The Big Picture: Arch-Villains
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am all for personal responsibility, but McDonald's should put forth a little extra effort and use better ingredients. I make an annual pilgrimage to McDonald's to remind myself why I only go there once a year. In terms of price, McDonald's is relatively expensive where I live; a single Big Mac meal costs as much as two boxed lunches, which are considerably more nutritious.
Come on now, Bob.
If you're going to have a burger as your potential last meal, at least make it a good one
Sure McD's is the popular name brand that everyone knows, but a Big Mac? Really? They've gotta have a decent burger joint in your area. A Red Robin or Whataburger near you? No Chili's or Fridays? They don't at least have a Carl's Jr. or Jack in the Box near you?
Ok, burger choice aside. Bob is spot on here. There comes a time when personal accountability must play into it. Yes, fast food is generally unhealthy, but taken in moderation (and combined with a "normal" amount of physical activity) will have little to no ill effects. Cigarettes, on the other hand, will likely kill you even in moderation, and no matter how many miles you run or situps you do.
Thumbs up, Bob. Spot on. (even if it didn't generate a staggering comment count)
If you're going to have a burger as your potential last meal, at least make it a good one
Sure McD's is the popular name brand that everyone knows, but a Big Mac? Really? They've gotta have a decent burger joint in your area. A Red Robin or Whataburger near you? No Chili's or Fridays? They don't at least have a Carl's Jr. or Jack in the Box near you?Ok, burger choice aside. Bob is spot on here. There comes a time when personal accountability must play into it. Yes, fast food is generally unhealthy, but taken in moderation (and combined with a "normal" amount of physical activity) will have little to no ill effects. Cigarettes, on the other hand, will likely kill you even in moderation, and no matter how many miles you run or situps you do.
Thumbs up, Bob. Spot on. (even if it didn't generate a staggering comment count)
OK, I really disagree.
One, bringing up the evolution argument in this matter is incredibly stupid. You know in what ways humans have evolved since the dawn of civilization? Some people are being born without canines. That's it. Evolution takes millions of years to take hold on complex organisms like ourselves, and if allowing people to die made humans stronger against that we would all have an inherent fear of electrical sockets already. I can see how making laws that force idiots to protect themselves can be silly from a completely utilitarian point of view, but trying to wipe out the 'driving motorcycles without helmets' gene from the species is not something that actually happens.
Two, Ronald McDonald is a relic of the past already. Things have changed. McDonald's came into being when selling kids a cheap toy and forcing their parents to buy a burger and fries with it was normal and the American Way of Doing Business?. That's not the case anymore. Just like 50's folks saw no harm in using Fred Flintstone to promote cigarrettes, we don't see any harm in this kind of marketing, but our children will.
Three, I agree with what Americans think of as a 'conservative' notion that the government should interfere as little as possible with people's lives, only doing so in extreme cases (I do think, on the other hand, it should be much more forceful with business). But the issue with the idea of policing the interactins between parents and their children is - how does that work? That's something that requires incredibly robust social services, and if your social services can't even find all cases of domestic violence, how do you expect it to find all cases of something so much more subtle? The way you want it to work just doesn't work.
Four, they already blame games for the lack of exercising. And frankly, I do too, partly.
Five, when the economy is at a downturn, the best way to get it rolling again is to make a lot of money changing hands to warm it up. Johnny Depp didn't harm the economy - he actively helped save it. So where do you want me to put this statue of him? I hear there's an open spot in Detroit they're not using for a Robocop statue after all.
One, bringing up the evolution argument in this matter is incredibly stupid. You know in what ways humans have evolved since the dawn of civilization? Some people are being born without canines. That's it. Evolution takes millions of years to take hold on complex organisms like ourselves, and if allowing people to die made humans stronger against that we would all have an inherent fear of electrical sockets already. I can see how making laws that force idiots to protect themselves can be silly from a completely utilitarian point of view, but trying to wipe out the 'driving motorcycles without helmets' gene from the species is not something that actually happens.
Two, Ronald McDonald is a relic of the past already. Things have changed. McDonald's came into being when selling kids a cheap toy and forcing their parents to buy a burger and fries with it was normal and the American Way of Doing Business?. That's not the case anymore. Just like 50's folks saw no harm in using Fred Flintstone to promote cigarrettes, we don't see any harm in this kind of marketing, but our children will.
Three, I agree with what Americans think of as a 'conservative' notion that the government should interfere as little as possible with people's lives, only doing so in extreme cases (I do think, on the other hand, it should be much more forceful with business). But the issue with the idea of policing the interactins between parents and their children is - how does that work? That's something that requires incredibly robust social services, and if your social services can't even find all cases of domestic violence, how do you expect it to find all cases of something so much more subtle? The way you want it to work just doesn't work.
Four, they already blame games for the lack of exercising. And frankly, I do too, partly.
Five, when the economy is at a downturn, the best way to get it rolling again is to make a lot of money changing hands to warm it up. Johnny Depp didn't harm the economy - he actively helped save it. So where do you want me to put this statue of him? I hear there's an open spot in Detroit they're not using for a Robocop statue after all.
I see Ronald a lot. But McDonald's change ad campaigns real fast so it's like they cant decide if they want to still use him or not.Orekoya said:
Wait, what the fuck did I just see? *Pauses* *Rewinds*
Is that...is that a picture of Batman fighting a shark with a lightsaber? That just might be the most awesome thing I have ever seen in my life. Does anyone have a link to that so I can set it as my wallpaper on every electronic device I own?
As for the subject itself, I agree with what that first guy in the Facebook comments said. I think a good chunk of the reason America is so fat is because we're more car dependent then most other countries. Did anyone else see that bicyclist topic from a few weeks back? Obviously I can't claim this as pure fact, but a lot of the Europeans in the topic were very pro-bicyclist while Americans were mainly the ones against them. (It was about bicyclists on main traffic roads, just to clear up any confusion) It seems a lot more Europeans use their bikes as their main method of transportation then Americans do. You generally aren't going to see Americans bicycling to and from work unless it's a small town. Again, this is all just based on personal observation, so take it for what it is.
...Come to think of it, that's not really what Bob was talking about at all. Oh well.
Is that...is that a picture of Batman fighting a shark with a lightsaber? That just might be the most awesome thing I have ever seen in my life. Does anyone have a link to that so I can set it as my wallpaper on every electronic device I own?
As for the subject itself, I agree with what that first guy in the Facebook comments said. I think a good chunk of the reason America is so fat is because we're more car dependent then most other countries. Did anyone else see that bicyclist topic from a few weeks back? Obviously I can't claim this as pure fact, but a lot of the Europeans in the topic were very pro-bicyclist while Americans were mainly the ones against them. (It was about bicyclists on main traffic roads, just to clear up any confusion) It seems a lot more Europeans use their bikes as their main method of transportation then Americans do. You generally aren't going to see Americans bicycling to and from work unless it's a small town. Again, this is all just based on personal observation, so take it for what it is.
...Come to think of it, that's not really what Bob was talking about at all. Oh well.
Ron English [http://www.popaganda.com/Paintings/2008_blab.html] took on both the subject of cigarettes being marketed to children (his Joe Camel anti-vertisement campaign may have played an important role in Joe Camel's retirement) and the use of Ronald MacDonald and his ilk to sell unhealthy fast foods to all of the impressionable tykes around the globe.
I'm left to wonder what he would make of the link between video games and a lack of exercise/sunlight if he'd make anything of it at all.
I'm left to wonder what he would make of the link between video games and a lack of exercise/sunlight if he'd make anything of it at all.
You missed the posts above explaining how fast food is NOT CHEMICALLY ADDICTIVE. Same way weed is in no way addictive, but people CAN form a dependancy on it, gambling, video games... etcdante brevity said:
The morbidly obese are addicted to food period, but there's nothing chemical about it that makes the brain addicted like crack, tobacco, or alcohol.
There's a difference between chemical and emotional/mental created addiction.
I had two cousins who used to love McDonalds, to the point where they wanted to eat every meal there. If they didn't get Mickey D's, they whined. And Whined. And WHINED. As a result, and to shut them up, their parents took them to eat there once a day. At their next checkup, they weren't obese, but their cholesterol counts were 297 and over 300.
Fast food has more bad effects than just making you fat. Me, I try to eat it once in a while, but it's not fast food that makes me fat. Eating too much and a sedentary lifestyle makes me fat.
Fast food has more bad effects than just making you fat. Me, I try to eat it once in a while, but it's not fast food that makes me fat. Eating too much and a sedentary lifestyle makes me fat.
This.Cocamaster said:
This.Cocamaster said:
This.Earaldor Xerron said:
Not this. A lot of parents went through a lot of those same processes (their brand of certification - if any - will of course differ) just so they could put a roof over their kid's head and put food on the table for him. And those who don't are probably putting in 60+-hour workweeks just to survive. And their investment in their child extends far beyond 172 half-days.Dastardly said:
I can't think of a time when I left my boys in the care of anybody for more than ten minutes that was not themselves a parent. One thing I have consistently seen the parents understand - and the non-parents fail to understand - is that the child informs the parent as much as the inverse when it comes to raising children. "Do you have kids" may seem an insulting question to people with clinical or academic training in their field but parenting is neither clinical nor academic; it's experiential, and that's no one's fault.
Moreover, I trust my pediatrician to address my questions regarding my child's health when I first commission her expertise in that field. She doesn't exceed her mandate and she doesn't presume to inform on, for example, how I should discipline my child or how to help him get along with others at school. Maybe that perspective on how and why I trust the expertise of a stranger in a limited scope can help inform the potential difference in a reaction to someone serving the parent's need versus pitting yourself against them as an advocate for the child.
I despise the "natural selection" argument, not just because it's somewhat offensive, but because it's extremely stupid. There have been many brilliant people in history with self-destructive tendencies. You did sort of acknowledge this, but the rest of your tirade overshadowed it. You seem to suggest that just because someone keeps themselves healthy/safe, it automatically means they are smarter than your average self-destructive individual. Here, I'll give you five seconds to think of a successful idiot... yeah, exactly. "Evolution" (there aren't any inverted commas sarcastic enough) doesn't seem to be doing such a good job after all.
An obsession with your health does not demonstrate intelligence or lack thereof. You should know, you're fat. There is a significant difference between choosing to do something despite it being detrimental to your health, and choosing to ignore the fact that what you are doing is harmful, despite overwhelming evidence. Most people who smoke these days are aware of the consequences, and although it may be true to an extent, I can't help but feel that "they're idiots and they deserve to die as a result of their own stupidity and humanity will be better off without these idiots carrying the idiot gene" is needlessly inflammatory, and more than a little ridiculous. Having said that, it is definitely not the government's place to be putting these relatively non-issues ahead of real political concerns.
An obsession with your health does not demonstrate intelligence or lack thereof. You should know, you're fat. There is a significant difference between choosing to do something despite it being detrimental to your health, and choosing to ignore the fact that what you are doing is harmful, despite overwhelming evidence. Most people who smoke these days are aware of the consequences, and although it may be true to an extent, I can't help but feel that "they're idiots and they deserve to die as a result of their own stupidity and humanity will be better off without these idiots carrying the idiot gene" is needlessly inflammatory, and more than a little ridiculous. Having said that, it is definitely not the government's place to be putting these relatively non-issues ahead of real political concerns.
You almost had my total agreement, until you mentioned the term "personal responsibility". It's not that I don't appriciate the term, or disagree with the concept, but I don't like how the term has been used by corporate interests to be absolved of any responsibility in anything because "they didn't force anyone to do anything." Not just fast food, tobacco companies and predatory credit lenders have made a mint encouraging (or at least not discouraging) their consumers to make decisions they know full well are bad for them. I've even seen the odd online neo-libertarian twerp say we shouldn't prosecute fraud because people dumb enough to be ripped off deserve it. I'm in support of personal responsibility, until it allows people to start laying traps for me. I'd be more inclined to blame the toy in the happy mean box (the only reason I ever ate McDonalds) than the clown, but I do think a sensable step might be to at least market fast food as the treat is should be, rather than a fewuant meal replacement.
Ah, but that cuts into profits, and we can't have that.
Ah, but that cuts into profits, and we can't have that.
oops... first, i mean... the right of speech... my bad... going to correct it now... shame on me....mikev7.0 said:
I quite agree with this.
I find it interesting how I can really agree on many things with MovieBob, and vehemently disagree with him on several others.
There definitely needs to be a license one has to get before they can legally have children. You take tests (obviously cannot teach everything), you learn how to be a good parent (again, it cannot teach everything, but it can give you a good idea), you prove that you can support the children, then you can have them.
That's MY Big Picture.
EDIT: No, I'm not saying some people can't be good parents without any prior training or knowledge (this typically depends on their intelligence, common sense, how much time they've spent with kids in the past, how they were raised, etc.), just that some people should not be raising children. Give them a horrible environment and it screws them up and makes them a far less stable, less useful member of society.
And yes, that is the whole 'Greater Good' argument going on. But then again, having parents who know what they're doing (to a degree) will probably make you less likely to be mentally scarred and traumatized, or have tons of emotional baggage.
I find it interesting how I can really agree on many things with MovieBob, and vehemently disagree with him on several others.
There definitely needs to be a license one has to get before they can legally have children. You take tests (obviously cannot teach everything), you learn how to be a good parent (again, it cannot teach everything, but it can give you a good idea), you prove that you can support the children, then you can have them.
That's MY Big Picture.
EDIT: No, I'm not saying some people can't be good parents without any prior training or knowledge (this typically depends on their intelligence, common sense, how much time they've spent with kids in the past, how they were raised, etc.), just that some people should not be raising children. Give them a horrible environment and it screws them up and makes them a far less stable, less useful member of society.
And yes, that is the whole 'Greater Good' argument going on. But then again, having parents who know what they're doing (to a degree) will probably make you less likely to be mentally scarred and traumatized, or have tons of emotional baggage.
Good episode, I highly recommend watching Fat Head, its on netflix live stream if you got it. Guy loses weight on a 100% fast food diet, while ripping the Supersize Me guy a new one, proving that its more about what and how you eat, rather then at what restaurant.
Btw, for anyone actually trying to lose weight, I recommend getting the book "4 Hour Body". I've been trying to lose weight for over 15 years, while injuring myself over and over again from over exercise, and theres so much fantastic information here that got me to lose 25 pounds while not going to the gym even ONCE. Not exaggerating in the slightest, as I hate gyms with a passion. I just recently hit my goal of getting under 200 pounds (im 6' 4") and I feel better then I ever have in my entire life. And no, I'm not some official salesperson for the author or anything.
It's all about eating the right things (mostly meat, beans, and lots of veggies soaked in butter/oil), then your body will do the rest. It's basically a high fiber/potassium, low carb diet (not to be confused with atkins, ITS NOT FUCKING ATKINS) and it works like a charm. The worst things for your body are actually things like cereal, rice, anything with high amounts of glutten, etc. But I still eat those things, just only once a week.
If anyone DOES read this and becomes interested, congratulations on your new life.
Btw, for anyone actually trying to lose weight, I recommend getting the book "4 Hour Body". I've been trying to lose weight for over 15 years, while injuring myself over and over again from over exercise, and theres so much fantastic information here that got me to lose 25 pounds while not going to the gym even ONCE. Not exaggerating in the slightest, as I hate gyms with a passion. I just recently hit my goal of getting under 200 pounds (im 6' 4") and I feel better then I ever have in my entire life. And no, I'm not some official salesperson for the author or anything.
It's all about eating the right things (mostly meat, beans, and lots of veggies soaked in butter/oil), then your body will do the rest. It's basically a high fiber/potassium, low carb diet (not to be confused with atkins, ITS NOT FUCKING ATKINS) and it works like a charm. The worst things for your body are actually things like cereal, rice, anything with high amounts of glutten, etc. But I still eat those things, just only once a week.
If anyone DOES read this and becomes interested, congratulations on your new life.
Wait hold on, did you just say that fast food is as dangerous as cigarettes? Source?dante brevity said:
Decent episode, no need for the shot at Johnny Depp, not his it was a crappy movie and he is a great actor.
I agree, keep the clown it isn't make kids fat, dumb parents are.
I agree, keep the clown it isn't make kids fat, dumb parents are.
I agree with the Morgan Spurlock sentiment - although "Supersize Me" was a relatively entertaining documentary, I never understood why people found it so revelatory. "Mcdonald's is BAD for you. NO WAY!?!? Wow, look at how SICK he got! I'm NEVER eating Mcdonald's AGAIN". I just had to shake my head when I heard crap like this from people who just watched the documentary.Emergent System said:
However, I'm just curious - since when is a hamburger "fairly nutritious"? I mean, the ONLY, and I mean ONLY thing, that a hamburger contains in it which could be considered important to the diet is protein - yes, I know we all need fat in the diet, but the fat ratio (particularly saturated fat ratio) to carbohydrate ratio is far too disproportionate, and as for essential vitamins, a hamburger contains...well, none of them. I'm just interested as to what you meant by that...
