The Houston Chronicle opposes Schlosser’s viewpoint saying that “What the author does in these pages is look at the biggest picture imaginable. He tabulates the actual cost to life and culture (food borne disease, near global obesity, animal abuse, political corruption, (work side danger) of all-American industry founded the premise of cheap.” In my opinion the Houston Chronicle concludes their case against Schlosser by saying in their final message that “If we should decide as a nation to use Schlosser’s math, even the richest people on Earth can’t afford that $1.99 combo meal.” This quote from the book shows the opposing viewpoint about the book. Thus, the Houston Chronicle is over exaggerating when they give their opinion about their analysis of the book because the Chronicle states that the phrase at the beginning of the quote about how the artist looks at “the biggest picture imaginable.” this phrase indicates that Schlosser’s research is not accurate and or precise enough.
Another opposing view is from the authors words for example he says, “I’ve been called a communist and a socialist, a “dunce,” a “health fascist,” and “economic ignoramus,” a “banjo-strumming performer at Farm Aid,”a
“hectoring nanny of the nanny state” and a much stronger epithets.
Another opposing view is from the authors words for example he says, “I’ve been called a communist and a socialist, a “dunce,” a “health fascist,” and “economic ignoramus,” a “banjo-strumming performer at Farm Aid,”a
“hectoring nanny of the nanny state” and a much stronger epithets.