>>11036935You genuinely have no clue what you're talking about. Firstly, sugar isn't just something you mine out of the ground like salt or whatever dumb idea you have about how sugar is made, it's a multi-step process to grow the crops, process them, process the sugar, move it without damaging it, then put it into everything in America. Secondly, you're a fucking moron if you think there's no money in sugar. Even if the government didn't subsidize it (initially done because of worries about famine and shortages; tl;dr how do we makes sure Americans are getting enough calories? Incentivize putting sugar in EVERYTHING), the fact that it's put in absolutely everything in America means it's incredibly profitable.
And finally, you're simply wrong on why this entire ordeal came about. The entire reason for the creation of a sugar oligopoly was to stop famine and ensure Americans wouldn't starve. However, after that clearly was no longer a problem, there was no reason for this state created oligopoly to remain. As long as no one said anything, no one would remove it from power (Congress is incredibly lazy). If, however, word got out that sugar was causing health problems (it actually doesn't, what causes health problems is obesity as it turns out, but sugar in everything contributes to American obesity, which is the entire crux of basically any "is X bad for you?" debate as the answer is no, being obese because you eat too much X is however), then it could create a moral panic and cause Congress to actually do something. To that end, a huge disinformation campaign was funded, and still is funded mind you, in order to keep the subsidies going.
