| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Barny Mobster

Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 1112
|
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:56 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| Alex B wrote: | One massive error here is the assumption that processed foods make people fat.
Actually calories make people fat, processed (fatty/sugary) foods just fit more calories in per mouthful.
I could gain weight eating fresh rice and fish (see sumo) and diet eating chips.
There was a kid in the paper recently who had to get almost all his calories from fat to control a medical disorder - but he isn't fat, because clearly he didn't eat too much.
There was also an interesting episode of Supersize vs Superskinny in which the fattie ate phenomenal amounts of really good fresh home cooked food, plenty of fruit and veg, and the skinny one had the occasional cheeseburger on the run.
So don't blame the foods. |
No one would ever suggest that other factors such as exercise, food quantities, meal times and frequency, depression etc don't all come into it. But you're not telling me that if I eat a couple of pounds of bread and lard a day and you eat a couple of pounds of fruit and steamed veg I'm not gonna get fatter and less healthy than you. There are many other health problems associated with a poor (often cheap) diet. Not just obesity. If someone is just living on chips and burgers and are skinny they are probably less healthy than a tubby person eating slightly too much good fresh food.
Yes, processed foods 'just' fit more calories in per mouthful. But try telling a three year old to stop eating because he's had his daily intake of fat. And it's not just what's in those foods, it's what's missing.
I'm not saying 'blame' food. I'm just saying don't demonise and ridicule people who struggle to feed their families a healthy balanced diet BECAUSE THEY ARE POOR. _________________ If it wasn't for luck I'd lose every tournament I played...If I wanted to manage a bankroll I'd be a bank manager.
Play online with The Mob at Genting Poker |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bogus At Won with No 28

Joined: 01 May 2008 Posts: 4457 Location: Hendon (Deception Central)
|
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:58 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
Creq;
God and Jesus failed us. _________________ Update TBC |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PokerSensation Flush
Joined: 18 Nov 2011 Posts: 522
|
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:51 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
You're a good man Barny and you mean well like many who share your beliefs.
I just find high taxes wrong as the money NEVER gets spent correctly. I would not mind at all if it were spent correctly but it never is as governments have their agenda. We are living in fantasy land if we think otherwise. It is also a little more complex as having low taxes encourages entrepreneurialism which leads to innovation and improvements in standards of living for all.
I mainly put that clown Savage on earlier because he can be quality entertainment - that is all. What I said above holds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jellyface Failed

Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 600 Location: Embedded
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:25 am Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| PokerSensation wrote: | | I mainly put that clown Savage on earlier because he can be quality entertainment. |
Goebbels was a laugh riot at parties, apparently. _________________ IF I WANT A MONKEY I GET A MONKEY. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
evelyn Quads
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 2094
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:42 am Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| PokerSensation wrote: | | I just find high taxes wrong as the money NEVER gets spent correctly. |
Don't you want a health service, a police force, street lighting etc ?
| PokerSensation wrote: | | It is also a little more complex as having low taxes encourages entrepreneurialism which leads to innovation and improvements in standards of living for all. |
Capitalists are interested in making money. They are not interested in improving anyone's standard of living or innovating. Some research can only be done by governments. If it was down to Alan Sugar and his ilk we'd still be counting on our fingers and the Higgs Boson particle would still be lost.
| PokerSensation wrote: | | What I said above holds. |
It is just your opinion. Other people have other opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alex B Straight Flush

Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 2780 Location: London
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:44 am Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| Barny wrote: | | Alex B wrote: | One massive error here is the assumption that processed foods make people fat.
Actually calories make people fat, processed (fatty/sugary) foods just fit more calories in per mouthful.
I could gain weight eating fresh rice and fish (see sumo) and diet eating chips.
There was a kid in the paper recently who had to get almost all his calories from fat to control a medical disorder - but he isn't fat, because clearly he didn't eat too much.
There was also an interesting episode of Supersize vs Superskinny in which the fattie ate phenomenal amounts of really good fresh home cooked food, plenty of fruit and veg, and the skinny one had the occasional cheeseburger on the run.
So don't blame the foods. |
No one would ever suggest that other factors such as exercise, food quantities, meal times and frequency, depression etc don't all come into it. But you're not telling me that if I eat a couple of pounds of bread and lard a day and you eat a couple of pounds of fruit and steamed veg I'm not gonna get fatter and less healthy than you. There are many other health problems associated with a poor (often cheap) diet. Not just obesity. If someone is just living on chips and burgers and are skinny they are probably less healthy than a tubby person eating slightly too much good fresh food.
Yes, processed foods 'just' fit more calories in per mouthful. But try telling a three year old to stop eating because he's had his daily intake of fat. And it's not just what's in those foods, it's what's missing.
I'm not saying 'blame' food. I'm just saying don't demonise and ridicule people who struggle to feed their families a healthy balanced diet BECAUSE THEY ARE POOR. |
If the calories were the same the weight gain would be the same. both would have health problems.
So I guess the suggestion is to veto poor people's choice of food using bans or taxes, on the assumption that they can't look after themselves.
But that also penalises the healthy, sporty responsible people who like butter, kebabs and fried chicken, and what did they do to get told what to eat by someone else (who is probably unqualified to make that decision, if we look at, say, current government diet advice, or recreational drugs policy.
So if they need nannying, because you disagree with their lifestyle and want them to adopt yours, why not just make being poor and fat a criminal offence? This leaves everyone with full freedom of food choice. Sentence fatties to 8-weeks hard community service, give them a 10kg bag of rice and garnish their usual food budget to run the scheme. I think that would probably border on inhumane, but I can't see that it's materially different or less fair than blaming and banning the food on offer. _________________ http://www.alexbowler.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
evelyn Quads
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 2094
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:10 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| Alex B wrote: | | So if they need nannying, because you disagree with their lifestyle and want them to adopt yours, why not just make being poor and fat a criminal offence? This leaves everyone with full freedom of food choice. Sentence fatties to 8-weeks hard community service, give them a 10kg bag of rice and garnish their usual food budget to run the scheme. I think that would probably border on inhumane, but I can't see that it's materially different or less fair than blaming and banning the food on offer. |
There is obesity with the rich as well as the poor.The problem is more acute with the poor because they cannot afford the fresh fish that you recommend for them. You can get hundreds of frozen burgers/sausages for the price of a piece of fresh fish. The solution is more government regulation of the food industry which is only there to make money and who do this by getting us to eat more and unhealthily (by supersizing, misleading food labelling and shoving too much sugar, salt and fat into processed food for taste etc etc). I am also in favour of a preventative healthcare programme. The latter might save money as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
darrensprengers Misclick

Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 6905
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:31 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
i am bit dismayed at "poker players" not able to do basic maths. the reason there are huge amounts of fat poor people is that there are more poor people. poor people are generated by the capitalist system with a created rich or fortunate, depending on how you want to describe them. i know a lot od rich people and through imbiding, admittidly the best port or whiskey, are incredible unhealthy. they are however a percentage of the rich and as a number are less than the huge amount of "poor" as you all seem to, rather embarrassingly, feel it is not neccessary to define.
It is not about the fatness it is the general unhealthiness.
food stuffs, to cope with the huge demand, are incredibly bad at the moment if you buy the cheapest. Its weird people want to ban cigarettes and yet sugar and saturated fat abuse deaths every year account for many more thousands.
this is an article. there are many, many more examples of how sugar lobbies control information about certain ingredients and there potential health issues.
fat is a bit of red herring. its to do with general health. eating bad food causing people to be unhealthy. i would not say that the government finds it ok due to medicine sales being on our gdp but its food for thought.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19300160 _________________ The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
-- Nick "The Greek" Dandalos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alex B Straight Flush

Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 2780 Location: London
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| evelyn wrote: | | Alex B wrote: | | So if they need nannying, because you disagree with their lifestyle and want them to adopt yours, why not just make being poor and fat a criminal offence? This leaves everyone with full freedom of food choice. Sentence fatties to 8-weeks hard community service, give them a 10kg bag of rice and garnish their usual food budget to run the scheme. I think that would probably border on inhumane, but I can't see that it's materially different or less fair than blaming and banning the food on offer. |
There is obesity with the rich as well as the poor.The problem is more acute with the poor because they cannot afford the fresh fish that you recommend for them. You can get hundreds of frozen burgers/sausages for the price of a piece of fresh fish. The solution is more government regulation of the food industry which is only there to make money and who do this by getting us to eat more and unhealthily (by supersizing, misleading food labelling and shoving too much sugar, salt and fat into processed food for taste etc etc). I am also in favour of a preventative healthcare programme. The latter might save money as well. |
You can still buy rice, beef, carrot, celery, onion, tin tomatoes, tin kidney beans for 4 (and hundreds of similar recipes) for less than an Extra Value Meal (maybe x2 just to be sure).
Its an excuse. Blame anything but the people, like most of the things that end up debated on here.
As a student it was fantastic that Asda sold plenty of bargain high-calorie ingredients (like huge bags of frozen chips, dirty sausages and burgers, etc), because we needed to maximise calories/£ on such a thin budget. Why ever would anyone have wanted us to be worse off by preventing selling those things or making them more expensive? _________________ http://www.alexbowler.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
darrensprengers Misclick

Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 6905
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:37 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
@alex b
i would class you as poor and yet you seem to have the wherewithal to eat relatively healthily. that's fine but due to lack of diet education and the difficulty in getting fresh produce particularly in inner city areas it is difficult to eat a balanced diet.
i do not want to eat food full of pesticides and added preservatives, and god knows what cruelty to ainmals and i am lucky enough to be able to afford to buy and research more humanely and healthily.
The problems come when you talk about eating high fat as a way to save money and time. you may not see the external damage which is simply the storage of energy in fat but the internal damage caused by these diets cost the taxpayer millions every year. i had the misfortune to require a serious lung op a few years back and i was in a leading hospital in london's heart and lung ward. there were numerous heart operations for heart disease and i can telll you there were no fatties getting any heart ops. not one of them was overweight let alone obese.
we have no problem banning smoking. i am an ex-smoker and would feel it should not be banned since it seems a freedom of choice. transfats and other horrendous modern food inventions are in the same category. its not about the individual and blaming them it about looking at it in a mathematical whole.
i would not ban macdonalds but i would ban it for the young. when you are old enough to make your decision to be fat, unhealthy, or whatever then on you go. feeding our kids this poison without any directional advice just seems incredibly naive. _________________ The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
-- Nick "The Greek" Dandalos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ReggieK The Guvnor

Joined: 16 Oct 2005 Posts: 4963 Location: Essex, Uk
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:54 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
Also depends where you live.
Where I come from and where I live now you have all them veg and fruits aplenty at rock bottom prices.
Also I can wander the fields nearby and get all the strawberries (just out of season now), goosegogs (lovely year this year), new taters. carrots, peas etc, and blackberries will be with us in a month, sloes the month after that, and we got apple trees all around here loaded up soon to be picked, and pears on the trees looking good too.
Half of you London types wouldn't have access to such goods, having to buy it at Harrods and all that
Though saying that, the kebab shop in the village do a lovely bogof pizza, and an xxl doner with killer sauce for 5 notes _________________ The coalition is waning and dying, the only option is to vote Labour in 2015~ Teacher Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
peterH Porn Baron

Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 2778
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| Alex B wrote: |
You can still buy rice, beef, carrot, celery, onion, tin tomatoes, tin kidney beans for 4 (and hundreds of similar recipes) for less than an Extra Value Meal (maybe x2 just to be sure).
Its an excuse. Blame anything but the people, like most of the things that end up debated on here.
|
I recall on one of those Jamie Oliver things about healthy eating, one mum bursting into tears because she couldn't afford to give her family healthy food. Yet it turns out their main meal comes from the kebab shop at least 4 times a week, the kids are sent to school with petrol station sandwiches or those dairy lea lunchables things, etc. And of course, both parents found enough money for a pack of fags a day each.
I'm not an expert on kebab shop prices, but i'm guessing it'll be around £20 for four, £6 for the kids sardines, and £10 a day of fags, so they have a possible food budget of £150-200 a week. That seems ample to provide a balanced diet for four to me.
Of cousre, the real reason was she couldn't be bothered to make the kid sarnies herself or knock up a chicken pie and peel some spuds for tea.
I'm a lard arse because I eat too much of the wrong stuff and don't exercise enough. No excuses. _________________ Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DCSW7 Straight Flush

Joined: 14 Feb 2007 Posts: 3834 Location: Spewing @ PLO
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:15 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| peterH wrote: | | I'm not an expert on kebab shop prices, but i'm guessing it'll be around £20 for four, £6 for the kids sardines, and £10 a day of fags, so they have a possible food budget of £150-200 a week. That seems ample to provide a balanced diet for four to me. |
 _________________ Not surprised Xavi's been replaced. His pass completion rate was only 89%. Useless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
darrensprengers Misclick

Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 6905
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:54 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
along with working class/poor people there will always be a underclass of stupid people.
people that spend £25 on a take away instead of part of a weekly shop. learn how to make your own burgers and you can save a fortune and also control the quality of the food you eat. most importantly sugar, salt, and any of the bad e numbers you do not with to eat. there are good e-numbers so it is worth the investigation.
when you change the question from poor to mean actually the poorest then these people should be helped. some people are incapable of education and learning to feed themselves properly. we should try and possibly fail but given the huge cost on our health service it should be worth the effort even if you do not feel it is our moral obligation in a society.
to be honest, i dont care what people eat as long as they have had access to all the right information. if people are prepared to eat mcdonalds, burger king etc when they know that it will literally shorten your life. when they really know its true and they still eat it a lot then what more can you do? i just dont think children incapable of making this decision should be subjected to it. parents who are stupid are in all sectors and demi-graphics of society and just like i would not expect parents to make there kids smoke by being around them without the law intervening the same should be true of these types of dangerous foods.
16 or 18 get so fat you are on gerry springer for all i care. shorten your life eating chicken nuggets. knock yourself out
as a society lets not make it easy for parents to be lazy and give their kids shit, quick options. lets make parents show our kids how to cook, look after themsleves. liek they do in other countries. i was in rural czech republic recently with some czechs at my mates weekend house. they had a bbq of sorts with all freshly sourced meat and loads of food made, grown and prepared by themselves. _________________ The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
-- Nick "The Greek" Dandalos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PokerSensation Flush
Joined: 18 Nov 2011 Posts: 522
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:01 pm Post subject: Re: Michael Savage obliterates a Socialist |
|
|
| evelyn wrote: | | Don't you want a health service, a police force, street lighting etc ? |
I said that there needs to be some taxes. Why do you assume that lower taxes leads to no police or lighting or health service? As for a health service, I have insurance. I do not want the government health service as it is. It is far too expensive, inefficient, and it is getting cutback which was always inevitable.
| evelyn wrote: | | Capitalists are interested in making money. They are not interested in improving anyone's standard of living or innovating. Some research can only be done by governments. If it was down to Alan Sugar and his ilk we'd still be counting on our fingers and the Higgs Boson particle would still be lost. |
Capitalists are not interested in innovating? LOL! What planet are you living on? Just look at areas where the governments stay out of. Have you noticed the improvements in technology over the years? Have you noticed that most people nowadays have a mobile phone and plasma tv? Quality has gone up while prices have fallen down.
The thing about a Capitalist system is that everyone benefits. It is a system where when people act in their own interests in benefits everyone. You win business by providing high quality products at the lowest price. This grows your business and you higher more people in productive jobs. The public sector is a drain on the economy as you are taking money from the efficient private sector and burning it in the pubic sector. You might have short-term jobs in the public sector but wealth is being destroyed. We do however need police etc, but the State is far too big. Countries with a massive State always collapse in the end because they become bankrupt.
Individual people have donated billions and billions to charity thanks to a capitalist system. Wealth has increased and jobs are created. You can’t compare any system that comes close to improving people lives. Communism, Socialism, fascism, comes nowhere close.
If you look at the 20th Century in the United States, it was an amazing century. The GDP per capita went up 610%. It went up much more than that qualitatively but you can’t measure some stuff like improvements in medicine etc. It went up every single decade. The quality of life got better and better and better.
Why do you think people continue to live better and better? What do you put it down to? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|