So you’re saying that the only advantage these delivery boxes have over regular meal prep — taking away the mental load of recipe choice — is also the one thing they give away for free? I have never used one of these boxes in my life, but I might try a few of the recipes. I’m sure they have excellent chefs in their test kitchen.
Buying and measuring ingredients is not something I would call a chore, so that doesn’t qualify as an advantage of meal boxes.
I think most people do find washing / peeling / chopping tedious, and it is objectively a large part of the time and cleanup cost of everyday cooking. Not to mention that if you’re cooking for one or two people it’s hard to avoid waste (e.g. if you use half an onion).
So I don’t think meal kits are necessarily decadent – the problem is where they’re framed as an individual consumer luxury, and delivered by courier in expensive packaging. If I could pick up prepared ingredients within walking distance, I’d be all over that, and it could be more sustainable than the ways I currently feed myself.
That’s what’s vexing about Hello Fresh. I can’t think of anything more suited to being a bricks-and-mortar business, but apparently the only way you can start a business now is if it’s an app that serves the entire population of Earth from day one and aims for a market cap in the billions.
There was a time about 6/7 years ago when places where you could prep ingredients for a meal to heat at home were in business. There was one at the central metro train station in Chicago. The idea was you could assemble the stuff in a container to take home on the train I think it lasted a year. Of course you could also prep up a weeks worth of meals. No idea why the business failed and disappeared.
I’m not sure PETA, the people who think we should stop using any crops that require insect pollination because of the use of forced insect labor, are the best people to look to for guidance in this. Perhaps they are accidently correct here, but that doesn’t make them right. If they were to free the monkeys, I suspect they would just follow their usual M.O. of immediately releasing them unconcerned about the chances of survival the animals would have in whatever environment they happened to be in were.
I don’t understand why we can’t hold 2 ideas in our heads here… yes, we know PETA sucks. So does abuse of animals. It’s kind of fucked up that people are almost gleefully promoting the abuse of animals just to stick it to PETA… kind of makes me understand how people can vote against their own interests to stick it to the libs… because “our side” becomes more important than actual values and building a better world that isn’t built on abuse and suffering…
sometimes it seems as though the executive board at peta try to devise positions which will alienate the most people each time they meet. on the other hand, strongly favoring monkey slavery as a way to piss them off seems pretty damned offputting too.
Is there really any reason why a human being can’t be paid to do this work? Is there any case where taking a wild animal and making them do that work is preferable? Yes, that’s a kind of abuse. And I highly doubt that even if this is “overblown” by PETA, that there is NO abuse in this system.
As soon as they replace the monkeys with humans, somebody will complain that the work is too demanding and dangerous and that more rigorous safety regulations should be enforced. Problem is, if you enforce those regulations, the practice no longer becomes profitable. And if you replace the workers with robots, people will complain that robots are taking their jobs.