What if there were a way to increase donations to worthy causes, while at the same time help fight this country’s obesity problem?
I think there is a way, and it would be simple to test. Suppose fast food restaurants that offer “meal deals” (burger + drink + one side, say) offered a $1 donation to Oxfam (or any other charity) as one of the side dish options?
There are two obvious benefits. One, I believe that people donate to charities more if they can do so conveniently. I myself had never given money personally to a hungry family, but when a local grocery store asks me if I want to buy a box of food “for the children” I do so almost automatically. Convenience allows us to then feel good about ourselves.
Secondly, people who choose this “side dish” are clearly missing out on calories that most don’t need anyway. How often do people get french fries, even when they don’t want them, just because they “came with the meal”? And subsequently, how many people eat the fries, because they paid for them–-even if they are no longer hungry? I’ve done this myself, although it seems irrational in hindsight.
What if instead I order a $5 meal deal and the cashier asks, “What side?” and my response is, “give it to the hungry”, and the restaurant then has some automatic money transfer mechanism in place to make the donation in an instant? I don’t know which would do society more good: the money raised, or the calories not consumed. Why isn’t this a win/win? Or a win/win/win, since the restaurant doesn’t lose anything, and only gains the positive PR? It would even show evidence that the restaurant has heard the message of “Supersize Me” and taken it to heart.
I think this idea is a good one, and I hope someone reads this post and shares the idea. All it would take would be one restaurant to start doing this, and before long all of them would be doing it. I can’t see a single downside at all.
Admittedly, this may have been tried before. If so: I wonder why it hasn’t caught on? What are the economics of such institutionalized charity? I think there are other interesting questions at play here…does charity in fact increase when it is convenient to give? (I’d love to see the research data on this.) Would people forgo empty calories in such a scenario? What would be the economic benefit of millions of calories not being consumed? Might there even be an adverse effect for, say, the potato industry, if less fries are scarfed down?
Let me know what you think. And please share this if you think that someone, somewhere, will see it and have the possibility of implementing it.
[Note: this blog post was originally written on Dec. 15, 2010, and emailed to a celebrity who will remain nameless. Needless to say, there was never a response…not even an automated one.]
Many Worlds Theory 
This is a very good idea. If you don’t mind I will forward this post to some restaurants here and see what transpires.
A sort of ‘anti-Swift’ modest proposal indeed…..
I like the concept but am pondering the economics. Certianly this is a win for the consumer who feels good about herself and avoids extra calories.
However, for the restaurant it is more complicated. For arguments sake, let us assume that the extra cost to make it a ‘meal-deal’ is 1$ and the cost of the ‘side dish’ is $0.50. The restaurant is making a $0.50 profit on each sale. However, if they took the additional $1 revenue and donated it to charity they would only get a fraction of that $ back as a corporate deduction, not near the 50% they were making. Even you factored in some sllight revenue increase for good PR value it is easy to imagine that it would be better for the restaurant to actually sell the side dish.
The food supplier (assume a hypothetical potato farmer in the case of Freedom Fries) would definitely lose out on the deal as less consumable good throughput would certainly decrease wholesale product orders. Not to mention less requirements for transportation. Overall, those calories seem to equate to JOBS for the American work force…….Eat up y’all!!!
Of course, if the idea caught on, there may be tangible reduction in obesity in America which would have positive economic benefit in terms of productivity, less sick leave, less health care costs, and so on.
True, but when have corporations ever sacrificed profits in the short term for, at least at this point, only a hypothetical good that is many years down the road?
I do think that the *first* restaurant to do this would get a huge tangible PR benefit. And they could reduce the cost from their advertising budgets.