The Big Picture: Arch-Villains
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Is it just me or is it that the more MovieBob goes on, the more one-sided, nerd-justicar does his show get?
I mean, he openly admitted that he worships Nintendo and thus limited his credibility in the gaming field in my eyes.
But lately he seems too much of a Saint Nerd, who knows what's right for everybody, cause... he's Bob.
Maybe just me though.
I mean, he openly admitted that he worships Nintendo and thus limited his credibility in the gaming field in my eyes.
But lately he seems too much of a Saint Nerd, who knows what's right for everybody, cause... he's Bob.
Maybe just me though.
I think it's important to understand the causes of obesity before we start attacking things. Today, more than ever, we live in an information economy. That means most people spend their days sitting in front of a screen of some sort. This general lack of activity leads to greater rates of obesity. While diet has it's place, the core of the problem likely is a mix of the two. Just picking a target to attack isn't going to fix anything.
there was a comedian on Graham Norton that once said "I was to have kids just so I can go to all those parents that used their kids to say they were right and tell them that because I'm a parent I am right."
Basically his argument was that no matter the issue, parents will say they are right just because they have had kids and you haven't, and I can definitely agree that parents think they are the all holy controllers of their kids lives and there or have the right to complain when food they give them is unhealthy or tv is too violent.
I really think you need a liscense to have kids, and have to take a test and class to prove that you will be a good one, but in some way that throw a wrench in your "let natural selection happen" plan.
Actually that was why movies like Idocracy scare the s**t out of me, because they could actually happen.
BTW they are actually getting ride of Ronald McDonald. See McDonalds is trying to turn itself into a healthy cafe like establishment with his actual chicken in chicken nuggets and salad options. They are actually getting rid of Ronald because he promotes the image of fatty fast food.
Basically his argument was that no matter the issue, parents will say they are right just because they have had kids and you haven't, and I can definitely agree that parents think they are the all holy controllers of their kids lives and there or have the right to complain when food they give them is unhealthy or tv is too violent.
I really think you need a liscense to have kids, and have to take a test and class to prove that you will be a good one, but in some way that throw a wrench in your "let natural selection happen" plan.
Actually that was why movies like Idocracy scare the s**t out of me, because they could actually happen.
BTW they are actually getting ride of Ronald McDonald. See McDonalds is trying to turn itself into a healthy cafe like establishment with his actual chicken in chicken nuggets and salad options. They are actually getting rid of Ronald because he promotes the image of fatty fast food.
Anyone else feel this one wasn't as good as Bob's usual episodes? He kind of just relayed something he saw on the news to us, then gave his opinion.
Talk about nerdy stuff Bob, it's more fun.
I don't know how things are in the US (if somebody could inform me, that would be swell, pard'ner) but where i live (France) the Government really cracked down on fast food restaurants. Rather than destroying them outright they just made them serve healthier food, you can buy salads at McD's, organic fruit, all kinds of health foods, and rather than burgers being the focus point you can buy veggie burgers, steak, fish, McD's has basically become a regular restaurant that happens to serve burgers.
Damn good burgers might i add.
Eating too much of ANYTHING is going to have negative effects, you can even die from drinking too much damn water. (It's seriously a lot of water though, a LOT.)
People should be personally responsable for what they do and what they eat, if they can't control themselves, how is the company to blame? Do people ignore the vast majority of customers who are fit, healthy people?
Talk about nerdy stuff Bob, it's more fun.
I don't know how things are in the US (if somebody could inform me, that would be swell, pard'ner) but where i live (France) the Government really cracked down on fast food restaurants. Rather than destroying them outright they just made them serve healthier food, you can buy salads at McD's, organic fruit, all kinds of health foods, and rather than burgers being the focus point you can buy veggie burgers, steak, fish, McD's has basically become a regular restaurant that happens to serve burgers.
Damn good burgers might i add.
Eating too much of ANYTHING is going to have negative effects, you can even die from drinking too much damn water. (It's seriously a lot of water though, a LOT.)
People should be personally responsable for what they do and what they eat, if they can't control themselves, how is the company to blame? Do people ignore the vast majority of customers who are fit, healthy people?
Being a fairly libertarian minded fellow it's nice to hear someone like you (very liberal) advocate for personal responsibility. You have an awesome streak of great Big Picture's going! Keep it up! =D
Ah... I love this argument. And in fact, I'm not against Ronald McDonald. In fact, I like him.
I think the problem is that society seems to want to head into the direction of Demolition Man where there is only one franchise left (please don't let it be Taco Bell) and then not even have the option to get salt for it.
I live in Canada and we have Tim Horton's; our favourite coffee and donut shop. About ten years ago they did something that saddened me greatly. They started to bake their donuts. It completely changed the taste and consistency of the donut. It started to taste something more like cake and less like the donut I loved.
You may be wondering why I bring this up? The answer lies in why Tim Horton's started to bake instead of fry their products. I looked into it and found out that they were joining the ever-growing bandwagon of food chains that wanted to be healthier. So they started to use baked donuts instead of fried.
Now this argument of theirs sounds good in theory, but stupid upon actual inspection. The argument could be made that some place like McDonald's has food that could appear to be healthy (you have your meat, cheese, veggies, and bread), but never ever could you do that for a donut.
When I get a Homer-like craving to go binge on half a dozen donuts I'm not thinking "Golly gee, I sure would like some donuts but I gotta find the healthy ones". I'm thinking that I want to down some junk food that satisfies my taste buds. So it is idiotic to try and make something that is inherently unhealthy healthier at the cost of the actual quality of the product.
I think the problem is that society seems to want to head into the direction of Demolition Man where there is only one franchise left (please don't let it be Taco Bell) and then not even have the option to get salt for it.
I live in Canada and we have Tim Horton's; our favourite coffee and donut shop. About ten years ago they did something that saddened me greatly. They started to bake their donuts. It completely changed the taste and consistency of the donut. It started to taste something more like cake and less like the donut I loved.
You may be wondering why I bring this up? The answer lies in why Tim Horton's started to bake instead of fry their products. I looked into it and found out that they were joining the ever-growing bandwagon of food chains that wanted to be healthier. So they started to use baked donuts instead of fried.
Now this argument of theirs sounds good in theory, but stupid upon actual inspection. The argument could be made that some place like McDonald's has food that could appear to be healthy (you have your meat, cheese, veggies, and bread), but never ever could you do that for a donut.
When I get a Homer-like craving to go binge on half a dozen donuts I'm not thinking "Golly gee, I sure would like some donuts but I gotta find the healthy ones". I'm thinking that I want to down some junk food that satisfies my taste buds. So it is idiotic to try and make something that is inherently unhealthy healthier at the cost of the actual quality of the product.
Well, no one has realized it's american culture to cram food down your throat. It is even apparent in our TV shows such as man vs food, and Anthony bourdain (who is not necessarily all about pigging out but when he is in an american city all he talks about is pig out spots.) I am not saying it is their fault but it is reflective our culture. Americans traditionally love to pig out. ESPN sponsors the hot dog competition every year with full coverage. Not to mention America has the largest market for competitive eating.
If we should blame anything we should blame ourselves and our culture. NOT our restaurants and chains that resemble our culture, because businessmen will be businessmen. If they see a large demand in cheap, greasy food they will absolutely increase the supply of cheap greasy food. The use of supply and demand is the most basic economic principle and putting it on the businessmen is a poorly informed statement.
If you want these corporations to start cooking better burgers than show it through demand or a survey. It does not need to be anything radical. For example if you could convince them to use buffalo meat instead of cow meat they would start serving buffalo burgers. (Which are lower in fat, and based on opinion better tasting.)
If we should blame anything we should blame ourselves and our culture. NOT our restaurants and chains that resemble our culture, because businessmen will be businessmen. If they see a large demand in cheap, greasy food they will absolutely increase the supply of cheap greasy food. The use of supply and demand is the most basic economic principle and putting it on the businessmen is a poorly informed statement.
If you want these corporations to start cooking better burgers than show it through demand or a survey. It does not need to be anything radical. For example if you could convince them to use buffalo meat instead of cow meat they would start serving buffalo burgers. (Which are lower in fat, and based on opinion better tasting.)
I will not blame McDonald's one little bit for anyone over the age of 18 getting fat on their products. That said, I'll make an argument that Joe Camel and Ronald McDonald ARE the same in some ways. I know that burgers are legal while underage smoking is not, and I also know that McDonald's is dealing above board in their marketing to kids while Camel was being sneaky about it. Therefore, I'll restrict my argument to the following: Both McDonald's and Camel used their mascots to encourage kids to become habitual users of a product that is demonstrably bad for them.
Eating even one fast food meal offers the same health/pleasure trade-off as a cigarette, and adults like Bob (and me) can make this choice as we wish. Eating one probably won't hurt you (barring allergies), and eating one very occasionally will have little effect on you, but regular moderate to heavy use WILL have a negative health impact. Also, both are habit forming and chemically addictive. Kids cannot properly understand what fast food is; they (and some adults) see it as just another kind of food, instead of the nutritionally worthless, calorie excessive junk that it is.
Also, consider that these cartoon characters have a long term strategy in mind. Joe Camel's targets are in their 30s right now, and many of them are still smokers. How many of those kids had access to cigarettes when they saw their first ad? The same number that could walk to their local McDonald's and buy a Happy Meal, i.e. the ones with bad parents. However, plenty of kids with good parents saw the ads too, but couldn't act on them right away. Later during their middle school years, the cartoon influences worked their magic, and plenty of well-parented 13-year olds used spending money on both Camel (illicitly) and McDonald's (right out in the open).
This issue isn't about moderation: most kids don't understand moderation. If one of something is good, twenty is better. When we let kids make choices (and McDonald's is baldly attempting to influence the choices of children), they shouldn't be held accountable for life if they or their stupid parents make bad ones. Unfortunately, that's what happens a lot today. What are you going to say to a 75 lb. 4-year-old? "Sorry, Sally, but you're going to have to pay for your parents idiocy and my right to get a Thickburger with a lifetime of diabetes and heart disease."
I'll make a radical claim: every child deserves to graduate high school at a healthy weight. Kids won't necessarily claim that for themselves; their families and communities need to help provide them a healthy diet. ALL parts of a community need to pitch in: families, schools, churches, and businesses. And when one community member seems to be willfully disregarding this right to aid its bottom line, you better believe I want the government to come in and crack the whip. If that means sending Ronald McDonald to the same pasture as Joe Camel, I'm all for it.
Eating even one fast food meal offers the same health/pleasure trade-off as a cigarette, and adults like Bob (and me) can make this choice as we wish. Eating one probably won't hurt you (barring allergies), and eating one very occasionally will have little effect on you, but regular moderate to heavy use WILL have a negative health impact. Also, both are habit forming and chemically addictive. Kids cannot properly understand what fast food is; they (and some adults) see it as just another kind of food, instead of the nutritionally worthless, calorie excessive junk that it is.
Also, consider that these cartoon characters have a long term strategy in mind. Joe Camel's targets are in their 30s right now, and many of them are still smokers. How many of those kids had access to cigarettes when they saw their first ad? The same number that could walk to their local McDonald's and buy a Happy Meal, i.e. the ones with bad parents. However, plenty of kids with good parents saw the ads too, but couldn't act on them right away. Later during their middle school years, the cartoon influences worked their magic, and plenty of well-parented 13-year olds used spending money on both Camel (illicitly) and McDonald's (right out in the open).
This issue isn't about moderation: most kids don't understand moderation. If one of something is good, twenty is better. When we let kids make choices (and McDonald's is baldly attempting to influence the choices of children), they shouldn't be held accountable for life if they or their stupid parents make bad ones. Unfortunately, that's what happens a lot today. What are you going to say to a 75 lb. 4-year-old? "Sorry, Sally, but you're going to have to pay for your parents idiocy and my right to get a Thickburger with a lifetime of diabetes and heart disease."
I'll make a radical claim: every child deserves to graduate high school at a healthy weight. Kids won't necessarily claim that for themselves; their families and communities need to help provide them a healthy diet. ALL parts of a community need to pitch in: families, schools, churches, and businesses. And when one community member seems to be willfully disregarding this right to aid its bottom line, you better believe I want the government to come in and crack the whip. If that means sending Ronald McDonald to the same pasture as Joe Camel, I'm all for it.
I'll find them for you if you want, but a Google search will help you find a dozen studies that say fast food is chemically addictive. Not just in an emotional/comfort capacity either; people who've eaten diets with high sugar get the shakes when the sugar is taken out of their food. I'm not saying that this should make fast food illegal; I'll be ticked if someone tries to take away my very addictive caffeine. Marketing these things to kids, though? No.Nurb said:
Wow. Um, how exactly is that an "and up front violation of the second amendment..." which states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Sorry, but I don't get what you're saying there. At all.punipunipyo said:
Otherwise great show again Bob, but I think I'm going to skip most of the comments from now on since about 80% of them are always people just saying the exact same thing you just pointed out in the video! Keep it up!
Alright Bob, I am very on board with you. The issue with me is that they call it 'food'. They list health stats on the little poster by the checkout, and display wonderous concoctions of set designers in the ads. Soda is not Food, we know that so we dont try to life off it. Chocolate bars, twinkies and all the rest of the crap we eat that isn't strictly speaking 'food' doesn't claim to be. They are called things like 'snacks' and 'candy'. If something is 'food' you SHOULD be able to survive eating it and therein lies the deception.
About 3:49
Welcome, boys and girls, to another exciting adventure oooof... MovieBob Hates Fox News Way Too Much!
Join us as we explore the statements (and implied statements) of Bob Chipman, a very insightful, very deep-thinking and very likable internet personality who unfortunately is one of the millions of snarky young adults who don't give Fox News (and/or the people on it) a fair look before considering it to be ultra right-wing reactionary shock stock.
Issue #291
Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilley and Sarah Palin are on YOUR SIDE, Bob. Conservatives generally support businesses like McDonald's. Even more than liberals, actually; the very health freaks we're talking about are typically on the left.
I know they'd be more likely to not support something regulating what parents can do to their kids, in a general sense, but for this particular case, you're on their side. Completely and totally.
The end
Edit:
About his weight
Screw anybody and everybody who plays this card on him. Why don't they continue being like that and go up to somebody and say he only supports the president because he's black? Then go tell a waitress that she only supports abortion because she's a waitress and therefore "must have needed one at some point"? Then go to a doorknob and tell it that it only supports a lower tax on hand sanitizer because it's a doorknob?
Welcome, boys and girls, to another exciting adventure oooof... MovieBob Hates Fox News Way Too Much!
Join us as we explore the statements (and implied statements) of Bob Chipman, a very insightful, very deep-thinking and very likable internet personality who unfortunately is one of the millions of snarky young adults who don't give Fox News (and/or the people on it) a fair look before considering it to be ultra right-wing reactionary shock stock.
Issue #291
Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilley and Sarah Palin are on YOUR SIDE, Bob. Conservatives generally support businesses like McDonald's. Even more than liberals, actually; the very health freaks we're talking about are typically on the left.
I know they'd be more likely to not support something regulating what parents can do to their kids, in a general sense, but for this particular case, you're on their side. Completely and totally.
The end
Edit:
About his weight
Screw anybody and everybody who plays this card on him. Why don't they continue being like that and go up to somebody and say he only supports the president because he's black? Then go tell a waitress that she only supports abortion because she's a waitress and therefore "must have needed one at some point"? Then go to a doorknob and tell it that it only supports a lower tax on hand sanitizer because it's a doorknob?
If you want to see fat kids here in a Japan (a nation with a populace for the most part does NOT suffer from endemic obesity), go a McDonalds. The company has cornered the 'afterschool studying/socialising' market, especially in the freaking heat. Essentially, this generation of Japanese kids will be the ruin of the nations incredible health statistics and perhaps even longevity statistics.
However, outside a McDonalds, surveying the older generations, it is more likely that the person directly infront of your in the street is slim rather than obese or overweight. Fingers crossed. Diet IS, however, very important to health and longevity, and during the Korean war, researchers found that American GIs in their 20s had internal organs of equivalent 'age' to Koreans in the 40s and 50s! Why? The conclusion was that Korea, free of fastfood and Western dietry excess at that time, was not wearing out bodies at an exponential rate.
Alcohol companies invest in 'awareness' about safe drinking. Fast food companies can do the same, if they want Brownie points with the public.
However, outside a McDonalds, surveying the older generations, it is more likely that the person directly infront of your in the street is slim rather than obese or overweight. Fingers crossed. Diet IS, however, very important to health and longevity, and during the Korean war, researchers found that American GIs in their 20s had internal organs of equivalent 'age' to Koreans in the 40s and 50s! Why? The conclusion was that Korea, free of fastfood and Western dietry excess at that time, was not wearing out bodies at an exponential rate.
Alcohol companies invest in 'awareness' about safe drinking. Fast food companies can do the same, if they want Brownie points with the public.
