The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
newfoodeconomy.org
The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
1–10 of 191 posts
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#2I almost bought into Imperfect Produce, too, what a bad taste in my mouth that would have left. Thanks for the good read.
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#3I wonder what's better in the long term for the farmers.
Making sure people have food to eat is something society in the US can easily do, I really wonder if the heroic volunteerism surrounding food banks is a good way to do it.
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#4I 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 business models have on the surrounding community.
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#5"Our venture, and ventures like ours, which rely on redistributing food waste, cannot succeed if people waste less food. So please waste more food."
Talk about putting the cart before the horse. I have no problem with saying, "that food isn't really waste, let's redistribute it if it's going unused." But someone's got their head turned right around if they think that a logical corollary is, "and that food should never be used, because we're redistributing it."
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#6"The company does this by commodifying food that would go to the poor for free"
The article provides 0 evidence towards this case. I'm all for listening to this argument, as it is a good one, but are there any facts to support this other than their shrinking user base?
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#7But 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?
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#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 groups shoehorn welfare into other areas. If you've got an income (or cash welfare) problem, fix that.
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#9When I did the math + realized the shipping costs, it was a no-brainer.
I know many people who buy into these 'good feelings' products.
Re: The ugly truth about the ugly produce movement
#10I 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
Stunning cognitive dissonance going on here.
Simply redirecting a portion of one's personal funds towards a local food bank doesn't absolve one of the moral wrongs associated with participation in a scheme that systematically undermines access to food for the least advantaged.