Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

newfoodeconomy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 191 posts

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#11

Post by 394549 »

jdavis703 wrote: post #4
Einstalbert wrote: post #2

I almost bought into Imperfect Produce, too, what a bad taste in my mouth that would have left. Thanks for the good read.

So when I was a kid my family made use of food banks. Now that I'm doing better in life I give a cut of each paycheck to my local food bank (The Alameda County Food Bank). I don't feel too bad about ordering from Imperfect Produce, it's convenient way to get produce delivered to your door, and I still wind up buying some things from the farmers market and co-op. On that note, it is good to know what consequences new…

> I don't feel too bad about ordering from Imperfect Produce, it's convenient way to get produce delivered to your door

Honest question: are there similarly convent ways to get produce delivered to your door that don't undermine the food banks' fresh food supply? If you can afford to pay for produce, why not pay for the produce that's traditionally been on the market?

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#13

Post by sithadmin »

MrEfficiency wrote: post #9

When I did the math + realized the shipping costs, it was a no-brainer. I know many people who buy into these 'good feelings' products.

>I know many people who buy into these 'good feelings' products.

Good, quick talk by Zizek on this phenomenon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#14

Post by sithadmin »

394549 wrote: post #11
jdavis703 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So when I was a kid my family made use of food banks. Now that I'm doing better in life I give a cut of each paycheck to my local food bank (The Alameda County Food Bank). I don't feel too bad about ordering from Imperfect Produce, it's convenient way to get produce delivered to your door, and I still wind up buying some things from the farmers market and co-op. On that note, it is good to know what consequences new…

> I don't feel too bad about ordering from Imperfect Produce, it's convenient way to get produce delivered to your door Honest question: are there similarly convent ways to get produce delivered to your door that don't undermine the food banks' fresh food supply? If you can afford to pay for produce, why not pay for the produce that's traditionally been on the market?

Local CSAs frequently have a delivery, or convenient nearby pickup option.

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#15

Post by sithadmin »

tedunangst wrote: post #7

But the total beet supply remains unchanged? Affluent customers are now buying the ugly beets, does that mean more pretty beets go unsold? Can they be donated?

>Affluent customers are now buying the ugly beets, does that mean more pretty beets go unsold? Can they be donated?

Realistically they probably end up on grocer shelves, which are themselves a horrific contributor to food waste. Some small portion of those that will otherwise end up in a dumpster will be redirected to other ends (e.g. 'made fresh' foods offered by various grocers) or donated.

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#16

Post by Swizec »

jpollock wrote: post #8

"Imperfect Produce claims it’s saving the world by reducing food waste—and helping farmers by buying surplus 'ugly' produce that would have been thrown out. Sounds great. The reality is that this produce would have otherwise gone to food banks, to be redistributed for free." People are complaining because a hidden subsidy (from government and other food buyers to the food banks) has been removed. I don't like seeing…

It’s crazy the contortions americans go through to avoid having welfare while still trying to have welfare. But god forbid we just have actual welfare.

Been living here 4 years, still don’t get it. Prob never will.

I’m supposed to only buy expensive produce so the cheap stuff can be left for those less fortunate? Why don’t you just use some of the exorbitant taxes I pay to help the less fortunate directly? Smh

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#17

Post by 394549 »

tedunangst wrote: post #7

But the total beet supply remains unchanged? Affluent customers are now buying the ugly beets, does that mean more pretty beets go unsold? Can they be donated?

> But the total beet supply remains unchanged? Affluent customers are now buying the ugly beets, does that mean more pretty beets go unsold? Can they be donated?

I doubt it. This is fresh produce we're talking about, the unsold "pretty beets" will be offered for sale on grocer shelves until they're close to spoiling and them get trashed as food waste.

One of the probable advantages of the "ugly beets," from the food bank perspective, is that they could affordably get access to them earlier in the supply chain while they were still fresh.

Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement

#19

Post by forapurpose »

jpollock wrote: post #8

"Imperfect Produce claims it’s saving the world by reducing food waste—and helping farmers by buying surplus 'ugly' produce that would have been thrown out. Sounds great. The reality is that this produce would have otherwise gone to food banks, to be redistributed for free." People are complaining because a hidden subsidy (from government and other food buyers to the food banks) has been removed. I don't like seeing…

> I don't like seeing groups shoehorn welfare into other areas. If you've got an income (or cash welfare) problem, fix that.

I'd prefer a better solution, but when one isn't available (and likely not forthcoming), needs of real people outweigh my economic principles: These people need food.

It's the same in engineering: As much as we would wish otherwise, sometimes the 'right' solution isn't available and we need to deliver, so we provide an imperfect solution that works.

Post reply on HN