Food Wastage
Section 1
In the United States of America, hunger is still a significant problem despite the colossal food waste. The effects that food waste has on the individual, as well as on the environment, are substantial and adverse. Research has shown that around 40% of food is unconsumed in the United States (Faruque, 2015). Evidence indicates that America disposes of approximately $165 billion of food annually (Gunders, 2015). The wasted food ends up in sites, which produce carbon dioxide and methane emissions from greenhouse gases. These facts could be a viable strategy to make food waste illegal in the United States.
Congress has established various laws prohibiting pollution and environmental waste. Food, especially when stacked in landfills, is a significant cause of environmental pollution. Gunders (2015) suggests that the organic matter of food waste accounts for 16% of methane emissions. This thus illustrates that disposed of food is a significant source of global gas emissions. The pilling of waste food also pollutes the environment and causes the odor and scenery in no small degree. In conservation and sustainability efforts, the law prohibiting food waste has an important role. It will also allow America to comply correctly with global warming local and international statutes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Consequently, in the United States, hunger remains a significant problem. Food safety in the country continues to be a substantial challenge. "As the author pointed out in the USA, food insecurity has been a major problem among one in six or 50.2 million individuals in insecure houses" (Faruque & Islam, 2015). The famine hit the recession especially hard and lasted all the years. A large number of Americans live in poverty, which contributes to widespread hunger. Hunger in children is a significant cause of infants' mortality and morbidity. Therefore, the allocation of wealth needs fair treatment for social justice. Only the wealthy and middle-class groups are involved in food waste. Food waste outlaws will also allow the most vulnerable members of society to redistribute food, thus improving health and well-being.
Food waste takes place in the processing and use of food at various levels. Gunders (2015) established that food waste starts in agriculture and continues to be harvested, processed, distributed, distributed, and used in households. Banning food waste would make the country more competitive and more prosperous. More significantly, resource and consumption usage would be affected by a culture of duty and obligations. The world's people are also rising. Hickey & Ozbay (2014) stresses that about 10 billion people worldwide will be affected. In the population upsurge, the US will not be left behind. Congress must protect future interests by concentrating more on saving than waste. Food industry stakeholders could save large food amounts if the legislation came into effect since it will take responsibility for all stakeholders.
Section 2
Food eating, however, must remain an individual's right. For that matter, the government or Congress cannot make a rule to decide how people can eat. America is a representative democracy, and that change runs counter to the basic ideas that make America a great country. Without government intervention, people have the flexibility to eat their preferred food as they want to. First of all, food is an integral part of an individual's life. It is immoral and illegal to regulate how people eat instead of personal freedom (Faruque, 2015). It is often argued in this respect that the government is responsible for ensuring proper waste management. The ban on waste food will not address the greenhouse gas emission or degradation issue. Politicians should therefore be keen not only to restrict the public's right to eat and dispose of surpluses but also to solve simple questions. The fifth and fourteenth amendments, most specifically, safeguard people's rights to protect people's land. The law enforces the use of people in a manner acceptable to them. Besides, the government has an integral role in safeguarding any adversity or collateral harm arising from the service.
The reality is that people are entitled to eat in a manner appropriate for them. That doesn't say, however, that people will use stuff irresponsibly. Previous studies showed that food waste is harmful to the environment, the atmosphere, and sustainability steps. Responsibility must be connected with any statute. For example, the US constitution requires citizens to possess and bear arms (Faruque, 2015). This does not, however, mean that a weapon against a human or wildlife is okay. The same is valid for food. Unlawful wasting of food means that people are not being denied the chance to consume as they want. Instead, the policy is intended to ensure responsible use and avoid the depletion of food that other vulnerable communities would otherwise benefit from such foods. The study of cost-benefit also favors legislation that hampers food waste. All the critical things that stakeholders must aim for are to protect our biodiversity, climate change, and environmental sanitation (Faruque, 2015). Individuals will find it unethical to use food irresponsibly in their homes without considering the repercussions they have in the three critical areas. The case against freedom and private usage does not underestimate the need for personal liability.
Section 3
Utilitarianism is one of the most well-known ethical guidelines in various cultures. It focuses mainly on making choices that ensure that most people are satisfied. The purpose justifies the means based on utilitarianism (Mandal et al., 2016). A behavior is moral, as long as the most significant people are satisfied. Thus, utilitarianism is a consecutive paradigm that attempts to determine the effect of a case, not the action itself (Mandal et al., 2016). The topic will have many views on a practical moralist. Banning food waste as the action may be incorrect because it tests the way people use food. However, this will ensure that many people are satisfied with the related benefits, such as cleanliness, sustainability, and the opportunity to feed hungry persons. While this law is punitive, more people are bound to gain in the long term. However, it does not necessarily indicate the opponent will agree with my thoughts.
One might argue that regulating how people eat their food is an indictment of their satisfaction based on the same practical policy. Opponents would say utilitarianism regards the outcomes of a case. In this scenario, a managed food intake and potential imprisonment will result. These people also do not have to agree with my views. However, the prohibition of food waste remains a controversial and contentious topic that has adverse effects on the person. The cost-benefit study has shown that more people, including millions of hungry Americans and their children, are likely to benefit from banning food waste. The benefit will then transfer happiness to the poor majority from the wealthy minority.
References
Faruque, C. J., & Islam, M. R. (2015). Hunger Reduction in the United States of America: Analysis of Factors Contributing to Hunger. Journal of International Social Issues (May 2015) , 3 (1), 13-23.
Gunders, D. (2015). Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill. 2012. Natural Resources Defense Council: New York .
Hickey, M. E., & Ozbay, G. (2014). Food waste in the United States: A contributing factor toward environmental instability. Frontiers in Environmental Science , 2 , 51.
Mandal, J., Ponnambath, D. K., & Parija, S. C. (2016). Utilitarian and deontological ethics in medicine. Tropical Parasitology , 6 (1), 5.
