and how they impact on the economy. As a result, it is good to assess that this economic model naturally deviates from what is required to the theories –which are inapplicable. A contemporary neoclassical economist will naturally be troubled by less insightful moments that attempt to distinguish the model and the real world. To affirm on irrelevancy of neoclassical economics, this chapter will appoint the natural environment factor and how neoclassical economic approach it.
Hunt (2007, pp. 79) acknowledges that the new classical economics relies on the crude assumptions which cannot be implemented in real economic environment. Firstly, the analysis focuses on equilibrium (demand and supply) and equilibrium naturally forming the central importance. Secondly, economist maximum their own gains through the number of transactions they conduct. For instance, households are assumed to maximize the utility concept and firms, on the other hand, the profitability concept. Thirdly, neoclassical economics assumes that all agents in the economy do have perfect knowledge. Fourthly, the preferences of individuals are inclined to influences of social standard. Lastly, cost on decision making by individuals are limited to rationality concept. The thesis is that; in Neoclassical economics perfection overrides reality.
In this regard, Loannides et al. (2007, p. 200) cites Kapp (1963) demonstration in neoclassical practice as erroneous and misleading in its application. For instance, the neoclassical concept of price is irrelevant and needs correction. Further to this, it is good note that the mainstream economics works in an incomplete system of accounting. In context, the accounting approach which attempts to affiliate cost as a determinant often fails on the account of implementation. Ideally, this assumption will naturally ignore the part of the cost and hardly promote the social efficiency. In addition, the rational economic behavior as a sine qua non of social welfare and economic efficiency is taken adrift as incomplete cost benefit analysis. In contemporary argument, it is prudent to note that neoclassical economics confines the real nature of the economy and the conceptual system fail to assimilate the reasoning and conceptual system.
After a close investigation of Kapp’s approach, one will notice that the neoclassical superiority concept fails to consider the social cost in production. For instance, Americans through product are naturally risked to hazardous economic problems – demoralization or even diseases. As such, neoclassical economics will naturally assume that labor is constantly supplied at all time. In relation to this point, the issue desists to be no longer institutional economics, as well as standard set by neoclassical mainstream, and as a result, putting forward a theory of price that it is rationally prudent to consider as flawed.
Tisdell (2010, p. 24) provides a similar approach in what the extract argues as an economic externality or spillover occurrence that the attempt to influence economic agents. As a consequence of activity; neoclassical provides a benefits economist with economics goods that are not necessarily paid for socially, and to a greater consequence are causing regression to others. For example, while a flower industry is doing great in providing flowers to several consumers, and investors in the flower business industry, gardeners are at a greater risk of chemicals. In an analysis, the economic agents in neoclassical regimes receive less than an economic benefit created in return. This assumption is seconded by neoclassical paradigm that states that individual act personal self-interest and the activity is likely to be undersupplied in a former case.
Salzano (2005, p. 190) joins in this discussion in what text consider as unpopular economic phenomenon. It is an economic fallacy to assume that economic agents in a given economic are equal, while in the real sense households are viewed as simpler molecules. In this regard, it is good to affirm that the social structure does not only have an economic background, but to a greater extent, commemorates a sense of equality that is not achievable in all sense. This is a descriptive assessment that argues without a solidified backing of self-organizing property and dynamics models.
The problem of normative biasness
Neo-classical economics is irrelevant since it does not explain actual economics, and to a larger extent is based on assumptions. The assumption partially argues that individuals act rationally and may be viewed as ignoring an important aspect of naturalness while dealing with the economy. Schoenberger (2002, pp. 83) provide a similar assumption in what the journal explains as absenteeism of normalcy in how the economy operates. Further to this, is an assumption that the economic man envisioned by neo-classic economics is significantly different from the real people and even a lack of neutrality is much evident in how the two relate to each other – a fact?
In a general economy, the firm’s output technically balances with household, and these are part of the Neoclassic and Keynesian economics. However, this approach lacks validity in how it is implemented. In any case, there is no economy in the world that has ever achieved perfection. Pertsova (2007, p. 17) quotes publication from Joan Robinson in which it was clear that, by as early as 1933, Neoclassical theory was already demonstrating imperfection in relation to naturalness. In fact through these arguments, it is considerate to note that neoclassical economies did base their arguments on utopia. As a result, neoclassical theories tend to ignore the problems of scale both in time and space. Based on this, there is a subsequent deficiency in attempting to integrate technological changes to the resources while using neoclassical models of economies.
In the context, individuals play a significant role in the economy. However, judging an individual contribution to the economy on the basis of individualism lacks coherent justifications since to a greater extent, the economy is subject to macroeconomic factors and not microeconomic attributions. Boya (2010, pp. 163) argues that the assumption of an exogenous nature of consumer preferences is subsequently questionable. In fact, Boya provides broader light in relation to the change of subject in relation to advertising, education, social groups and cultural development. Backed by this, the analysis of optimal satisfaction lacks a solidified argument in attempting to justify the significance of material bundle relative to non-material bundle.
Nonetheless, it is coherent to examine the disguise of companies maximizing profits. In this assessment, companies attempt to maximize their profits in guise of addressing the problem of private versus social utility. While this approach is in all respect proactive and responsive to economic conditions, it is good to note that the approach is contestable since it does not address the intrinsic worth of the economy in relation to justifying a given economic situation. In other words, neoclassical economics focuses on the increasing number of material ownership, but to a greater extent the theorems do not address the real value of the economy. Currently, income inequality is significant demise of a desirable economy. However, new classical economics does not address these situations with the intent of finding long-term solutions. In fact to a greater extent, neoclassical economies are chiefly responsible in accelerating these deficiencies.
Assumption of rationality
Further to the discussion of irrelevance, it is good to note that neoclassical theories are largely irrational and not fit for relative economic development. According to the findings conducted by Zafirovski (2008, pp. 789) it is good to note that radical institutionalism is centered on the inequality of income, psycho-cultural implication of the economy as well as, wealth and power. In fact, neoclassical approach to economics abandons the institutional economics pioneered by Marxist analysis. In response to this, it is good to argue that technocratic and meritocratic strategies fostered by neoclassical economies are largely incoherent to restructure the cultural foundations of global capitalism. The irrationality depicted here is that; radical institutionalism insists on the fundamental and comprehensive repositioning of the place of economy with the society.
Subsequently, within the mainstream economics, rationality concept is examined by maximization of resources. To this analysis, there are several effects to the maximization principle. In this case, neoclassical economist attempt to defend an irrespective version that players in the economy attempt to deliberate maximize the economic worth. The inherent problem is that neo-classical economics tends react without performing adopting a calculation. These are assumption conducted on as if the basis and are not necessary performing calculations. Viskovatoff (2012, pp. 216) adds to this discussion in what the journal considers as a prescriptive varies of what people in the economy got to do in a given situation. Bruni (2007, p. 155) joins Viskovatoff (2012) in what text argues as an individual purposive and irrationality lacks the necessary knowledge on his disposal.
Bruni (2007) is structured by the argument that neoclassical economies remain linked to maximization of utility. However, in a contrast, take a close issue in microeconomics; corporate social responsibility. One will notice that the concept of utility remains sidelined and to a greater extent of human good. Companies will naturally be coerced by laws; for instance, Sarblexy Act, to act to a given agenda, and this distance from neoclassical economics. Further to this, the degree of happiness could be measured on an aggregate through cardinal utility functions and this seeks to obtain specific values. Also, the level of utility achieved through consumptions could be compared to different individuals and the society in the course of time.
In this regard, there has been an extended discourse attempting to argue that the utility has taken an ordinal concept which in analysis means that there is a possibility of developing interpersonal comparison and thus, the debate of taste and preferences will naturally ensue. In fact, it is good to argue that the taste and preferences are based on inherent heroic simplification and this blurs the direct consumption and well-being of utility. Consequently, Stern (2007, pp. 200) affirms that neoclassical theories are primarily responsible for the creation of insatiability factor. As such, ordinality theorems will naturally imply that consumption does not present subsequent diminishing marginal returns and principle of revealed preferences will naturally interpret that people consumption patterns are influenced by their levels of income.
Further inside the discussion of rationality, it is good to integrate Hempel argument that naturally seems sounding to seconding the cognitive question of ethics. Hartman et al. (2000, pp. 82-86) discusses the epistemological faux pas in relation to the tendency to reify the concept rationality. Accordingly, the journal establishes that rationality behavior neoclassical economics theory provides the theory that postulates rationality. Vanberg (2004, pp. 22) concludes neoclassical economies are irrelevant, inappropriate and infallible to maximize of utility and profits in both macro and microeconomics.
Absurdity in Equilibrium
Neoclassical paradigm in relation to economic balancing is partially answerable to the unreasonable irrationalism view of scientific change. In any case, there are gross irrelevancies of the theories in relation to calculating macroeconomic factors. Espino (2007, pp. 674) supplements to this discussion in what the journal considers as theoretical development in science, that contributes to devotion of efforts geared towards reconciliation. The equilibrium theory seeks to appeal the idea of insulation. Technically, the criteria of prediction, explanation and testability seek to respond to the equilibrium models which are purported scientific model.
In this light, it is good to demise that a scientific research program chiefly deployed by neoclassical economics is both progressive and degenerative and to a greater extent lacks clarity as well as empirical approaches in calculation. According to Gospodarek (2009, pp. 409) assessment of Lakatos, a scientific evaluation can be determined by the experimental tenor of a protective belt. Hence, accordingly, the theory predictive success in neoclassical will fail to reinforce hardcore experiments. Based on this approach, one will naturally find neoclassical theories with satiation or increasing returns to scale do naturally fail on the account implementation.
Therefore in response to economic problems, neoclassical economists will begin with basic laws and the underlying equilibrium theory. However, these laws are mere ubiquitous assumption and they lack a coherent approach in identifying factors of economic need. Neoclassical economics will naturally employee these factors since they believe that this is a relative approach. However, taking to the bank that other factors, for instance, the fair play by government does contribute to the economic, applying some of these theories will naturally be absurd in the equilibrium level.
Alternatively, the scientific models attempt to call for mathematical ability and considerable ingenuity. However, applying this approach is not decisive to answer to challenges prevailing at the time. In fact, application the scientific approach (one based on predictive purpose and specific purpose), neoclassical economies will naturally invite an economic environment and not a real world. For instance, the Russian economy has recently suffered economic problems due to sanctions as a result of Crimea and Ukrainian crises. However, a neoclassic economic in Russia did not affiliate the assumption of the real world. For neoclassical economics to work, then it all depends on the adequacy and nature of law existing in each particular region.
Jennissen (2004, p. 46), cites Keynesian neo-classical economic theory and how it can be applied to derive answers on international migration. In this analysis, Keynesian theory migration is an equilibrium that ensures a recovering mechanism in relation to macroeconomic analysis. In applying this, Jennissen (2004) argues that the theory of international migration mitigates unemployment differences rather than the real wages differences. As a result, the equilibrium theory as applied by neoclassical economics is largely questioned by the outsider should command unquestioning assent from its adherents, strikes and its more appropriate in conducting a metaphysical theory in a greater scientific discipline. Therefore, in response to irrelevancy, there is a close relationship between equilibrium theory and the postulate of rationality. Consequently, the general equilibrium theory is highly formalized prescriptive of a mathematical structure and not necessary a scientific theory with identifiable cognitive content.
Conclusion
The above research has clarified that neoclassical economic are irrelevant if applied in a contemporary economy. The research has assessed that neoclassical economics fails to meet the threshold intrinsic worth of a given society since to a greater extent neoclassical economy are irrational and do not seek to maximize the intrinsic moral worth of a society, but as alternative neoclassical economics pursue the utility concept. In this regard, economist should pursue more decisive theories; for instance, a reproduction and surplus theory which are pragmatic in the sense of implementation.
References
Boya, C., & Monino, J. (2010). The impact of exogenous information on stock value through the
coloration concept: a test model. Journal of Innovation Economics, 6(2), 163.
Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2007). Handbook on the economics of happiness. Cheltenham, UK:
Edward Elgar.
Dubbink, W. (2003). Assisting the invisible hand: Contested relations between market, state and
civil society. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Espino, E. (2007). Equilibrium portfolios in the neoclassical growth model. Journal of Economic
Theory, 137(1), 673-687.
Gospodarek, T. (2009). ‘Representative management’ as a rational research program in Kuhn-
Lakatos-Laudan sense. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 1(4), 409.
Hartman, L. P., Shaw, B., Stevenson, R., & Painter-Morland, M. (2000). Human Resources
Opportunities to Balance Ethics and Neoclassical Economics in Global Labor Standards.
Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 19(3), 73-116.
Hunt, S. D. (2000). A General Theory of Competition: Too Eclectic or Not Eclectic Enough?
Too Incremental or Not Incremental Enough? Too Neoclassical or Not Neoclassical Enough?. Journal of Macromarketing, 20(1), 77-81.
Jennissen, R. P. W. (2004). Macro-economic determinants of international migration in Europe.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loannides, S., & Nielsen, K. (2007). Economics and the social sciences: Boundaries, interaction
and integration. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Pertsova, C. C. (2007). Ecological economics research trends. New York: Nova Science
Publishers.
Salzano, M., & Kirman, A. P. (2005). Economics: Complex windows. Milan: Springer-Verlag.
Schoenberger, K. (2002). Emancipating the Slaves to Neo-classical Economics. SAIS Review,
22(1), 81-85.
Stern, D. I. (2007). Limits to substitution and irreversibility in production and consumption: A
neoclassical interpretation of ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 32(4), 197-215.
Tisdell, C. A. (2010). Resource and environmental economics: Modern issues and applications.
Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific.
Vanberg, V. J. (2004). The rationality postulate in economics: its ambiguity, its deficiency and
its evolutionary alternative. Journal of Economic Methodology, 11(1), 1-29.
Viskovatoff, A. (2012). Science, Rationality, and Neoclassical Economics, L. D. Keita.
University of Delaware Press, 1992,187 pages.. Economics and Philosophy, 26(03), 216.L
Zafirovski, M. (2008). Classical and neoclassical conceptions of rationality—Findings of an
exploratory survey. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(2), 789-820.
Dangers of fast foods
Name
Course Name
Instructor
Date
Dangers of fast foods
Michael Polan’s ‘Escape from the western diet’ argues that Western processed foods are full of industrial chemicals, and a major cause of nutrition relates chronic diseases. Adoption of good eating habits by humans is essential as nutritionists do not offer a good solution to modern diets and only deal with the medicalizing the predicament (Pollan 434-440). Humans should not just be westernized in their dietary habits and concentrate on plants for nutritional value. Humans should try to avoid fast foods with the large amount of calories especially due to their health effects.
David Zinczenko in his book ‘Don’t blame the eater’ consumption of junk foods in the US has put many kids at risk of lifestyle diseases such as diabetes as many cases are reported every year. It is advisable that children consume healthier foods to avoid the risk although it is difficult to find the healthy food. The majority of the food joints offer fast foods with no calorie information as David asserts. Fast foods should be required by the law to provide information on the quantity of calories in each food pack to reduce the risks associated with consumption of fast foods.
In the Judith Warmer’s Junking the junk foods, the Obama administration policies for the regulation of the consumption of junk foods by the American kids was a step forward in reducing lifestyle diseases. A number of the US citizens protested the directive to allow schoolchildren consume low-sugar foods. According to statistics, more than a third of Americans adults are overweight, and Warner notes that the move was politically motivated. However, many hope that in the future people will change their lifestyle, regard fatty, and junk foods as unhealthy.
The writers of the three articles unanimously agree on the dangers posed by consumption of the Western processed foods in America because of the health risks involved such as obesity and diabetes. David claims that the eater is not to be blame although Polan and feel that the problem lies with the consumers of the fast foods. As Polan notes, individuals with a high intake of Western processed foods tend to suffer from chronic diseases compared to people who take natural foods especially from plants (Pollan 435). The high figures of people suffering from diabetes in America result from high consumption of fast foods, which are very accessible. However, some chronic diseases such as diabetes are caused by other factors such as inadequate exercises and heredity and not necessarily fast food. The government faces many challenges when implementing policies to reduce the public consumption of processed foods especially the school-going children. The policies may assist to regulate the consumption, but it is impossible for the government to regulate all the companies and food joints. The best thing for the individuals is to be disciplined and eat a balanced diet from natural foods. There is viable good evidence to argue that accessibility results in the consumption of the fast foods as human beings can travel long distances in search of what they want. The main reason for the high consumption of the processed foods is bad eating habit and craving for fast foods. The other cause is the lack of information of calorie contents on the package of the processed products lead to an increase in their consumption as people are never aware of the amount they are consuming. Children love fast foods, and will never care to look at the information on the packaging material, and may not understand the meaning of the figures. Adults who consume the fast foods may not have time to read the information on the pack and calculate the number of calories they need to take. The other thing that contributes to the consumption of the fast foods is the Western way of thinking and the fact that fast foods are very cheap, readily available, and appealing to the look. The availability of the fast foods in the food joints and supermarkets contribute to the high rate of intake since they are affordable. The displays especially in the supermarkets are appealing, and it is difficult for people to contain their craving for fast foods. However, a person aiming at having a good diet and living a healthy life will never get attracted to the processed products on the display. Craving for fast foods is not about seeing but a habit that is difficult to control. Plants foods are the best for maintaining a healthy diet and reduction of diet-related diseases as Polan argues. In the past, people used to consume fresh foods from the farms and lifestyle diseases were less compared the number of cases reported today. The fresh foods from the farms contain a high nutritional value such as proteins and vitamins, which help people, live a healthy life. However, people require carbohydrates and fats in their diet and sometimes need to take the processed foods in addition to foods from their farms. There is no need of forbidding processed foods completely as long as people eat responsibly.
Advertisement also does not give information regarding the dangers of consuming too much of the calories as tobacco does, thereby raising the risks factors as people eat without any caution as Pollan notes (437). However, eating habits are not necessarily an influence of factors such as the advertising or lack of calorie information as Polan argues but individual choices. With or without advertisement on the dangers of consuming fast foods, people should try to live a healthy life and control their eating desires. Advertisements may be there, but people may never bother to take the warnings. For instance, the tobacco manufacturers give a warning to its products’ users but they never fail to smoke.
Warner notes that fast foods cause overweight in children and adults but forgets that the genetic make-up of an individual also contributes to weight gain. Politics should not be a blame for increased fast foods intake as Warner asserts since regulations should start from an individual’s choice and not from a governing body. The government may put laws but will never get to somebody’s kitchen to see the kind of food being served. According to David, the eater should not be blamed for eating an unhealthy diet, but the presence of the fast foods without calorie information on the packaging. However, healthy eating is a person’s choice, and external factors should not be blamed for the consequences.
In conclusion, fast foods are hazardous to peoples’ health as the three writers argue since many of the sufferers have a history of taking junky foods. The other factor that contributes to the unhealthy eating is due to inadequate regulation of the food industry such as lack of calorie information and warnings on the packages. The medical cost associated with the treatment of diseases caused by the fatty diet is quite high, and the death rate due to the same issue is high especially in America. Fast foods rich in calories are a great health hazard to peoples’ life, and lifestyle change is the only option to curb it.
Works Cited
Pollan, Michael. Escape from the Western Diet.
Warner, Judith. Junking Junk Food.The New York Times Magazine, 25 November, 2010. Print.
Zinczenko, David. Don’t Blame the eater. The New York Times, 23 November, 2002. 1. Print.