A Quote by Michael Pollan

The correlation between poverty and obesity can be traced to agricultural policies and subsidies. — © Michael Pollan
The correlation between poverty and obesity can be traced to agricultural policies and subsidies.
There are a lot of stats and a strong correlation between dropout rates and crime as well as poverty.
Let's get rid of all our subsidies together. Let's join hands as wealthy industrialised nations and say to the world, we're going to get rid of all our agricultural subsidies together.
There is an excellent correlation between giving society what it wants and making money, and almost no correlation between the desire to make money and how much money one makes.
There is direct correlation between a society lacking in artistic vision to lack of social conscience, i.e., crime, poverty, and senseless, violent atrocities, materialism.
There is a correlation between economic inequality and personal violence. The explanation for the correlation isn't completely clear; there are a number of possibilities.
The ultimate objective of subsidies should be to empower the poor, to break the cycle of poverty, and become foot-soldiers in our war on poverty.
Our policies for increasing agricultural production and productivity have been scale neutral; that is, our policies are equally effective irrespective of the size of the holdings.
Obese kids watch no more television than kids who aren't obese. All the thin kids watch massive amounts of television, too. There is no statistical correlation between obesity and media use, period.
While our energy efficiency is improving, there is a very high correlation, almost near perfect correlation, between GDP growth, and energy usage.
The number of kids affected by obesity has tripled since 1980, and this can be traced in large part to lack of exercise and a healthy diet.
Correlation across replicated environments adds a whole new dimension of complexity of the environment, ... You would expect most application groups to have the same set of policies. In reality, you have differences in policies. That reflects back to that whole process of manual storing in the environment.
Often, there is no correlation between the success of a company's operations and the success of its stock over a few months or even a few years. In the long term, there is a 100 percent correlation between the success of the company and the success of its stock. This disparity is the key to making money; it pays to be patient, and to own successful companies.
Unemployment in the sense of distress is widely disappearing. . . . We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land. The poor-house is vanishing from among us. We have not yet reached the goal, but given a change to go forward with the policies of the last eight years, and we shall soon with he help of God be in sight of the day when poverty will be banished from this nation. There is no guarantee against poverty equal to a job for every man. That is the primary purpose of the economic policies we advocate
Giving subsidies is a two-edged sword. Once you give it, it's very hard to take away subsidies. There's a political cost to taking away subsidies.
Rich country protectionism - barriers, subsidies and support - mean that the world supply of agricultural goods is artificially increased and world prices depressed.
Private charity discourages poverty while public subsidies encourage it.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!