Login   Register
 Login    Register
2016-01-21 ACS: Russell Simmons
AndySmith
User avatar
Im not special.
 
Rank: Vetted
Posts: 10,746 | Online
Joined: Feb 12, 2013
imchipdouglas wrote:
Provigilant wrote:A lot of what he says about the food industry is true. The US government does subsidize the meat, dairy and agricultural industries, and corporations do put lots of additives in food to improve yield, reduce cost and increase profits.

Simmons is the first to admit there is no conspiracy behind it all. It's just the way the system works. There is a huge demand for food, and corporations lobby the government to pass laws that allow them to increase the supply. Food is just another product to be marketed and sold, and nutritional value is often overlooked if there is an opportunity to make money. For example, if Golden Corral can make an extra $3 for you to shovel a bunch of low grade crap into a styrofoam container and take it home, they will do it. If you become obese and get diabetes, there is another industry that profits from that.

The point is what can anyone do about it? This is the system we have, and there's a ton of people who need to eat. Simmons solution is to become a vegan, meditate and do yoga. He claims it is cheaper and easier, but even he slips every now and then. I was surprised he admitted he got high and ate bad food over New Year's. You have to give him some credit for being honest.

I thought the most chilling part of the interview was when he told his daughter that Oprah liked his book. Her response was,"Dad, Oprah is for the common people." This is a super-rich girl who skipped two grades and wants to run Goldman Sachs some day. She seems fully invested in the system.

How you describe the "system" is one of the most reasonable ways I've seen it articulated. There's no conspiracy - it's marketing, economics, logistics - it's the same as everything else. Public companies are always being pressured to deliver good financial results, and there are a lot of levers to [try and] get there. Less space between items on the warehouse conveyor (Walmart), machinery that can do a human's job much faster and more precisely with no salary or benefits (auto industry), buying your own shipping company to reduce shipping costs (Amazon Europe). But in the last decade or two, companies are finding that what's good for their financial performance isn't always aligned with what the consumer wants. Transparency/simplicity in ingredients and production, rejection of hormones and pesticides, choosing an "artisan" story over mass-production, worker treatment - some of these movements are legitimate; others evoke caveman superstition, but all have challenged the conventional "business-first" business model. No conspiracies, just a consumer that is more aware of and curious about the origin and impact of their transactions, and businesses that are having to adapt. Even impersonators are being called out; e.g., for "greenwashing," or Tito's Handmade Vodka for not really being handmade (artisan).

I worked for a food research company several years back. We were hired by the marketing arm of the dairy industry to understand the "journey" to veganism, which typically begins with vegetarianism (the dairy industry was understandably keeping an eye on this). We did ethnographies where we went into people's homes across the US, talked to them, looked in their refrigerators, got to know their media consumption, etc. We talked to vegans and vegetarians, and mein gott, the vegan community - while there are no doubt wonderful exceptions - were without a doubt the most deranged and conspiratorial group of people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. We had a Ph.D. food scientist riding along who was familiar with the dairy industry, who would give us a full debrief on why 98% of the information these people shared was beyond lunacy - not that memorizing a universe of patently false information diminished their enthusiasm for sharing it even a little bit. I mean, it was like pre-printing press, this stuff. Beyond having an in-house scientist politely wait until we were back on the road to debunk everything we had just heard, the reason the vegan community's "truth" seems so incredible to me is because the paranoia is endemic; i.e., not just limited to food. These people, wild-eyed, were telling us who really knocked down the towers, telling us about the Bohemian Grove, about lizard people, urging us to listen to Alex Jones... truly a crowd after Art Bell's heart.


It's not a conspiracy in the sense that there's a cabal of evil men sitting around a table cackling about poisoning the American public. But there is a bias in the system that encourages, really demands, that a corporation profits above what is the best thing for their consumers. It is in nearly every industry, it's a result of capitalism when you don't have enough regulation and oversight.

It's not evil, but it is wrong. To save a few pennies relative to their profit they'll engage in practices that risk the health of the consumer, both short term and long term and there is often little negative consequence for such actions so they do it again and again. McDonald's could provide a much higher quality, nutritious meal for the money a consumer pays, but they don't because all the chemicals and fat and junk makes people addicted and crave it. They aren't evil, they are a company trying to make money. But money shouldn't trump the best interests of society.

Also, Chip, go eat a bag of dicks.

Tijuanapussypatrol
User avatar
 
Rank: User
Posts: 276 | Offline
Joined: Jan 21, 2015

AndySmith wrote:
imchipdouglas wrote:
Provigilant wrote:A lot of what he says about the food industry is true. The US government does subsidize the meat, dairy and agricultural industries, and corporations do put lots of additives in food to improve yield, reduce cost and increase profits.

Simmons is the first to admit there is no conspiracy behind it all. It's just the way the system works. There is a huge demand for food, and corporations lobby the government to pass laws that allow them to increase the supply. Food is just another product to be marketed and sold, and nutritional value is often overlooked if there is an opportunity to make money. For example, if Golden Corral can make an extra $3 for you to shovel a bunch of low grade crap into a styrofoam container and take it home, they will do it. If you become obese and get diabetes, there is another industry that profits from that.

The point is what can anyone do about it? This is the system we have, and there's a ton of people who need to eat. Simmons solution is to become a vegan, meditate and do yoga. He claims it is cheaper and easier, but even he slips every now and then. I was surprised he admitted he got high and ate bad food over New Year's. You have to give him some credit for being honest.

I thought the most chilling part of the interview was when he told his daughter that Oprah liked his book. Her response was,"Dad, Oprah is for the common people." This is a super-rich girl who skipped two grades and wants to run Goldman Sachs some day. She seems fully invested in the system.

How you describe the "system" is one of the most reasonable ways I've seen it articulated. There's no conspiracy - it's marketing, economics, logistics - it's the same as everything else. Public companies are always being pressured to deliver good financial results, and there are a lot of levers to [try and] get there. Less space between items on the warehouse conveyor (Walmart), machinery that can do a human's job much faster and more precisely with no salary or benefits (auto industry), buying your own shipping company to reduce shipping costs (Amazon Europe). But in the last decade or two, companies are finding that what's good for their financial performance isn't always aligned with what the consumer wants. Transparency/simplicity in ingredients and production, rejection of hormones and pesticides, choosing an "artisan" story over mass-production, worker treatment - some of these movements are legitimate; others evoke caveman superstition, but all have challenged the conventional "business-first" business model. No conspiracies, just a consumer that is more aware of and curious about the origin and impact of their transactions, and businesses that are having to adapt. Even impersonators are being called out; e.g., for "greenwashing," or Tito's Handmade Vodka for not really being handmade (artisan).

I worked for a food research company several years back. We were hired by the marketing arm of the dairy industry to understand the "journey" to veganism, which typically begins with vegetarianism (the dairy industry was understandably keeping an eye on this). We did ethnographies where we went into people's homes across the US, talked to them, looked in their refrigerators, got to know their media consumption, etc. We talked to vegans and vegetarians, and mein gott, the vegan community - while there are no doubt wonderful exceptions - were without a doubt the most deranged and conspiratorial group of people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. We had a Ph.D. food scientist riding along who was familiar with the dairy industry, who would give us a full debrief on why 98% of the information these people shared was beyond lunacy - not that memorizing a universe of patently false information diminished their enthusiasm for sharing it even a little bit. I mean, it was like pre-printing press, this stuff. Beyond having an in-house scientist politely wait until we were back on the road to debunk everything we had just heard, the reason the vegan community's "truth" seems so incredible to me is because the paranoia is endemic; i.e., not just limited to food. These people, wild-eyed, were telling us who really knocked down the towers, telling us about the Bohemian Grove, about lizard people, urging us to listen to Alex Jones... truly a crowd after Art Bell's heart.


It's not a conspiracy in the sense that there's a cabal of evil men sitting around a table cackling about poisoning the American public. But there is a bias in the system that encourages, really demands, that a corporation profits above what is the best thing for their consumers. It is in nearly every industry, it's a result of capitalism when you don't have enough regulation and oversight.

It's not evil, but it is wrong. To save a few pennies relative to their profit they'll engage in practices that risk the health of the consumer, both short term and long term and there is often little negative consequence for such actions so they do it again and again. McDonald's could provide a much higher quality, nutritious meal for the money a consumer pays, but they don't because all the chemicals and fat and junk makes people addicted and crave it. They aren't evil, they are a company trying to make money. But money shouldn't trump the best interests of society.

Also, Chip, go eat a bag of dicks.


Did anyone else see the story about how the new "mozzarella" sticks at McDonald's are actually made out of mostly other things cheaper than the 100% cheese they claim to be?

poochies uncle
User avatar
 
Rank: User
Posts: 3,378 | Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2013

Tijuanapussypatrol wrote:
Did anyone else see the story about how the new "mozzarella" sticks at McDonald's are actually made out of mostly other things cheaper than the 100% cheese they claim to be?



phpBB [video]

Retardedpetesampras
User avatar
Alison Rosen fan
 
Rank: User
Posts: 3,174 | Offline
Joined: Apr 4, 2013

A. Love the scroll in that screen capture/video above me. I too found the movie yawn enducing.

B. Soda and corn syrup. - something seemed to change in the mid to late 80's. I remember soda (Coke etc) only being served at special occasions. (Birthdays, Fourth of July etc). You had milk or water with all of your meals. Occasionally hot tea. Iced in summer. Then gradually it seemed that soda was kind of served with everything. The "norm" if you will. I know sociology isn't you all's strong suit. Anyway, maybe it was marketing and abundance combined.

C. This brings up another thing that seemed to not exist in the 70's. "lactose intolerance" and fear of "glutens". If the societal shift from milk and bread to soda and veganism is a good thing I have yet to see it. Bread in many forms has sustained human life for literally centuries. And steroids and antibiotics aside, humans have consumed dairy products for hundreds of years.
I love you.

1780's Guy
User avatar
Omnipotent Ramrod
 
Rank: Admin
Posts: 19,390 | Offline
Joined: Mar 3, 2007

Retardedpetesampras wrote:I know sociology isn't you all's strong suit.


What's wrong with you?
Follow @CarollaBoards for updates & news! -- TWITTER ME @1780sGuy
Feeney, to Dameshek (re: reading message boards): How 'bout you read your daughter a book? "Oh, no no no, I gotta see what 1780's Guy said." [Daves Of Thunder, Episode 60]

wojonixon
User avatar
Lily white and always polite
 
Rank: Vetted
Posts: 6,725 | Online
Joined: Jul 18, 2012

1780's Guy wrote:
Retardedpetesampras wrote:I know sociology isn't you all's strong suit.


What's wrong with you?


If your sociology game were stronger you wouldn't have to ask that question.
johnsok0 wrote:Traci's a dirty ho

Neil T
User avatar
Dead chuffed
 
Rank: Moderator
Posts: 48,492 | Offline
Joined: Apr 9, 2008

Youse Alls.

Retardedpetesampras
User avatar
Alison Rosen fan
 
Rank: User
Posts: 3,174 | Offline
Joined: Apr 4, 2013

wojonixon wrote:
1780's Guy wrote:
Retardedpetesampras wrote:I know sociology isn't you all's strong suit.


What's wrong with you?


If your sociology game were stronger you wouldn't have to ask that question.


Perhaps ironically true?
I love you.

HowWouldIKnowThat
User avatar
My bad, didn't even look at what thread we were in
 
Rank: Vetted
Posts: 13,938 | Offline
Joined: Aug 15, 2013

Retardedpetesampras wrote:
wojonixon wrote:
1780's Guy wrote:
What's wrong with you?


If your sociology game were stronger you wouldn't have to ask that question.


Perhaps ironically true?


A sociologist would say "from each his own, according to his ability". So maybe back off SEG, he's doing what he can.

1780's Guy
User avatar
Omnipotent Ramrod
 
Rank: Admin
Posts: 19,390 | Offline
Joined: Mar 3, 2007

Retardedpetesampras wrote:
wojonixon wrote:
1780's Guy wrote:
What's wrong with you?


If your sociology game were stronger you wouldn't have to ask that question.


Perhaps ironically true?


Right, when it comes to sociology and social interactions we all pale in comparison to an anti-social that goes by the name "Retarded Pete Sampras".

Got "us" good.
Follow @CarollaBoards for updates & news! -- TWITTER ME @1780sGuy
Feeney, to Dameshek (re: reading message boards): How 'bout you read your daughter a book? "Oh, no no no, I gotta see what 1780's Guy said." [Daves Of Thunder, Episode 60]

DonnyCal
User avatar
 
Rank: Vetted
Posts: 3,098 | Offline
Joined: Aug 14, 2014

HowWouldIKnowThat wrote:
Retardedpetesampras wrote:
wojonixon wrote:
If your sociology game were stronger you wouldn't have to ask that question.


Perhaps ironically true?


A sociologist would say "from each his own, according to his ability". So maybe back off SEG, he's doing what he can.

That's what Senators say.
Mandrake, have you ever seen a commie drink a glass of water?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests