Toward the end of her essay, McMillan implies that “the lines of an absolute…are typically drawn, somewhat laboriously, around the elephant in the room : the economic class" (217 ). I expect more information after being involved like that, but she immediately jumps into her proposed solutions instead of exploring the problem behind the lesson. It touches lightly on the different food spending of the rich and the poor, but I'm still curious. It also seems to go right back to the “two parts” (217) after changing my way of thinking. His brief mention of class issues is distracting, especially because it is short-lived and placed right in the middle of what could have been a continuous stream of thought. Furthermore, the title suggests that his essay is about class warfare, but fails to adequately illustrate this aspect of the food debate. Maybe her slight hints in the essay should be enough, but I'm not sure about her