> In the not distant past most Americans spent 30+% of their income on food, which I doubt is a world many of us want to return to.

I mean - I think I understand the motivation behind that but

I am pretty convinced that the value of "low-carb" / "no-carb" diets has less to do with the impact of carbs (after all, wheat literally was the symbol of European civilization for a really long time) and more to do with how they're used as cheap caloric filler (looking at you, Panda Express). Pretty much a "get what you pay for" kind of situation, in my eyes - so maybe spending that much on food isn't as bad as was thought.

also, on the gripping hand, looks at cost of housing - so maybe if it's not one thing it's another.