Michael Dahl, Author at Intellectual Roundtable

How Do We Make Our Food System Healthy And Sustainable?

America’s food system is centered neither on health nor sustainability. It is not organized around providing people with healthy food grown in living soil or produced on well-managed pasture.

Much of what fills grocery store shelves today would be unrecognizable to our great-great-grandparents. Thousands of available products are less whole foods than engineered food-like substances, containing preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial flavorings, coloring agents, stabilizers, and even so-called “food glues” used to bind processed meats together. On average, food travels roughly 1,500 miles from farm to consumer.

At the same time, an enormous portion of our food is never eaten at all. The USDA and EPA estimate that 30–40% of America’s food supply is wasted, with approximately $161 billion worth of food ending up in landfills each year. This waste is especially tragic given that millions of people in the United States and around the world continue to experience hunger or chronic undernourishment.

Meanwhile, some estimates suggest that 55% of harvested U.S. cropland is devoted to growing animal feed crops such as corn, soy, and alfalfa, a very inefficient use of land to feed humans in need of healthy food.

Too often, the true costs of our food system are externalized onto the soil, water, air, farm workers, rural communities, public health systems, and future generations. Within a genuinely holistic system, those costs cannot simply be pushed out of sight or absorbed by others.

This raises difficult but necessary questions.

Should truly nourishing food be priced in ways that fully reflects its real costs, even if that makes it more expensive? If so, should subsidies be redirected away from large industrial producers and toward low-income households to ensure access to healthy food?

Or should cheap, highly subsidized food-like products continue to dominate grocery store shelves while their real costs remain hidden in our environmental, economic, and public health systems? What other options are there?

How can we change our current food system so that it is both more healthy, and also sustainable in the long term?

Should The Rich Be Taxed At A Higher Rate Than Others?

The question of whether the rich should be taxed at a higher rate than others is often discussed when people debate fairness and the role of government. Taxes paid by individuals, households, and businesses help fund public services such as schools, roads, healthcare, public transportation, local police, and national defense. Because everyone benefits from these services, governments must decide how the tax burden should be distributed.

Supporters of higher taxes on the rich often point to history as an example. During and after World War II, the United States had very high tax rates for the wealthiest Americans. In the 1950s, the top federal income tax rate was about 90 percent for the highest earners. However, this rate only applied to income above a certain, high level, not to all of a person’s income.

Supporters argue that people with higher incomes benefit greatly from systems that help businesses and the economy grow, such as reliable roads, educated workers, and a stable government. Because of this, they believe wealthy individuals should contribute a larger share to support these systems. They also say that higher taxes on the rich can help reduce the gap between rich and poor. Tax revenue can be used to support programs such as quality public education, expanded healthcare, and assistance for people with lower incomes.

Since the 1960s, tax rates for the highest earners have been reduced several times, with major reductions taking place in and since the 1980s. Some people believe these changes helped encourage business growth and investment. Others argue that lower tax rates have reduced government funding for public services and contributed to rising income inequality.

Critics of higher taxes on the rich argue that extremely high tax rates could discourage people from starting businesses, investing money, or working harder. Some believe everyone should pay taxes at the same rate because it treats all citizens equally. Others worry that very high taxes might cause wealthy individuals or businesses to move their money or investments to countries with lower tax rates.

The debate continues today. Where do you side? Should the rich be taxed at a higher rate than others?

What The Hell?

What the hell?

It feels like our country has shifted into the bizarro world. Whether it’s rules, social norms, or politics, what was once accepted is now rejected, and what was previously dismissed is now embraced. Ideas we believed a generation, a decade, or even a year ago now seem outdated or have been completely overturned. What the hell?

For example, overt lying is now common in politics, and most of the public accepts it. In fact, spreading lies is widespread. However, not long ago, when those lies were exposed, a politician’s approval ratings would drop—unless, of course, they soon showed genuine remorse.

Or, whatever happened to treating people with respect, kindness, and a little grace? We live in an era where friendships are ending because everything has become political, and disagreements turn into hatred. Family members don’t talk to each other or even disown one another over political differences. And some politicians label their opponents as evil or even compare them to subhuman creatures — for example, our president often calls opponents animals or vermin. When and why have we let so much harshness into our private and public lives?

Lastly, social media isn’t bringing us together, even though we can connect with people across the globe. Instead, our feeds are filled with rumors, lies, and bullying, which turn people away from forming new relationships—unless, of course, the people we meet share our beliefs.

We’re confused, angry, overwhelmed — and worst of all, numb. When everything feels upside down, it’s hard to know where to turn or whom to trust. So many have checked out, opting for apathy instead of action, because what good does caring do anymore? Every day brings a new contradiction, a new reason to shout, yet we stay silent. Or worse, we laugh it off. Cynicism has replaced hope. We’ve started accepting the absurd as normal because fighting it seems pointless. But shouldn’t we fight? Shouldn’t we care? Shouldn’t we be trying to find ways to rebuild community?

What’s going on? What the hell?

Should A Healthy Society Have Billionaires?

As of September 2024, there were 801 billionaires based in the United States with a combined wealth totaling $6.22 trillion. For comparison, in 2020, the U.S. had 614 billionaires with a combined wealth of $2.947 trillion. As a result, today’s billionaires control significantly more wealth than the bottom half of American families. And wealth disparities are only increasing.

Is this okay? Should a healthy society have such a thing as billionaires? Should wealth be capped — or, at least, should those making more than a billion dollars be taxed at much higher levels?

Defenders of a billionaires’ class assert that the wealthy — as innovators, risk-takers, and job creators — help drive a healthy American economy. While making money off their money, billionaires often retain only a fraction of the social benefits that accrue from their investments. Proponents of unchecked wealth say that any effort to impose income and wealth limits will dampen the desires of richest amongst us to contribute to the growth of our economy.

Another argument posits that billionaires donate significantly to charities — from homelessness programs to environmental causes to the arts — which benefit from individual gifts and foundations that support such causes.

However, not everyone agrees that unbridled income and wealth are good things. This camp believes that extreme wealth and income inequality are dangerous to democracy. For example, billionaires — like Elon Musk — have much greater access to political leaders and often contribute to candidates and causes that will help them become even more prosperous.

Another line of reasoning for limiting wealth maintains that billionaires invest heavily in financial interests that hurt the rest of society, from environmental damage to food insecurity to unfair market advantages.

Or, did you know that billionaires live, on average, a decade longer than the average person, and their older years also have nearly a decade more disability-free time than the rest of us? Of course, it must be noted that in general those who live in poverty and less prosperous communities live much shorter lives than those higher up the income scale. (This is known by some as “death by zip code.”) Supporters of greater income and wealth equality may ask if a “Billionaires’ Tax” could be used to help others enjoy the life- and comfort-span of the wealthy.

Of course, this post lists only a few reasons for each side of this debate. Do you have more to offer? Or how do you feel about the wealth and income divide? Should a healthy society have such things as billionaires?

Who Are You?

When a family member, friend, or colleague introduces me to someone, I often ask the person what many think is an awkward conversation starter. I ask, “Who are you?” I usually put an inflection on the word “are,” which apparently makes things even more strange. If it’s at a social gathering and they’ve come with their spouse, they may answer, “I am so-and-so’s partner.” Others assume I am asking about what they do for a living: “Oh, I’m so-and-so, and I work at such-and-such a place.”

Because they thought the question was odd, they usually ask, “Is that what you mean?” I reply that I had no preset notion about the appropriate answer. I just wanted to know how they identify themselves and what that means about their life.

I usually continue, “It could be, as you shared, how you are connected to the people here today. It could be about your job. It could be that you are a parent. Heck, it could be a unique hobby that you have. The person I am now with may perceive the question as really practical or, perhaps, existential. It could serve as, ‘What makes you tick?'”

Sometimes, their eyes light up with this clarification. One person recently told me, “As a hobby, I’m a woodworker. Mainly, I make cabinets.” This answer began a conversation I had never thought I’d be having. I know nothing about cabinet-making, so I had tons of questions.

So, now it’s your turn. Does your occupation mainly define your identity? Does family (including pets) come first? Do you aspire to be something you’re just now practicing–like, “I’m training for a marathon?” Do you have a proper work-life balance, so any take on the question is fair game? Or will the conversation become a chat about how you’re trying to work fewer hours so you can do something else that you feel needs your attention?

So, dear reader, who are you?

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30	31

Spread the word about Intellectual Roundtable:

Spread the word about Intellectual Roundtable:

Spread the word about Intellectual Roundtable:

Spread the word about Intellectual Roundtable:

Spread the word about Intellectual Roundtable: