Suggestions on the US Obesity Issue
The obesity problem in the United States is not a joke, but a national disease. It is not because a minister criticized soldiers' physiques, but because the whole country is chronically self‑destructing. Wealth should not mean bulkiness; obesity has never been a sign of happiness. It is a symbol of imbalance, the result of uncontrolled desire. Rich people’s obesity may be retribution; poor people’s obesity is a societal crime.
Subsidies were originally well‑meaning, but when they lose direction they become poison. The government spends money to rescue those enslaved by food, only to create greater dependence and deeper pathology. Welfare should improve lives, yet it becomes a system that sustains disease. Subsidies cause obesity, and obesity in turn generates higher medical costs. One cycle completes, and the government’s goodwill turns into disaster.
American obesity is not due to too much food, but food that is too bad. High sugar, high salt, high fat, additives, artificial flavorings, chemical colorings—these fill the stomachs of the poor while emptying their lives. The government subsidizes these junk foods through food vouchers; the intention is relief, but the reality is funding self‑decay. The poorer eat more and live shorter lives. The more the state spends, the sicker the bodies become.
From an evolutionary perspective, poverty should not be a disaster. Poverty brings hunger, hunger triggers autophagy, autophagy clears dead cells and restarts bodily cycles. Thinness is the blessing of poverty, the last natural defense for the weak. Moderation, lightness, hunger—that is the wisdom humanity has learned over millennia. Modern society has broken this balance. We treat hunger as shame, fullness as freedom, and replace natural laws with industrial food. Humanity falls in abundance, rots in satiety.
Logically, poverty means thinness and fewer diseases; wealth means fatness and more diseases. That is the natural law. But the world has reversed. The rich now practice restraint, eating organic and healthy foods; the poor binge, drink sugary drinks, and chew junk. Restraint has become a privilege, indulgence an equalizer. Such a social structure can only produce pathological outcomes—obesity is no longer an individual problem but a national one, an inevitable product of a system that defies nature.
The government should reflect: why do subsidies exist? They should help people live better, not faster destruction. Food vouchers should not be used to purchase ultra‑processed foods; unhealthy foods should bear higher tax rates; the more additives a food contains, the more consumption tax it should pay. That is a “chemical tax,” also a civilizational self‑rescue tax. If manufacturers want quick profits, they must pay the true cost of bodily pollution. Tax revenue should flow back to healthy foods, making organic produce no longer a luxury for a few.
Subsidies should also have standards. The government could adjust distribution ratios based on body‑fat percentage: 1‑5% over the limit receives 95% of the subsidy, 6‑10% over receives 90%, and so on. This would re‑link subsidies to self‑discipline rather than rewarding laziness. Such a policy would be fair and rational.
True benevolence has never been indulgence. Continuously subsidizing a decadent lifestyle only turns goodwill into an excuse for laziness. If the government truly cares about its people, it must have the courage to promote restraint and punish excess. Goodwill without limits will rot. Only when subsidies are re‑bound to responsibility can the United States rise again from the shadow of obesity.