What does poverty in America really mean? Many people living in the United States are classified as impoverished, and yet, a large number of these people are also classified as obese. Many of them even have cable television, and yet, they still receive government funding for food. Something is missing here, in any other nation a person who is in extreme poverty has nothing to eat, no medical care, and is dying to disease and starvation, television doesn’t even come into the picture.
With that in mind, obesity in people who are in lower economic brackets is still mind boggling to me. When we cook our own food, we can see everything that goes into it, and are therefore more inclined to eat healthily, rather than put in tons of greasy, salty, utterly unhealthy materials. That said, fast food is, generally speaking, much cheaper than raw ingredients required to make something home cooked. What this ends up meaning, is that poor people can only afford to eat out, and that doesnt make any sense whatsoever. It needs to change, and, I’m not so radical that I would say “We need to eliminate all fast food restraunts, so that we can improve the health of our nation”. That would be a silly claim, because, as it stands there are millions of employees that can only feed their families because they work at these places, so, I feel there is only one option that remains. Kill all the people in poverty. Just kidding, an increase to the prices of fast food. By increasing the price of fast food to a point where it is more expensive than going to a grocery store, it loses all appeal to those who use it as a cheap means to feed their families. McDonalds and Burger King and Taco Bell shouldnt be something a family has for dinner every night. There are cheap alternatives that can be made within the home, with very few materials. Most of these are soup based, but filling just the same. To eliminate obesity in the poverty stricken parts of America, we need to change the accessibility of food, so that fast food is not the best course for people to take.
The next thing to consider, is medication within the lower income brackets. I’m not here to argue that there shouldn’t be medical treatment available for everyone, but there should be a larger focus on making sure that the right medications are obtained. According to the data from “Wired Magazine”, some of the medications distributed, may be causing increased rates of obesity, diabetes, and strokes. This is huge to consider, when we look at the maps of where these things occur. The highest obesity rates, which also lead to higher diabetes and stroke rates overlap the areas where poverty is most prevalent. Medication is expensive, as is going to a doctor to see what’s wrong, and many people can’t actually afford to go and get a full blown diagnosis, and make sure they’re getting on the right medication for it. If incorrect diagnosis and treatment is leading to over usage of some medications, and in turn leading to other major health concerns, there is a huge flaw in the system. There is a huge difference between going to the doctor and being prescribed something and going out on the street looking for something that can help you. The misuse of prescription medications is serious on multiple levels, as there can be related allergies and complications from using multiple medications at the same time, as well as the increase in obesity, diabetes, and stroke that occur from over usage and misusage of these medications. Now, I’m not saying that doctors should be forced to charge less, because, it’s not cheap to go through medical school, but what I am saying, is that there needs to be a better way for the people who don’t have the financial means to have a quality exam to find out what’s wrong, and how to fix it, without putting their lives in more danger than they were to start.
The final point I have to make, is that if someone is using food stamps, financial aid, government assistance to keep food on the table, there is no reason whatsoever that there should be a nice, 42 inch television with 400 channels wall mounted. If a person is able to afford such luxuries, there is no reason whatsoever that the government should be helping to pay for food being on the table. Such frivolous spending is why systems to support those in need are failing. I feel that this, is one of the most easily rectifiable issues, as the government should have every right, to go through a person’s financial records, and do a quick sweep of a home if they are going to provide assistance. I’m not suggesting that this be something that occurs month to month, but, it should occur at least once a year, so that it becomes much more difficult to rob the system. Just because someone didn’t make enough money to feed their children one year, does not mean they can’t feed them the next, and if there are expenses that are luxuries that are taking away from the necessities, there should be no funding.
There are many people in America that need all the assistance they can get, maybe disease hit them hard, maybe old age, or more likely bad luck hit them hard. The economy is by no means at its best right now, but there will always be room to help those that need it. The people that are just using the system as a form of easy living need to have it removed. People don’t like paying taxes, but they can handle it, because of the morality, and they love the freedom they have. The people exploiting the system are likely paying little to no taxes, and the whole system needs to be checked out very thoroughly and reworked so that people have a much harder time using and abusing it.