|
Foxfire_ posted:I agree with fischmech.  ChairMaster posted:McD's is no worse than any other food really, but it's designed to be so full of sugar and fat and salt that it's really really easy to just eat a poo poo load of it, which is bad news for dumb people that don't keep track of the calories they eat. This, really, is the main thing about fast food. Not that one helping of ~processed~ food instead of one helping of other food with similar calories will magically make you fat.
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 07:54
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:anecdotally I eat like absolute poo poo yet I’m still an Adonis Are you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 07:57
|
|
|
no 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 08:04
|
|
|
To speak to the processed foods angle, a lot of the qualitative analysis that fishmech glosses over involves addressing how much easier it is to consume calories via processed means versus eating raw or minimally processed ingredients. It's physically easier for a human being to ingest multiple bacon mcdoubles ($2 on the mcvalue menu; god bless) than it is it for a person to consume a similar number of calories eating food that is prepared with what most would consider "conventional means" at home . You would have to sit at the table and work through a big rear end sandwich that wouldn't have nearly the mg of sodium as the mcdoubles you're almost literally inhaling down your gullet. When you boil it down to an enjoyment versus effort game, mcdoubles win out every time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
Just a reminder, y'all are arguing with a dude that dug up milk prices from the 90's to make some asinine, pedantic point. You will not win this fight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 08:40
|
|
|
It’s not about winning. It’s like sparring with an AI that is maxed out in only one category.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 08:51
|
|
|
The Maroon Hawk posted:Just a reminder, y'all are arguing with a dude that dug up milk prices from the 90's to make some asinine, pedantic point. Actually you'll find I had the last word. The trick is not to include any thoughts and just disagree with as few characters as possible. I'm actually a professional Baker, I love to eat fast food, but I also have a six pack in my late 30s. Fast food, and how it is sold, marketed and regulated has zero functional difference to their tobacco counterparts and are net drains on society. The problems with either can be overcome with individual will-power but as a whole will drag down the health of a Nation while providing nothing useful whatsoever. (A Marxist can run a fryer just as easily)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 09:02
|
|
|
If you want people to do something, make it easy to do, best to be the path of least resistance. People have to put in active effort for a healthy lifestyle and most people don't have that effort to spare. It's not like there was an age of universal self-discipline and diets that was forgotten, people just ate whatever was available, which usually wasn't enough to get fat unless you were rich/a literal king. Now, fattening, tasty and unhealthy food is the easiest to get, and you need active education and self-discipline to the point where it's worth it to literally pay someone to tell you how if you don't want to get fat. And the fast food companies literally build their business model around making people eat as much of their fattening and addictive food over healthier alternatives, starting with making children interested so they will form habits for life. I mean hell, so many people have trouble quitting smoking when it was a lifelong habit they started in their early teens, and they were deliberately marketed as a sign of maturity and coolness. Restricting sales to make children unable to get them, and removing the marketing so people only see their dorky parents and gross old people smoking, has made interest plummet. (note that tobacco companies still market the same old way in countries that don't ban them from doing it)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 09:36
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Fast food, and how it is sold, marketed and regulated has zero functional difference to their tobacco counterparts and are net drains on society. The problems with either can be overcome with individual will-power but as a whole will drag down the health of a Nation while providing nothing useful whatsoever. (A Marxist can run a fryer just as easily) Should fast food have warning labels and if so what should they look like?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:let me help you with this sinister engineering: make things people want to buy e.g. salty and sweet. Yes. Sugar is physically addictive, psychologically habit forming, and unhealthy in the amounts it is used in. This isn't contentious, and Type-2 diabetes and obesity rates in America correlate sharply to the development of cheap sugar as a dietary staple. It's also marketed directly to children in a way that cigarettes wish they could have gotten away with. ReidRansom posted:Bro, the slave trade was all built around sugar. By the 1700s it was very important poo poo. It wouldn't have been had we had a third of a continent covered in a cash crop monoculture that produces sugar almost as efficiently as sugarcane at that time, as opposed to it being a new world thing that wasn't exceedingly available back in Europe. For fishmech's sake I'll spell it out: It's loving corn. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 11:57
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:Should fast food have warning labels and if so what should they look like? No. All food production should be owned by the workers, so that perverse incentives disconnected from said food production don't encourage things like psyops on children or union busting to keep the laborers impoverished or fighting to maintain transfat usage for no good reason (other than profit, but I repeat myself). There is more than enough room for food of every type of nutritional content in a world absent advertising, regulatory capture, and a predatory capital class. Baby formula is literally pure nutrition yet Nestle's marketing in the third world is likewise identical to tobacco company's shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 12:34
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Yes. Sugar is physically addictive, psychologically habit forming, and unhealthy in the amounts it is used in. Marketing is bad in its entirety but that's capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:To speak to the processed foods angle, a lot of the qualitative analysis that fishmech glosses over involves addressing how much easier it is to consume calories via processed means versus eating raw or minimally processed ingredients. It's really not difficult to halfass cook 6 ounces (uncooked size ofc) of burger patties and slap cheese slices and bacon and pickles on top of it at home, and then make fries out of a a potato or two. It's a mystery why people like you act like there's some amorphous PROCESSING step that needs to take place. A Bacon McDouble has 450 calories, the two small beef patties once cooked are already around 300-330 calories on their own, and a small bun as they typically use or you'd use at home is ~100 calories. So just the two main ingredients and your home copy is already at 430 of 450 calories before you slap in a little bit of bacon etc. This is the whole reason the "processed food" term is useless. It doesn't indicate anything about the food other than you dislike it. poopinmymouth posted:
This is absolutely false. Submarine Sandpaper posted:Sugar in America has never been cheap compared to the rest of the world due to trade protections put in place near the founding of the country and has always been abundant aside from ww1 and ww2 rationing. The past ten or so years haven't seen an especially cheap sugar either, in the 60's it got down to less than 2 cents a lb compared to 13 in 1919 and 12 today. I suspect your correlation is even stronger when looking at sedentary lifestyle. Protip: America double its sugar prices nearly overnight with the raft of sugar tariffs that went in in the early 70s, causing a temporary shortage before HFCS production could spin up to meet demand. And American sugar prices have remained more or less doubled the world price ever since - it's one of the big reasons so much American candy is actually manufactured in Canada and brought across the border, you don't need to pay the tariffs on finished good's use of sugar. fishmech fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
Yeah French fries you get from a fast food place is the same as cutting up a potato at home. That makes sense. Your insight cuts to the bone!
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
Will You Soon Have To Pay Sales Tax On Every Online Purchase? https://www.npr.org/2018/04/17/603093440/will-you-soon-have-to-pay-sales-tax-on-every-online-purchase Should have been done ages ago...
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
All food is made up of atoms, doesn't matter if it's normal fast food or holier than thou "home cooked" food, the atoms are all the same. You can't say some atoms are better for you than others, it's all atoms when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:All food is made up of atoms, doesn't matter if it's normal fast food or holier than thou "home cooked" food, the atoms are all the same. You can't say some atoms are better for you than others, it's all atoms when you think about it. Unstable atoms that emit radiation are bad for you
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:Yeah French fries you get from a fast food place is the same as cutting up a potato at home. That makes sense. Your insight cuts to the bone! in terms of calories? pretty much yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Will You Soon Have To Pay Sales Tax On Every Online Purchase? It sucks, but I agree. The legislative part needs to catch up to the realities of modern technology (like so many other things).
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:This is the stupidest possible conversation, and especially one that nobody should ever have with fishmech. You guys know perfectly well that he will never see anything to do with the actual experience of eating fast food and how it compares to home-made or other foods, and will just harp on about numbers and calories for the rest of linear time, completely ignoring the actuality of how people eat and are intended to eat fast food. ironically when travelling i often would eat at mcd's since their calorie counts are known (versus random airport restraunt #3). the all day breakfast sandwiches aren't *great* but a saugage egg and cheese sandwich + water + apple or banana from the cvs is pretty decent, cheap, and easy to find. (my other goto for healthy-ish is diners, a couple eggs and strips of bacon is not great ruffage wise but not terrible either)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:in terms of calories? pretty much yes. Wrong. https://www.thedailymeal.com/eat/why-do-mcdonald-s-fries-have-nearly-20-ingredients Nearly any item that can be found at a fast food restaurant contains unnecessary ingredients that are there for the pursuit of profit. The exact same foods can be cooked with less additives if the goal isn't to wring every last speck of profit out of laborers and customers. (also if anyone who actually enjoys cooking had their say, they would prioritize quality over preservatives) poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:Yeah French fries you get from a fast food place is the same as cutting up a potato at home. That makes sense. Your insight cuts to the bone! Tell me the magic demons that exist in frying up potatoes at a McDonald's that don't exist frying up potatoes at home.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Tell me the magic demons that exist in frying up potatoes at a McDonald's that don't exist frying up potatoes at home. You are so bad at this, lmao (and completely wrong, still) https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html FRENCH FRIES Ingredients: Potatoes, Vegetable Oil (Canola Oil, Corn Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Natural Beef Flavor [Wheat and Milk Derivatives]*), Dextrose, Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate (Maintain Color), Salt. *Natural beef flavor contains hydrolyzed wheat and hydrolyzed milk as starting ingredients.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Like have you ever seen McDonald’s food? Lmfao.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You are so bad at this, lmao (and completely wrong, still) soooooo trace amounts of flavoring and a food color preservative
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You are so bad at this, lmao (and completely wrong, still) Oh boy, so you think it's evil that when you fry potatoes, several different oils might be used and so is salt and other seasoning. Like really, this is so unreasonable to you? I take it the only thing you ever eat is unflavored gruel then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
And in the UK a McD fry it has 4 ingredients yet they're the most obese nation in Europe and has the same calories to the US one. GASP Ya'll don't have an argument anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
Wow look at those goal posts move, lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
i like that fishmech subtly switched the debate from "is sugar a poison" to "is sugar the sole factor in obesity" and then harped on the second for pages in some kind of vain attempt to preserve his forums glory and to think, it all stems from him being unable to enjoy a cigarette
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Will You Soon Have To Pay Sales Tax On Every Online Purchase? This is probably off topic (maybe less so than the loving fry debate) but is there any good case for the continuing of sales taxes as opposed to an increase in progressive income taxes? Beyond the impossible politics of it, I mean. I always thought sales taxes were incredibly regressive, especially when applied to essentials.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Wow look at those goal posts move, lol Uh dude you're the one constantly shifting to justify your hatred of food that isn't what you eat. You're literally scared that sometimes mcdonald's uses different oils for the frying. self unaware posted:i like that fishmech subtly switched the debate from "is sugar a poison" to "is sugar the sole factor in obesity" and then harped on the second for pages in some kind of vain attempt to preserve his forums glory I never shifted anything. It's the people scared of basic science trying to claim that sugar doesn't have any sort of dose-response curve.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:This is probably off topic (maybe less so than the loving fry debate) but is there any good case for the continuing of sales taxes as opposed to an increase in progressive income taxes? that's why you see sales tax increase as the only tax increase in red states. self unaware posted:i like that fishmech subtly switched the debate from "is sugar a poison" to "is sugar the sole factor in obesity" and then harped on the second for pages in some kind of vain attempt to preserve his forums glory
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You are so bad at this, lmao (and completely wrong, still) There is a funny story behind those ingredients. Back in the day they used beef fat and tallow as oil and flavoring. They switched it out for hydrogenated oil in the 90s because people thought that vegetable oil was healthier. They add a beef base to the oil to mimic the old flavor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
so is retail collapse some kind of diabetic shock or obesity related disease or what
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:This is probably off topic (maybe less so than the loving fry debate) but is there any good case for the continuing of sales taxes as opposed to an increase in progressive income taxes?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
FistEnergy posted:so is retail collapse some kind of diabetic shock or obesity related disease or what stores can only support so many in house scooters and handicap spots
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:This is probably off topic (maybe less so than the loving fry debate) but is there any good case for the continuing of sales taxes as opposed to an increase in progressive income taxes? when you have different tiers of government, some come to rely on other forms of taxes in the united states, you have the following jurisdictions to worry about -national -state -county/city -special district each of which has different taxation powers. the feds mostly don't collect sales tax, for example. local jurisdictions rely totally on sales and property taxes since they can't tax income, etc. and local jurisdictions can impose their own taxes to pay for poo poo not on the state level. where i live, the state completely hates paying for mass transit, so the local county/city governments imposed their own sales taxes to pay for it. sucks but it's better than no mass transit at all
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:This is probably off topic (maybe less so than the loving fry debate) but is there any good case for the continuing of sales taxes as opposed to an increase in progressive income taxes? Submarine Sandpaper posted:that's why you see sales tax increase as the only tax increase in red states. boner confessor posted:when you have different tiers of government, some come to rely on other forms of taxes Sales taxes are indeed regressive. And, yes, this is why red states almost always cut income taxes and rely solely on sales taxes to fund their governments. South Dakota is in fact a no-income-tax state, and they have an obvious stake in making online retailers collect sales taxes from customers in South Dakota. Given that we won't ever see a "progressive" restructuring of local/state taxes, ensuring that people pay local sales taxes on their online purchases makes a certain amount of sense. I mean, if you make your product available for sale in zip code XXXXX, you should pay XXXXX's sales tax. With most accounting applications, you can automatically track and pay that sort of thing, too. Most states (as the article pointed out) even provide software to do this for free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Sales taxes are indeed regressive. And, yes, this is why red states almost always cut income taxes and rely solely on sales taxes to fund their governments. South Dakota is in fact a no-income-tax state, and they have an obvious stake in making online retailers collect sales taxes from customers in South Dakota. In Wyoming, we don't pay sales tax for food that isn't prepared. It's been that way since 2006. The state does collect sales tax on Amazon if the purchase is over a certain amount, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
I don’t think most states charge taxes for unprepared food.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 00:42
|
|