Bananas are ridiculously cheap even up here in Canada, and they aren’t grown anywhere near here. Yet a banana can grow, be harvested, be shipped, be stocked, and then be purchased by me for less than it’d cost to mail a letter across town. (Well, if I could buy a single banana maybe…or maybe that’s not the best comparison, but I think you get my point)

Along the banana’s journey, the farmer, the harvester, the shipper, the grocer, the clerk, and the cashier all (presumably) get paid. Yet a single banana is mere cents. If you didn’t know any better, you might think a single banana should cost $10!

I’m presuming that this is because of some sort of exploitation somewhere down the line, or possibly loss-leading on the grocery store’s side of things.

I’m wondering what other products like bananas are a lot cheaper than they “should” be (e.g., based on how far they have to travel, or how difficult they are to produce, or how much money we’re saving “unethically”).

I’ve heard that this applies to coffee and chocolate to varying extents, but I’m not certain.

Anyone know any others?

    • @JubilantJaguar
      link
      410 months ago

      Very frustrating to argue with people who claim to have no concern for living creatures when in fact they probably love their dog or cat and would find it just as hard as anyone else to watch a video of what goes on in factory farms. Food choices are such a fundamental part of human culture that most people just cannot stand having them questioned, it’s as if you are questioning their religion. Alas.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        310 months ago

        Ok you should Google wild bovine. Aurochs are extinct, cows aren’t really a distinct species, and bovine specifically covers everything from wilderbeasts to yaks which all exist in the wild. So it’s worth ridiculing people so ignorant of the world and so unwilling to even do a Google search.

        Hell there are wild escaped domestic cows a day’s drive from me lmao.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          this is better, but it amounts to handwaving and anecdotes. surely you can address the logic of what they said and cite a source instead of saying “look it up”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            310 months ago

            no, there is no point in investing effort in a discussion when the other party wont. The commenter does not actually care whether there are or aren’t, if they cared they would look it up.

            They want to waste my time arguing against a position they have no investment in. There is literally a Wikipedia page on wild bovines, that’s how low effort this is.