|
Well I don't think it work in a practical sense however I like the fact that it would force caloric
information in food products to be a bit more accurate. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Price is based on how much it costs to produce as compared to how much one can get people to pay.
The reason things are priced per their weight or volume is because these are measurements of how
much of the item had to be produced and how much is being purchased.
I suppose things could be sold by the amount of benefit offered to the customer in relation to how
much it costs to produce the amount of benefit but it would be a crack addict thing to do.
Costs are currently effected by the benefits offered because of demand for products that are
beneficial.
Many groups involved in selling items spend a lot of money to stress the importance of buying their
products.
The suggested new concept has been in effect for a long time.
I can't believe I just had to say all of that. Lol |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No, that wouldn't work. Currently the price of food is based on manufacturing, shipping andpackaging
price. If we were to change that, I'm certain that many companies will go out of business. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
That wouldn't work at all. Price should be based on the labor needed to create and/or pack ,
transport and present the drinks. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
How would drinks fall into your concept? A 20 oz. Coke would be pricey, coming in at 200-300
calories per bottle, but a Diet Coke would cost next to nothing. Not to mention that studies have
shown that Diet Coke can sometimes have the same reaction to the body as Coke does, which means
there's nothing really Diet-y about it.
I can see companies pumping up the artificial things in their food to lower their calories, which I
don't think is going to be that much more healthier for us in general. Sure, you might not be as
fat, but you'll have all these chemicals swimming around in your body.
How would this concept affect poverty? I could see poverty increasing as the less fortunate would
not be able to afford much to feed their family. We would all like to eat well, but sometimes some
of us just can't afford it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I like your idea. It's a concept in preparation. Foods have calories, and foods have calories +
nutrients. Maybe on serving sizes? You and LordDaniel don't like the pig americans! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This new concept is not rational - it would never work. Why? It is too time consuming and time is
money. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Well the problems with that we'd end up paying a fortune for some healthy things like olive oil and
avocados. And meanwhile it does nothing for other health risks (like high sodium).
Not to mention the true cost of things should be based on the free market and cost of production,
not a food attribute like calories.
But it was a clever idea. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
25 Aug 2009 01:28
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
