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?

  • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Point out the wild bovine to me bruh, they don’t exist, they’re one of the many species dépendant upon humans for their survival.

      • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 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.

        • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 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.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 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”

            • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 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.