I recently read an article about a councilwoman and her ambition to close the many fast-food eateries along a corridor in the city. Her claim was that the fast food restaurants were in a low income are of town and that the people don't want them there but they have no other viable choices. Not only are there other areas of town with more fast food chains, but the bill doesn't even askfor any of them to close down, just not to open any new ones within the next two years. What exactly is it that they hope to accomplish with this, and what other viable choices do they hope to make, high price small restaurants that people can't afford anyway. Another thing is that, these people, along with many others around the country, aren't forced to eat at fast food places, it's something they choose to eat and could just as easily decide not to.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Consumerism can't be controlled. It's just the ways things are in the U.S. I agree, people chose to continue feeding money to the fast food chains. If they were so unwanted, then no one would eat there.
A kid in my sociology class is planning on holding what he calls "a very free market." How it works is: you bring a good or service (food, clothes, singing, bike repair, etc.) and contribute it to the mass pool of other goods and services. If you see something you like, you take it. There's no exchange - my brooch for your earrings, etc. It's a bring what you want, take what you want, no control, no government event. It's going to be very fun.
Wouldn't it be nice if people weren't obsessed with money, and consumers began making their own food?
You'd be amazed at how many people can't run a stove, oven, or even a microwave.
I don't need drugs - I have genetics.