Apocalypse COW(s)

Preface: 

This passage is based on a very loose grasp of the topics/events/concepts of basic mathematics covered. A good, solid ramble.

Further, I reserve the right to keep my room stocked with Godiva, Hershey's, Apple Jacks, other super-healthy items. I understand that my uh, "preference" (euphemism for: obsession) for chocolate(errr crack) may appear to undermine my support of healthy eating, but let's role with it. 

Major issue with Mobama healthy eating campaign: LEAVE MY BAKE SALES ALONE.

Bake sales were the go-to fundraiser at my precious high school. Science club? BROWNIES. Drama Club? BROWNIES Italian Club? cann-BROWNIES.

I reserve the right to raise money for often purely social events under the guise of "being educational". And to make 7th period slightly more endurable the best way possible: a sugar high (not to be confused with other kinds of brownies and other kinds of highs, ahem).

Despite this, I have to admit that some regulation of cafeteria slop (sorry slop) is in order. For the kid with the choice of fried this, fried that, and salad, what do you expect? (And no, it shouldn't be salad. Fools.) Kids need better options to make better choices. Obviously suppliers/budget-tight school boards aren't the most incentivized to go this route, which is why they could use a little push. 

Sarah Palin, at least to my understanding, is vehemently opposed to Michelle Obama's campaign against eating unhealthy food. Another step towards big government, legislation infringing upon the citizen's right to be fat, doomsday. The mindset I am referring to adheres to the belief one of the four horsemen was an alleged Muslim whose wife suggested kids eat their damn brussels sprouts. Call me statist, but I can't help but think that the government may have incentive to protect its interest in this arena(which it is constitutionally permitted to do...probably?). In less PC terms, fat people are expensive. Fat, poor people are expensive. Junk food is cheaper, more convenient, all-around more attractive to the busy(or lazy, if I take the elitist tone) barely-making-breadwinner that is depicted by politicos and people who actually care (the charitable, activist sort). 

Ways to tackle a problem in my imaginary government handbook: economically or socially. (Militarily is also on the list but I don't feel it is relevant...at this time. There's an Onion article for that.) Sure, they can make soda more expensive and provide subsidies for apples. But who wants a fucking apple? So, the social approach: leverage popularity(read: influence) to change behavior. I like apples > I am cool > you should like apples. To be fair, Mobama's penchant for J Crew hasn't been the most adopted in inner-city circles. I think we may have a better shot with items that aren't marked up 400% of their original value, no? (The validity of that number is questionable, as is the assumption that this isn't the case with produce, but go with it.) Probably-more-accurate assessment: those cardigans are 5x the price of a cardigan at Conway. Beyond demand, there is also the issue of availability (or scarcity, in this case).  Shop rites tend to lose out to corner stores in the areas in question. 

But ah, the loss of flexibility. And the ability to actively choose salad over fried this/that. The decline of trust in the notion that the average American possesses and actively uses the ability to discern what is good for him/her/spawn of him/her. Should we not give them the chance?

Maybe they'll surprise us.