Vegetables are like porn because ... "We know ‘em when we see ’em"

At the risk of sounding like a maniacal libertarian that I am not (only a maniac, thank you very much!) the recent tomato/vegetable controversy is a reminder that when government takes it upon itself to define something for all of us, then somebody who stands to gain from it will work to maximize their own self-interest.

First this update:

the House voted 298-121 that a slice of pizza spread with two tablespoons of tomato paste should be counted as a vegetable, at least when it’s fed to schoolchildren. Obama signed the bill into law on Friday.

One might question the wisdom of our reps at Congress worrying about tomato paste when they can't seem to figure out anything about the budget.

But, why this tomato paste bill you ask?

“It was Schwan and ConAgra that were lobbying the issue,” says Margo Wootan, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “If two tablespoons of tomato paste counts as a vegetable, pizza is a reimbursable meal. Because the crust counts as a grain, the sauce is the vegetable, and the cheese and pepperoni have protein. But two tablespoons of tomato paste isn’t a vegetable.”

You can't blame the food industry--they do what they have to do.  It is a logical consequence to government having taken up the responsibility to define a food pyramid and what our school kids can eat.

BTW, what is a vegetable anyway?

Suddenly all vegetables, not just the zucchini, are pornographic: We know ‘em when we see ’em. I asked a spokesperson for the Food and Nutrition Service, the USDA body that oversees the school-lunch program, how they defined a vegetable. “When it comes to defining foods, we hew to the FDA’s standards.” But Janet McDonald, an FDA spokeswoman, told me that such fundamentals were out of FDA purview: “We don’t have a definition of vegetables. Probably it’s under the USDA.”

Hahaha!

Inflation is here. Beware.

If we decide to have pizza, we always go to Bene, and have their Mediterranean, which used to cost $18.50. Last week it was $19.75. A significant jump in the price. The croissants at our neighborhood grocery store, Market of Choice, look a tad smaller than before. I think they are trying to maintain the price the same, but are actually delivering a little less to account for inflation.

Well, Daniel Gross explains:

[producers] have been able to pass on only about 60 percent of their higher
costs to consumers. The result has been sharply lower profits. .... many
companies have reached their limit in absorbing higher costs. That is why we've
had large bankruptcies in the restaurant industry (Bennigan's), and in
retailing (Linens 'n Things). Today, every company is faced with a choice of absorbing the higher costs passed on to them by suppliers or passing them on to consumers. Many companies are choosing the latter course. Airlines are furiously tacking on
charges for luggage, food, drink, blankets, and pillows. Hershey's, complaining
of costs for sugar and other commodities that have risen between 20 percent and
45 percent so far this year, in August announced a 10 percent price increase. Frank Bruni reports in Wednesday's New York Times that restaurateurs are
substituting cheaper goods (shiitake mushrooms instead of morels, lump crabmeat
instead of jumbo lump crabmeat) and keeping the prices steady. When you pay the
same for smaller portions or for goods of lower quality, that's inflation.