Assignement #1

1a-1b.) "what are the different motivations that that drive Americans to make their food choices?"- according to Michael Pollan, what motivates Americans to make their food choices is itself the very title of his book, "The Omnivores Dilemma." When you have the ability as a human to eat just about anything mother earth has to offer, deciding what to eat is very much a challenge. According to michael Pollan there are a number of factors that determine what we decide to consume. He illustrates this dilemma well when comparing this choice as a human to that of a koala bear. "The koala bear doesn't worry about what to eat: If it looks smells and tastes like a eucalyptus leaf, it must be dinner" (Pollan 2). however omnivores like us have to figure out which of natures dishes are right for our consumption. We rely on recognition and "sense memory" to keep us away from poisons. Basically, somewhere along the way someone ate the wrong type of mushroom and died, so we know not to eat that mushroom. similarly, someone along the way discovered that meat hidden beneath harsh exterior of a crab was quite delicious. Also, taste and smell are basic factors that decide what we eat. Those senses are also what keep us from consuming things that have spoiled and are harmful to us. Another impotant factor that he discusses is culture. Culture greatly influences what and how we eat, and the fact that America is a nation built on soo many immigrants "each with its own culture of food, Americans have never had a single, strong, stable culinary tradition to guide us." Another factor that Pollan discusses is also the main issue that Marion Nestle discusses in his book "Food Politics," is marketing. The industrialization of food, and the food industry's power on what most Americans eat. Pollan discusses how one of the most important staples of the human food consumption disappeared almost over night , due to the diet industry. And that staple of course is bread, and consequently carbohydrates in general. Marketing and advertising seems to be Marion Nestles main argument in why Americans eat how they do.I have become increasingly convinced that many of the nutritional problems of Americans- the lesdt of them obesity- can be traced to the food industry's imperativeto encourage people to eat more in order to generate sales and increase income in a highly competative marketplace. Ambiguos dietary advice is only one result of thisimperative. Nestle 4So Marion Nestle's arguments on why Americans eat the way they do are largely based of on media and what the food industry sais we should eat as well, as what is made most available to us. His arguments are long and in depth, but in summary, the major factors and avenues the food industry uses to influence food choices are as follows: taste- make foods sweet, fat, and salty; Cost- Add value but keep prices low; convenience- make eating fast; confusion- keep the public puzzled; and promoting the public to eat more.Clearly there are many factors in why Americans eat the way they do. For me, in my personal experience, cost is what I witness as the most important factor in choosing what to eat. I was fortunate to have a mother that was born and raised in Italy, cooked well, and dinner was always a set part of the day where we sat down and took our time around the dinner table. Never in my childhood, unless I dined at a friend's house did everyone eat independently and KFC was on the menu. Though she made very little money, there was nothing that could have made her compromise organic foods for for industrialized itmes found at Fred Meyers or Safeway. Everyday almost all the way through highschool I watched kids eat pizza, or public school food served on styrofoam trays, while I brought my own assortment of home made pasta or stir fry. It was almost difficult, as everyone would comment and even teachers would be curious as to what I had for lunch today, but I am soo grateful for it. But today as a poor college student, I too seek refuge in cheap foods. Though perhaps not the 1 dollar McDonald cheeseburger but frequently the $2.50 submay sandwhich. I too oftne fall victim to this American diet phenomenon. Why? because it's predominantly what's accessible and it's cheap.2a.) I don't know that the film "The Future of Food" was hipeful or pessimistic about the future of food. It seemed that it did what a good informative documentary should do and that is state the current scenario as it stands, and provide information. Actually, if anything the vibe that I got from the film was that it was more on the pessimistic side of things. It painted a very clear picture of what is going on and the crimes that corporations such as Monsanto are commiting, but didn't really offer any hope or make it seem like anything could be done about it. I don't know. Maybe I just say this because after watching the film, I myself felt very pessimistic about the future of food, in America and around the world.2b.) I couldn't agree more with Michael Pollan's suggestion that organic food is not overpriced, once external costs are factored in. Actually, more than his comment in regards to the 99 cent burger that "the price may be low, but the cost is high," which is very true, I was particularly affected on his argument on the percentage of their income that Americans spend on food. He states that we spend some 10-11% of our incomes on food, and that is all we want to spend. Yet we have no problems spending the rest on material goods, gas, entertainment, etc. This is way too low. Lower than anybody else ever. Perhaps if we all actually bought Organics, then this percentage would actually be closer to what it SHOULD be!3.) I would define a cooperative business structure as a business without a boss. A business with a horizontal power distribution, and a demoacratic decision making model. IT is a very communistic approach to a business model, but works well because it focuses on the good of the whole. It is an effective business model for a number of reasons, namely because it will produce less employees who try and steal or do the business wrong as those who work for the cooperative business are also part owners, and will have the business' best interests in mind.4.) I think People's post expansion business is okay , but not solid. They are okay in that they definitely have picked some strong avenues and standards by which the business runs, such as being vegetarian, and being so strict about knowing where their items come from and whether or not they can put them on their shelves, and I think this is a strong technique. However I simply say that they're not all the way solid because they themselves will tell you that they are not. They are straight forward about the fact that they don't exactly know where they want the business to go.5.) I think the store itself is the marker of people's identity. The products they carry, their choice to be a vegetarian store, their cleanliness, and even just their architecture. Their architecture shows that their focus is very much community. From the open courtyard and ample seating outside to the wonderful open, light and airy community room upstairs. They definitely focus on health, and community health. It is a very nice place!