« Open Thread 134 St. Marks Place Takes a Mulligan »
September 24, 2009
The City Spurs Grocery Stores to Underserved
The Bloomberg administration, which has already cut down on trans fats and distributed fruit vendors to produce-anemic neighborhoods, is now seeking to provide incentives for grocery stores to open in areas where most families spend their food budget at bodegas and drug stores. The City Planning Commission unanimously approved the proposal on Wednesday, reports The New York Times, which would grant zoning and tax incentives to grocery stores, with set requirements about how much produce and other foods they sell. The city is eying northern Manhattan, central Brooklyn, the South Bronx, and downtown Jamaica in Queens. Many city officials, food experts, and grocery store executives approve of the plan, meant to spur economic growth in addition to encouraging health (and fighting the rising rates of obesity and diabetes), but the Times mentions a recent report to Congress by the Department of Agriculture that shows an uncertain correlation between obesity and access to healthy, fresh foods. Avi Kaner, a supermarket operator, said education is the main solution. “If you force distribution of product to a population that’s not interested in it, or not educated in it, and the grocery stores can’t make a profit,” he told the Times, “they’ll eventually leave.” Check out the Times article for more details about the program, similar programs across the country, and a finer breakdown of the pros and cons.
A Plan to Add Supermarkets to Poor Areas [NY Times]
FRESH Food Store Program Overview [DOCP]
NYC's Neighborhood Grocery Store and Supermarket Shortage [DOCP]
Photo by Royce Bair
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11565
Comments
“If you force distribution of product to a population that’s not interested in it..."
If these nabes don't have such stores, how can one assume that they are not interested in having them? We all know what they say about assuming...
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at September 24, 2009 9:35 AM
oh look. nanny bloomberg is at it again! granted, this isn't a bad thing, so one can't complain.
and believe me it's going to take an entire socioeconomic culture shift of magnanimous proportions to choose an apple over a bag of doritos.. believe me, it took YEARS for me to.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 9:38 AM
also this might be "slightly contraversial" but why not put a ban on people who get WIC and food benefits cards to only be allowed to buy supposedly "healthy things" i.e. no junk food. one big problem is that people really don't get much money for food allowance in government benefits, i think it's like 300 dollars a month max.. a big bag of doritos will fill you up faster and youll feel more full than some healthier alternatives... it's a double edged sword.
i grew up in a household where i kid you not we ONLY ate junk food. the occassional pasta was available, but other than that it was non stop junkfood. you know how people usually gain 15 pounds when they go off to college? i lost 40! basically by eating the healthier options in the dining hall that were never available for me at home... so i think this program does have some merit in that sense, at least it's available.. tho ive never been to a neighborhood in nyc, even the very bad ones, where you still couldnt find vegetables (granted not overpriced organic crap) if you really looked.
there's also no shame in eating a big bag of Bird's Eye frozen carrots. those are available in every supermarket
Sorry, i had a lot to say about this issue.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 9:44 AM
What Snappy said.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 9:45 AM
This just in from Psychology Today with regard to menus:
"There are often two competing goals when people order off the menu: the long-term aspiration of eating healthy, and the short-term desire to indulge yourself. Just looking at a healthy option on the menu can be enough to vicariously satisfy the healthy-eating goal, making people more likely to run for the indulgent foods." and "just because consumers say they want to see healthy foods on a menu doesn’t mean they will order them.”
I can't help but wonder if or how this might play out similarly with regard to shopping choices. It appears to be a rather universal and disturbing human propensity/trait.
Posted by: Nokilissa at September 24, 2009 9:46 AM
Rob, you make a good point per frozen veggies. Many mistakenly believe that they somehow lose 'food value' in the process of being bagged and frozen. Not true. And they are relatively cheap, universally available and incredibly easy to heat up and serve.
Posted by: Nokilissa at September 24, 2009 9:49 AM
Noki...i read something very similar to that a while back.
I like to look at the vibrant colors in the fruit and vegetable aisle but I'm more likely to take home the meat.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 9:52 AM
not sure how anyone could be against this. it's not like they're trying to put some kind of upscale $20 fancy Whole Foods green beans shop in. every neighborhood deserves access to a decent, clean, well-stocked grovery store with fresh fruit, veg and other food.
Posted by: CG_ups at September 24, 2009 9:55 AM
cgups, no one is against it here, please dont try to bring that up.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 9:58 AM
I thought they were promoting the expansion of street vendors with carts for veggies & fruits?? We could use one in Fulton Park where I get off the subway.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 9:59 AM
rob - the guy in the article posted above pretty much implied it "If you force distribution of product to a population that’s not interested in it, or not educated in it, and the grocery stores can’t make a profit,” he told the Times, “they’ll eventually leave.”
Posted by: CG_ups at September 24, 2009 10:01 AM
When I used to work in Canarsie, the local Key Food had a good produce section, and there was a Caribbean grocery nearby that also had produce.
However, there is another dimension to this issue. Ff you have $5 to spend for dinner, it is more filling to buy french fried and chicken nuggets or lo mein from a chinese place then to buy a bag of apples and something else. It is also more convenient.
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 10:03 AM
yep. totally jester. i know when im down to my last 5 dollars the last thing im going to be buying is fresh fruit and veggies. tho i was pretty busted recently and bought 4 bags of frozen veggies for like a buck each at associated :)
granted after eating a bag i was far from full or sated.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 10:11 AM
expect lots of these I care about poor folks from Bloomberg press corp in next month. More about image than real impact.
Not that city can do that much....economics of supermarkets are tough. Low profit margin and all.
But some zoning does make it more difficult to open supermarkets but small grocery/bodega owners are not going to be too happy about this. Chinatown seems to sell lots of fresh vegetables and fruit without large supermarkets.
Something could be done to encourage these in other areas (but I don't know what).
Posted by: Petebklyn at September 24, 2009 10:13 AM
Do they still teach cookery / home economics in schools & colleges? I know I could use a refresher course if I were to go back to preparing my own meals with fresh ingredients. I know there is no reason to assume that cookery skills are any better or worse in low income neighborhoods vs high income ones, just think that kitchen klutzes like me need a little help.
Everyone has good points here. Interesting point on banning junk food from food cards Rob, but I think it may be hard to administer and only affect a section of the population. Also 'magnanimous' means generous or noble (literally 'having a large spirit'), not big per se.
Posted by: etson at September 24, 2009 10:14 AM
basically all i ever remember of the home ec classes taught in my high school were them making were brownies and cookies. seriously.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 10:21 AM
Jester is right. If you are head of a family stretching that $5, you can go farther with pasta, rice, potatoes and a bit of non-prime cut meat than you can with veggies and steak. There is a good reason the peasant cuisines of the world are full of starchy and filling stews and casseroles. It's called survival.
Growing up pretty poor myself, I remember plenty of meals with rice and beans, and chicken and dumplings made with chicken backs. There is no meat on a chicken back, it was pure flavoring and wishful thinking. We always had vegetables and fruit, even if it was frozen veggies and apples and oranges, but we filled up more on the starches, that's human nature.
I think it's great to give supermarkets some incentives and push to come to underserved neighborhoods. I don't think we need to ban people from buying crap. Adults don't need a nanny, they need teachers. And like drug trafficing, how about going to the source. I don't hear anyone telling those enormous agrobusinesses, with their high priced lobbies and pr firms, not to grow and produce corn chips and high fructose snacks and drinks.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 10:24 AM
My limited observation is that in certain relatively poorer neighborhoods there are produce stands on every block. Chinatown was mentioned, and you see the same thing in Caribbean areas of Flatbush and South Asian areas of Kensington. So somehow the market is able to respond to real consumer demand even with the city's antiquated commercial zoning.
Posted by: Sparafucile at September 24, 2009 10:24 AM
I think its interesting that Chinatown, which has a very large low income population does not have the same obesity problem They use far more vegetables and protein- They manage on low budgets and it would be informative to do some comparing and find out how they manage it.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 10:50 AM
This is a demand and culture issue and it drives me nuts that so many seem to portray these people and neighborhoods as corporate victims, which just perpetuates the problem. Who doesn't love an excuse for their poor choices? This is nanny-state policy at its worst.
As others have mentioned, look at all the cheap as hell beautiful produce available in the Chinatowns around the city and other ethnic neighborhoods such as Brighton Beach (not that it seems to keep the Russians healthy). It is insane how cheap great fresh produce can be in those places. Did the city put those markets there? No, there is a strong demand in the neighborhood for that stuff at that price point, and the businesses deliver. Also, even in bodegas, there are all sorts of cheap healthy options like lentils, beans, and pasta. One $1.50 bag of lentils will easily feed a family.
Posted by: solidago at September 24, 2009 10:55 AM
bxgrl, US asians also have the highest average educational attainment of any racial group according to the last census. I think there are a number of sociological things to be learned from the achievements of US asians as a group.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 10:57 AM
When I was a struggling student we used to make a batch of lentil bolognese each week using marmite to flavor it up.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 11:04 AM
Also, just in general, there is a negative image to staying in and cooking food for yourself, IMO. On Sundays before I go out to have a drink and work on my laptop, I prep some meals for the week.
But weekdays, between the option of meeting up with friends, going on a date, or doing something else, I opt to just buy something and cut corners on my diet. I am blesssed that I can eat pretty much what I want, and I also don't have a taste for cakes, baked goods, etc., but still: I NEVER go to a green market, although I always get some vegetables when I shop to toss in - when I have/make the time to prep my meals.
Talking about diet is a taboo subject, I'm thinking.
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 11:19 AM
"I don't hear anyone telling those enormous agrobusinesses, with their high priced lobbies and pr firms, not to grow and produce corn chips and high fructose snacks and drinks.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 10:24 AM"
I agree. Big Tobacco is a sexy and hip thing to hate, but Big Food gets a free pass.
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 11:21 AM
I don't know if thats true about "Big food", there's been a couple of anti-burger movies, there's a whole anti-hi-fructose corn syrup movement, there are also a number of people calling for soda taxes (though it got shot down in NY state).
I'd agree that dioet can be a taboo subject though.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 11:32 AM
True, ditto - I meant, "up until recently Big food got a free pass..."
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 11:42 AM
Montrose, great post at 10:24. Might enlighten some people who criticize people in less affluent areas who, out of necessity rather than choice, feed themselves and their families fast food / junk food instead of more healthy alternatives.
Everyone try to go see Food, Inc. while we're on the topic of nutrition.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 11:43 AM
Montrose @ 10:24 is dead on.
I just came home from shopping at the grocery store. The price of fresh fruits and vegetables is pretty astronomical right now.
My suggestion for anyone on a budget. Buy frozen. They have great sales on the big bags of frozen veggies. Also, you don't have to worry about them spoiling. You use them when you want to and in most instances they're MORE nutritious because they're frozen within 24 hrs. of being picked.
Most fresh veggies lose the majority of their nutritional value 7 days after being picked. Think about how long it takes to pick, transport them, stock them and have them sit out before you buy it, bring it home and stick it in your fridge for another 3-5 days.
Hardly worth it at all.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 11:50 AM
"there's been a couple of anti-burger movies"
ditto, just a technical note: if you're referring to Fast Food Nation, Food Inc., etc., I don't consider them anti-burger (anti-meat in general) movies. To me they are more about showing people the awful conditions under which the animals are kept, the issues around a few gigantic players dominating the meat industry, worker conditions, quality of the food, etc. They aren't meant to convert individuals to become vegetarians and vegans.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 11:50 AM
Nothing beats fresh corn & fresh tomatoes and that season is about to end. :-(
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 11:51 AM
infinitejester - give me a f'ing break - tobacco is an ADDICTIVE substance that offers no benefit whatsoever and has negative health effects no matter how little you consume.....
Even a soda can provide liquid/quench thirst and offer calories, and there is really no evidence that in small quantities it is harmful.
Your analogy is silly.
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 11:53 AM
Dietary issues get complicated. Culture has as much to do with what we eat as money, as do genetics. Take Caribbean food. Lots of vegetables and fruits, but also lots of fried foods, for very practical reasons. Hot climates mean cooking in ways that will preserve food when refrigeration is not available to poorer people. Frying and cooking with powerful spices protects food from spoilage, at least for a little while. Breads, cassavah, and potatoes stretch a meal out, and fill you up. There is a lot of obesity in the Caribbean, and among Caribbean people elsewhere. It's not because they don't eat vegetables and fruits.
I'm sure there have been studies as to diet, culture, economics and ethnicity. It's ironic that the elite in the past would have been plump. They ate better, and more often, than the peasantry, and didn't have to do strenuous manual labor to survive. As western societies evolved, that changed, and the western beauty ideal changed as well. Now it's actually chic, and rich, to look as if you survive on one wilted lettuce leaf a week.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 11:53 AM
The thing is "pasta, rice, potatoes and a bit of non-prime cut meat," as MM writes about, is not "fast food/junk food," as Biff describes. MM's memory is revaltory of the real issue here, which is not so much a lack of fruits and vegetables, as an over abundance of processed foods that are cheap and fast. If you're working two ro three jobs with no other adult at home it's way easier to heat something up or get take out than to cook, no matter what it is you're actually eating.
Posted by: Peter18 at September 24, 2009 11:55 AM
dittoburg- indeed we could learn (but in case you haven't noticed, some of us are notoriously hard headed) :-)
What i wonder about is why the fresh produce is so much more affordable in the wonderful Chinatown Markets and expensive elsewhere. I love tomatoes but I swear, 2.99/lb? As much as some meat. It's really crazy.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 11:56 AM
fsrq, who drinks soda in small quantities??? I have high tryglycerides and they went down dramatically after I cut out the soda. I drank about a can a day!!!
There's a reason sugar is called "white death."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 11:57 AM
quote:
offers no benefit whatsoever
absolutely, 100 percent, untrue. nicotine is a wonderful chemical that has MANY benefits. it's the other crap in ciggies that suck.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 11:58 AM
Thanks MM, Now I'm craving a big bowl of okra cou-cou and codfish with a side of fried breadfruit.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 11:58 AM
quote:
Now it's actually chic, and rich, to look as if you survive on one wilted lettuce leaf a week.
ugh. i hope that outlook changes soon!
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 12:02 PM
Peter, I'm not sure I understand your point. Do you really think the issue with obesity in the poorer neighbourhoods in New York is the result of people eating "pasta, rice, potatoes and a bit of non-prime cut meat,"? If so, I disagree. While I don't dispute anything Montrose is saying about her own personal experiences growing up, I think the issue today is most definitely cheap and easy access to fast food / junk food / soda versus people eating too much rice and potatoes and low quality meat. Just my opinion.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 12:02 PM
"absolutely, 100 percent, untrue. nicotine is a wonderful chemical that has MANY benefits. it's the other crap in ciggies that suck."
Like the filter? :-)
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 12:03 PM
quote:
I love tomatoes but I swear, 2.99/lb? As much as some meat. It's really crazy.
whoa that is insane actually. tomatos are like the only thing i know what it usually costs per pound cuz i eat them like crazy when i can. i usually get the 1.29 a pound ones, sometimes the 1.49 ones cuz they are redder and prettier.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 12:05 PM
Great idea. Great. It will reduce my carbon footprint and my aggravation level since I now drive weekly to Fairway for this stuff. I've lived in Fort Greene for 5 years now and it has always blown my mind that I didn't have a local Green Grocer on the South eastern border of Fort Greene where I live. Still no green grocer -- plenty of twinkies and doritos though. Sure I could do some exercise and walk around or go to the Park on Saturday, but I don't want to. Just gimme a store so I can pick stuff on the way home...
Posted by: donatella at September 24, 2009 12:09 PM
I guess, Biff, I'm thinking more of a family, with one member cooking for many, and trying to make it all last, as compared to a single person, or a couple who don't sit down to eat a meal with family and kids. I agree with you on the fast foods.
I don't eat much processed food, but I certainly admit it is easier to eat badly when you forage on your own, and eat out a lot. And non diet soda is evil, but banning it, or taxing it to death is too big brother for me. Like ciggies, I choose not to partake. (Although every once in a while, I love a cold, icy, Schweppes Ginger Ale.)
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 12:11 PM
Biff: We agree. I don't think obesity is the result of eating "pasta, rice, potatoes and a bit of non-prime cut meat." I think if people had the time to prepare these foods as in the past there would be less obesity. I think obesity is at least partially the result of people not having or taking the time to prepare these foods as they did in the past, and relying on the convenient processed foods.
And if you rely on the convenience of processed foods because you're too busy working three jobs that don't pay a fair wage or provide health insurance or child care, then I'm not sure that providing more and better grocery stores will make much of a dent in the obesity problem. Not that I think it's a bad idea per se.
Posted by: Peter18 at September 24, 2009 12:11 PM
rob- the tomatoes at the foodtown near me are high priced. (and not even that great).I love tomatoes- a good beefsteak tomato is like a real steak.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 12:13 PM
Biff, I didn't mean to imply they are anti-meat, I was quoting them for their anti-big food take. Are you a vegetarian?
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 12:14 PM
Montrose, I'm sure it's a combo of what we are both talking about. We're probably close in age and, while there was certainly fast food when I was kid, it just wasn't as prevalent and cheap as it is now (and no dollar menus back then). I also think people are more prone to eat poorly when on their own. I don't cook but most of the folks I know who do always say they prefer cooking for a group of people versus just for themselves.
Thanks Peter for the clarification. We're definitely on the same page.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 12:17 PM
"Are you a vegetarian?"
Ditto, no I'm not. Although I've seriously considered going that way after seeing some of the documentaries and reading a bunch of books on the state of the meat industry.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 12:18 PM
DIBS - your hyperbole is interesting but if 1 can of soda was as toxic as you imply (white death) - then America's life expectancy would be falling rapidly since the per capita consumption in the US is approx 2 cans per day.
Not saying its healthy by any means but comparing soda to cigarettes is like comparing russian roulette to bike riding.
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 12:18 PM
fsrq, there was no analogy there. It was a point about how between Big Tobacco and Big Food, Big Food obviously affects more people, but until recently you never heard about it.
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 12:19 PM
Not to mention, kids don't move these days. They come home and are sedentary. They watch TV, play video games or are on the computer or texting. They're sloths.
I think those of us over the age of 30 can agree that was certainly not the case when we were growing up. All you did was run around playing games, sports etc.
A lot of things are different now that most homes are 2 income and there isn't someone at home to have the time to cook. It's grab what you can, when you can. It's just the way it is.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 12:22 PM
Peter18 makes great points, there.
The best and healthiest way to eat, outside of growing and raising your own food, is the fresh food, daily market approach. Shopping daily for only what you need for meals, buying fresh produce, cuts of meat, fish, etc. Then shopping maybe once a week for staples. I've tried to do that as much as possible, but it's not easy, or convenient always. And it's certainly not the way most Americans shop. We like mega shopping, and shopping only once for a week or more. That's part of the reason why processed foods are so popular.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 24, 2009 12:24 PM
fsrq, I bet 90% of Americans don't know their tryglyceride levels either.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 12:24 PM
Those were the milk carton days...
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 12:25 PM
I thought they were promoting the expansion of street vendors with carts for veggies & fruits?? We could use one in Fulton Park where I get off the subway.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 9:59 AM
There's one of those carts at Macon or Halsey and Nostrand a short block or 2 from the Nostrand A/C stop, which competes with the Bravo supermarket (small fruit/veggie section, but it's there, complete with weekly specials) and a fruit and veggie market right around the corner on Fulton St. Plus Foodtown is just another block and a half away with another fruit and veggie market across the street.
There are so many places in Bed Stuy that are blocks and blocks from any food retailer besides bodegas that have no or virtually no fresh fruits and veggies (maybe a few onions, bananas, potatoes) and no frozen veggies either.
Posted by: rf at September 24, 2009 12:28 PM
It is surprising the variety of choices you find in one of those huge supermarkets they build on the edge of towns in many places. When I was home on vacation, my mom and I went there almost every other day to get things. It's a combination of gustatory pleasure and the thrill of spending money to walk around and stock up on all the things for sale in a really nice supermarket. People living in middle America have NO excuse not to eat healthy. Lime THL said, just frozen vegetables alone are easy to stock up on and good for you.
Posted by: infinitejester at September 24, 2009 12:29 PM
oh totally THL. SOOOO many kids the second they come home from school they are sitting at their computer munching away on food until they "feel tired" and go to sleep. that cannot be good! a lot of parents probably feel tho, rightfully so, better the kid on the computer than in a gang or just out in the streets causing trouble in general. as sad as that may sound.
funny how you never see obese gang members, right?
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 12:31 PM
bxgrl, US asians also have the highest average educational attainment of any racial group according to the last census. I think there are a number of sociological things to be learned from the achievements of US asians as a group.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 10:57 AM
Not, by and large, the US asians who live in Manhattan's and Brooklyn's Chinatowns.
Posted by: rf at September 24, 2009 12:31 PM
Milk in glass bottles delivered to your doorstep fresh each morning, a bakers on the corner for fresh bread, a greengrocers on main street...
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 12:31 PM
I wonder how many of these people who are allegedly too busy to prepare a reasonably healthy meal from scratch using low-cost ingredients still manage to watch three or four hours of TV a day.
I think a sedentary lifestyle, for children and adults, has far more to do with obesity than our eating habits. Get rid of cable TV, high-speed internet, and XBox, and you'll probably find you can eat whatever you want without getting fat.
A lumberjack breakfast is fine if you're going to be out chopping trees all day. The problem is when you get it at a drive-through window on your way to a desk job.
Posted by: Sparafucile at September 24, 2009 12:36 PM
yeah totally. i have a desk job and it makes me sad to see myself get fatter and fatter every day :( it doesnt help that i refuse to give up my top model and 90210 tv watching and 40 ounce sippin'. but it's a lifestyle choice, you can't really help people who dont want to be helped, you know?
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 12:48 PM
rf - unfortunately the census doesn't break it down that way, but I'm sure you're correct because from what I've read its the children and subsequent progeny that do well while the immigrant parents are just working like crazy to provide for them.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 12:52 PM
"A lumberjack breakfast is fine if you're going to be out chopping trees all day. The problem is when you get it at a drive-through window on your way to a desk job."
!!
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 12:53 PM
One problem with fresh veg and many groceries in general is that the profit margin is incredibly small. For the bodega owner with high rent and limited space, there's little incentive to stock something that might end up being tossed, and doesn't make that much money to begin with. You can make much more money off a package of Oreos, and they have a shockingly long shelf life.
As for Chinatown, food is cheap because many of the shops own their space, which makes a huge difference. Chinatown, while affordable, can be hard to navigate for the uninitiated--incredibly crowded with little English spoken. I imagine it's overwhelming for many non-Chinese--and has been for me at times.
Posted by: tinarina at September 24, 2009 12:53 PM
"I bet 90% of Americans don't know their tryglyceride levels either...."
So....People are already living longer than ever, so whatever it is, it cant be all that bad. and besides for 90% of those who would have a high number the approach wouldnt be to eat better, it would be to prescribe a bunch of super expensive pills (of marginal overall benefit) and tons of expensive followup tests anyway.....
Given Ins costs and health care costs - better that most people dont know.
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 12:55 PM
Chinatown has the best produce & fish/seafood because the turnover is so high. years ago there was a story done by one of the TV stations and China won hands down for fish freshness over ALL of the supermarkets.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 12:56 PM
Dittoberg, thanks for the idea, "lentil bolognese" - I'm always looking for new things to do with lentils. One bag will last me two or three days - ideal for a cheap and lazy guy like me - but after a gazillion variations of lentil soup and lentil salad I've started running out of ideas.
Posted by: solidago at September 24, 2009 12:58 PM
fsrq, that sounded pretty stupid.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 12:58 PM
DIBS - I think Drug Inc... is a far bigger problem for this country than Food Inc - if you think that's stupid - so be it.
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 1:03 PM
FSRG;
Let me state something heretical (in these days). I think that for SOME people, smoking a couple of cigarettes a day is not that bad (just like it's not that bad to have a can of soda a day). It helps them to relax (instead of taking some drug to do so)and supresses their appetite.
My old grandma used to say it best: everything in moderation. Moderating one's diet and behavior seems to be a lost art these days, however.
Posted by: benson at September 24, 2009 1:13 PM
prices in chinatown are low because
(1) it's super high competition and Chinese people often & frequently engage in price wars
(2) cheap labor; legal minimum wage would be a huge increase vs what workers are paid there
Posted by: more4less at September 24, 2009 1:14 PM
"I think those of us over the age of 30 can agree that was certainly not the case when we were growing up. All you did was run around playing games, sports etc."
Word up. We spent 90% of our time in the streets, playing sports and street games. We didn't come home until it got dark outside or until we were summoned, even in the winter. My family had a "lumberjack" style of cuisine, but none of us have any obesity issues and we're all still in good shape.
Posted by: East New York at September 24, 2009 1:16 PM
bxgrl, US asians also have the highest average educational attainment of any racial group according to the last census. I think there are a number of sociological things to be learned from the achievements of US asians as a group.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 10:57 AM
Not, by and large, the US asians who live in Manhattan's and Brooklyn's Chinatowns.
Posted by: rf at September 24, 2009 12:31 PM
if you focus on the kids who are going to school - true statement.
Posted by: more4less at September 24, 2009 1:19 PM
While I'd love to blame soda for the obesity problem, in reality its our whole approach to food and sometimes it seems the simpler, healthier foods are more expensive. As per my comments with rob re tomatoes. At Foodtown they are sometimes 2.99 and even 3.99 a pound or more. Spend that much for mac and cheese mix and it goes a lot further. Go to a fast food place and you get a meal.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 1:25 PM
Does Fresh Direct deliver to all (most?) of Brooklyn?
Just wondering, because their produce is good and the selection is hard to beat.
Agree that cost and lifestyle are the biggest obstacles to eating well, but it sure doesn't help when finding decent fruits and vegetables is a problem.
I guess the north slope is one of the better stocked neighborhoods in Brooklyn, but it seemed a bit of a step down to me after Manhattan. I'm still shocked by how often Union Market will have overripe bell peppers that are getting soft for $3.99/lb.
My wife and I try, and luckily for us money isn't a big problem when it comes to food, but time sure as heck is.
We try to cook stuff on Sunday that we will have leftovers from for a few days and we have some dishes that we can put together very quickly, but when one of us gets sick or one of us is stuck working late and the other one has to chase the kid around, we end up just calling for delivery.
I keep meaning to put together a recipe book of good meals that can be prepared in less than an hour, but, of course, I don't have the time. And when I do have the time, I won't need it anymore...
Posted by: northsloperenter at September 24, 2009 1:32 PM
Bxgrl,
I just went to the big Shoprite grocery store this morning. I bought 2 batatas (latin white sweet potatoes). They were each about the size of a small/medium baked potato.
$3.87!!!
Almost 2 dollars a potato! It's insane! Imagine if I had a bunch of kids to feed instead of just me and the hub?
Meanwhile just prior to going there I got a 5lb. bag of frozen Yucca at BJ's for $3.89. This is why I stick with mostly frozen veggies when possible.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 1:34 PM
Everyone over 30 always thinks that it was different when their generation was young - mostly it wasnt - Im over 30, Atari came out before I was 10, Cable TV was widely available by the time I was 13, I remember kids eating Peanut butter/fluff on wonder bread at school,every supermarket carried twinkies, and the general (adult) population lamented that our kids were lazy sloths (which might be true - its just not any different)
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 1:42 PM
fsrq-
Yeah, they were available but not many of our folks were buying them for us.
My dad only paid for cable when the Rangers went to a cable channel. Until then it was 2-13 baby. I wanted my MTV!
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 1:49 PM
THL - The Rangers have been on Cable since 1969!
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 2:01 PM
We used to get them on a regular station growing up in L.I. until sometime in the very early 1980's. Different cable co. perhaps?
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 2:03 PM
Anyone questioning the academic achievements of Asians in North America is INSANE! Take a glance into a classroom at Stuy High or Hunter or another top High School in New York. There is a HUGE and disproportionate percentage of Asians in those fine schools and others. Asians are amongst the brightest and the best in our schools without question. Those are just the facts. How it got to be that way is another discussion altogether.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:08 PM
MSG in NYC - dont know about LI; but that bolsters my statement - Cable became wildly popular in the early 80's that puts it into the homes of today's 30-45yr olds during their childhood.
Kids are more or less the same and adults are too - they always think that it was different when they were young....they are mostly wrong.
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 2:08 PM
THL, I grew up in the pre-remote control days where the channels would go up to 13, and there wasn't even a Channel 1! And of the 13, there were only 3 or 4 that ever had anything on that was worth watching.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:09 PM
My friends and I spent all day and night outside playing baseball and bike riding in the summer and hockey and skating in the winter. There was almost no day that we would stay inside.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:10 PM
Exactly Biff. We spent maybe an hour at home after school and then we got kicked back out of the house until it started to turn dark. we never watched TV until after dinner and only for an hour or two. We had the same 2-13 and I think we mainly watched 2,4 and 7. CBS, NBC and ABC.
I didn't start watching TV on a more regular basis until I was in H.S. but even then we'd hang out and do stuff after school we usually didn't hang at home because most of us had mothers that didn't work. What teenager wants to hang out with their mom watching over them?
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 2:17 PM
FSRG;
I have to disagree with you on this issue. In one sense, it is true that parents have always lamented that their kids are lazier, less respectful, etc. - probably since the caveman days.
Having said that, it is no doubt true that kids today do not engage in the same level of spontaneous outdoor activity that ENY speaks of. I am about the same age as ENY (early 50's) and I remember that when I was a kid, every block in NYC was chock full of kids playing in the street. You just don't see that anymore.
About two months ago I went to a party at my cousin's house in NJ, and they have a big spread of land. One couple brought their 2 kids, about 10 and 12 years old. They spent the entire party texting on their cell phone. In my day, at a party like that, we'd be playing ball in the backyard.
Posted by: benson at September 24, 2009 2:17 PM
THL, that's so funny and true. We took every minute we could to enjoy our freedom with our friends. We had the Buffalo affiliates of ABC, NBC and CBS and I'll throw in CBC because it had all the hockey games and SCTV. CITY-TV was one other channel that had ok shows, including Much Music, hosted for years by none other than a very young JD Roberts (now goes as John Roberts) who is now on CBS News.
Check him out in this 80s clip!! He was the coolest back then.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv_I_cbKW5o
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:22 PM
We're were outside from early in the morning till dusk and then in the summer at the beach till 9 or 10. There were very few overweight kids, eating wasn't a priority. It was much more fun to go exploring. I feel for kids today because of all the "dangers' out there and worse their helicopter parents. My parents got cable after I moved out in 1989 and I didn't get it till 2004.
Posted by: DeLepp at September 24, 2009 2:23 PM
DeLepp, as much as I was playing all day long outside, I was considered a fat kid. When I look back at the few old pics of me that I have, I was actually not even that bad and would probably be considered average size these days! The other kids in all the pictures were like stick people.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:26 PM
biff, you were probably a little husky. Today's husky kid is in relatively great shape compared to the numbers that are now obese. Kids are getting treated for type 2 diabetes these days. Besides exercise what is so different between now and the 70s? Had processed foods then, maybe they didn't taste so good?
Posted by: DeLepp at September 24, 2009 2:32 PM
"I feel for kids today because of all the "dangers' out there and worse their helicopter parents. "
It's not really individual parents. It's the whole attitude in society.
There was an article recently in the Times (can't find link) about how parents who want to let their kids walk to school by themselves, etc., run into problems with public officials and the parents of other children who think they are being irresponsible.
And then when so few parents are letting their kids be alone outside, it really does make that rare kid who is left alone more vulnerable as it is so unusual for a child to be left unmonitored that they will be a clear target for anyone who is looking for a target.
Sort of like a 26 year old walking down a street talking on her iPhone in Clinton Hill after 11:00 pm...
Posted by: northsloperenter at September 24, 2009 2:36 PM
For 2 summers the organization I worked for did special summer programs with kids from Chinatown. The first summer we had about 30-40 kids, the second we had about 100. I kid you not- every single one of them was a high achiever. Part of their problem was they didn't know how to let go. Everything was so serious. I had one kid who was a killer artist- untrained- and he really wanted to pursue it but his parents would have had a fit. they were all hardworking, bright and all aiming for good colleges. So RF- I don't know who you know but I don't agree with you.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 2:37 PM
I have no quantitative data on when kids were more active and they certainly may be more lazy today....but I clearly remember when video games (atari) was thought to be the downfall of society and kids were criticized for spending Sunday morning watching Krofft Super Show, Land of the Lost and Justice League (I think that is what I was watching when the Iranians took our hostages)....
I am not saying kids arent more sedentary overall now (I dont know except anecdotes which are kinda meaningless). But I am inherently skeptical whenever someone says that things were different when they were kids - cause I'm no kid now and I clearly remember our generation (X) being called the laziest bunch of degenerate, neer-do-wells that ever existed....
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 2:37 PM
DeLepp, I think a big factor was a good amount of us had mom's at home that cooked dinners most nights. That's few and far between these days whether it's finances or just them choosing to work outside the home. There's little time to cook meals from scratch.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 2:38 PM
Husky was exactly the word they used.
I preferred being called big boned.
But once I really got active into sports (and started noticing girls), I got in much better shape.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 2:38 PM
nsr, you've got a point. Calling child services is a knee jerk reaction to every independent. Reminds me of the lunacy in phoenix with the pictures of young kids in the family tub together. I can't tell you how many my pictures my parents took.
Posted by: DeLepp at September 24, 2009 2:40 PM
"I'm no kid now and I clearly remember our generation (X) being called the laziest bunch of degenerate, neer-do-wells that ever existed...."
That's because every one of our parents walked 10 miles uphill both ways barefoot to get to and from school.
Us lazy good for nothings had a school bus!
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 2:40 PM
thl, you're probably right to a point. My mother went back to work full time when I was in 2nd grade, there was always a salad, protein and a veg on the table for 7pm dinner. Though the only snakcs inside the house were milky ways, my mothers favorite. If we gorged on too many of them after school there would be drama!
Posted by: DeLepp at September 24, 2009 2:45 PM
FSRG- I thingk every generation feels that way about the next. There is a very famous Ancient greek text talking about exactly this. (Can't remember who wrote it- the brain cells have left the building).
Posted by: bxgrl at September 24, 2009 2:46 PM
exactly benson.
I played b-ball morning thru night, interrupted only by stickball or various forms of juvenile delinquency, or a bike ride. My parents chose not to have a TV, but like biff said there were only a few channels anyway.
No friggin' suburban-type leagues with uniforms and parental guidance I mean interference.
I keep thinking about what we drag around today vs then. Back then you'd leave home with a spaldeen or a basketball. Never carried ID even. Today you need the wallet, the cell phone, the IPOD, and maybe the PSP.
I was 165lbs and 6'2", surely I was underfed given all the calories we burned.
Posted by: denton at September 24, 2009 2:48 PM
I wasn't underfed. I ate a big breakfast. A big lunch. A big snack (comparable to a meal) after school. Then a big dinner and desert EVERY night. I think we just burned it off.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 2:51 PM
lol am i the only adult tho who is HAPPY all the kids are inside their houses on their computers? it really does making walking around outside more pleasant for adults. hahaha. i think i'd move immediately if one day i walked outside my apartment and saw all of the park slope children playing in the street. GACK!
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 2:54 PM
You know, I'm amazed when I think back and realize that I used to ride the subways with my brother and cousins just for the fun of it, when I was 11 years old or so. We knew of a way to sneak onto them for free at the station near my house. More amazing to me is that me parents KNEW that we were going on the subway, and were fine with it.
One time we took the subway to the Atlantic Ave station, and that was the first time I saw the LIRR trains. I was excited because I was a big train buff, and I wanted to view them up close. We got off, clowned around on the LIRR trains in the station, and then got back on the subway, only this time we had to pay. The token clerk realized what had happpened, and started to scold me and my group. She said "Do you know how hard your father works for this money?". She let us on back for free.
Later that night I told my father what had happened. He was not fazed in the least that we had taken the subways so far. He WAS thrilled that the token clerk had scolded me on the value of money.
Posted by: benson at September 24, 2009 2:59 PM
Rob,
So I take it that means you don't want to babysit for me once the kid is born?
(couldn't help myself)
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 3:00 PM
There is a valid counter argument from Northsloperenter that it isn't just parents fearing other parents and officials, but there is a real concern about letting young kids outside these days on their own. We talk about the old days how our parents would never lock their doors, would leave babies in their strollers outside restaurants and never ever worry that someone would try to take them away, etc. It's not just the fear of other parents judging me or, even worse, reporting me, it's also my own fear based on how far less safe it is for young kids on the streets.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 3:01 PM
THL, you can drop off TownhouseBaby with us anytime. The Champettes only fight with each other but are very good with babies.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 3:02 PM
Chinatown, while affordable, can be hard to navigate for the uninitiated--incredibly crowded with little English spoken. I imagine it's overwhelming for many non-Chinese--and has been for me at times.
Posted by: tinarina at September 24, 2009 12:53 PM
tinarina, there's a street market of veggies on Mulberry just south of Canal.
Lots of fresh fish places (and fruit-veggie stores) on Mott between Hester and Grand, starting a block north of Canal.
No problem for a non-Chinese and/or non-Chinese-speaker. Close to the B/D at Grand or the N/Q/6/J/M/Z at Canal and Centre St.
The Hong Kong Supermarket on Allen and East Broadway burned down but the former Dynasty supermarket on Hester and Elizabeth is now part of the Hong Kong chain. (Gee I wonder about that fire!) There's another huge supermarket, with better fruits and vegetables, just east of East Broadway under the Manhattan Bridge, not far from the East Broadway stop on the F train.
Posted by: rf at September 24, 2009 3:07 PM
Biff at this point we're wondering if we're ever going to see the kid. My MIL is already blocking out a bedroom for it in her apt. and has said we can visit whenever we want. She's shipping me food (Omaha Steaks- I need iron). She calls me every day to see how I'm doing.
We're already looking into the details of what's involved with regard to restraining orders.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 24, 2009 3:09 PM
Later that night I told my father what had happened. He was not fazed in the least that we had taken the subways so far. He WAS thrilled that the token clerk had scolded me on the value of money.
Posted by: benson at September 24, 2009 2:59 PM
And now we have to suffer through your scoldings day-in and day-out. :)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 24, 2009 3:10 PM
biff and nsr, valid point. What's worrisome is have things gotten that much worse than 25 years ago or has the definiton of safe changed. Granted I grew up in a rural area, but I had little concept that I would ever be un safe, ignorant-maybe.
Posted by: DeLepp at September 24, 2009 3:10 PM
biff, I don't think it's factually less safe. When I was a kid there were pedophiles all over the hood. If it is less safe it's because everyone keeps there kids in cuz they think it's less safe. Also with AC and TV, you don't see adults hanging out on the stoops in the evenings anymore a la Jane Jacobs, keeping things safe.
Posted by: denton at September 24, 2009 3:11 PM
No, things are NOT that much worse. Crimes by strangers against children are not more common, just more publicized (especially if said children are white, in which case they go on 24-hour rotation on cable).
My daughter takes the subway alone all the time; started doing so in sixth grade when she was 11.5.
Posted by: rf at September 24, 2009 3:14 PM
"If it is less safe it's because everyone keeps there kids in cuz they think it's less safe."
Denton, it might be a self-fulfilling prophesy to an extent for sure.
Posted by: Biff Champion at September 24, 2009 3:15 PM
it's funny cuz kids are exposed to WAY more criminals and perverts online on the computers in their bedrooms than they would be playing outside.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 3:32 PM
People generally overestimate the calories they are burning with exercise, and they may reward themselves by eating more. Additionally, many studies have found was that diet plus aerobic exercise provides only a very marginal benefit (in terms of weight loss) when compared to diet alone.
This is NOT to say that physical activity isn't important. It just points out that it isn't everything. Sedentary lifestyles aren't great, but they are almost certainly not the reason that obesity rates have skyrocketed in recent years.
That is more likely the direct result of portion sizes, processed foods, high fructose corn syrup, corporate junk food subsidies, engineered and processed everything, and the altogether human propensity to eat what is put in front of oneself - the doughier and higher calorie the "better".
Posted by: Nokilissa at September 24, 2009 3:53 PM
obesity could be the result of people having a lot less sex these days as well too. i know i was much thinner when i was getting it :(
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at September 24, 2009 3:57 PM
When I was young we lived in a shoe-box in the middle of the road, me parents beat us to death every night, and I had to wake up and go to school two hours before I went to bed.
Apologies to Monty Python.
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 3:59 PM
If anything in NYC - kids are now SAFER than we were 30 years ago - remember 30yrs ago was 1979!
"Warriors come out and plaaaayyy"
And as for the publicity of pedophilia/ crimes against children - it might have been a bit late in childhood for some but I vividly recall the Eton Patz case and eating my cereal b/4 school staring at some missing kid & my mother checking my Halloween candy for razors.....
If anything in my observation (compared to my childhood) the reason that we wanted to go out and play all day (and could) was because there were TONS of kids in our neighborhood, all of the same age - in many neighborhoods in NYC and the suburbs, you no longer have that - so it tends to diminish the packs of kids we remember. It will be interesting to see what happens in a few years when the toddlers in places like Lower Park Slope grow up. Because that is an area where it seems everyone (the gentrifiers) moved in around the same time and thus have kids around the same age
Posted by: fsrg at September 24, 2009 4:12 PM
so what's all this have to do with price of potatos?
Posted by: Petebklyn at September 24, 2009 4:14 PM
Pete - groceries are more expensive now due to pesky child labor laws which weren't in play when we were young'uns
Posted by: dittoburg at September 24, 2009 4:20 PM
oh, ok
Posted by: Petebklyn at September 24, 2009 4:30 PM
"People generally overestimate the calories they are burning with exercise, and they may reward themselves by eating more. Additionally, many studies have found was that diet plus aerobic exercise provides only a very marginal benefit (in terms of weight loss) when compared to diet alone."
It isn't about 'doing exercise' for an hour or so a day. It's about general levels of physical activity throughout the day. Walking everywhere vs. driving or taking cabs, doing the dishes by hand and chopping vegetables vs. a dishwasher and cuisinart, raking and shoveling vs. using a leafblower or hiring some illegals, stairs vs. elevator. These are little things, but over the course of a day, repeated day after day after day, they make a difference. Go a generation or so further back, and most people worked in agriculture, where they were on their feet from sunrise to sunset.
Humans evolved in an environment of calorie scarcity and constant migration, and our bodies' metabolism hasn't caught up to cheap food and ubiquitous labor-saving devices.
Posted by: Sparafucile at September 24, 2009 4:47 PM
Rob, most people are getting more not less since societal mores against sex outside of marriage are pretty much gone. Ask dibs :-)
Posted by: denton at September 24, 2009 6:55 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Ruthie's
added November 9, 2009 12:00 PM in Clinton Hill, Downtown Brooklyn
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.