Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-05-2013, 10:54 AM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
(20-05-2013 10:31 AM)amyb Wrote:  
(20-05-2013 10:18 AM)I and I Wrote:  Not true at all, old school dictatorships fail because they rely on physical force. When you can convince people to choose to go against their physical health or convince people to choose people in office that take away freedoms THAT IS MOTHER FUCKING POWER, THAT IS A TRUE DICTATORSHIP.

The problem I see with this is that you are assuming soft drinks are a gov't conspiracy. I think most people see them as a drink that the public demands, so the companies supply it. Some make good choices about it, some don't. When Coca Cola started out, people didn't drink it five times a day; it was a treat, like ice cream. It is now more available (in more places, more brands are out there) due to consumer demand for it.

Actually I think the original Coke had coke in it...five times a day may have been a minimum! HAHA!

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 11:28 AM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
^ I mean when it was used for "refreshment" purposes only, not medicinal. I might switch to Coke if they put the coke back in it, though.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes amyb's post
20-05-2013, 06:04 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
(20-05-2013 10:31 AM)amyb Wrote:  
(20-05-2013 10:18 AM)I and I Wrote:  Not true at all, old school dictatorships fail because they rely on physical force. When you can convince people to choose to go against their physical health or convince people to choose people in office that take away freedoms THAT IS MOTHER FUCKING POWER, THAT IS A TRUE DICTATORSHIP.

The problem I see with this is that you are assuming soft drinks are a gov't conspiracy. I think most people see them as a drink that the public demands, so the companies supply it. Some make good choices about it, some don't. When Coca Cola started out, people didn't drink it five times a day; it was a treat, like ice cream. It is now more available (in more places, more brands are out there) due to consumer demand for it.

I don't know who said or implied that soft drinks were a government conspiracy.

Stating that Corporations spend billions of dollars on ads to convince people to consume their products isn't a "conspiracy theory" at all. I tend to assume things are common knowledge when I post on here. You weren't aware that corporations spend lots of money on advertising?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 06:05 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
How are ads not coercion?

According to you guys corporations are wasting money on ads because according to you guys it's not the ads that convince us to consume x product, it's all because we choose to consume it, 100 percent free choice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 06:42 PM (This post was last modified: 20-05-2013 06:46 PM by amyb.)
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
(20-05-2013 06:05 PM)I and I Wrote:  How are ads not coercion?

According to you guys corporations are wasting money on ads because according to you guys it's not the ads that convince us to consume x product, it's all because we choose to consume it, 100 percent free choice.

dictionary.reference.com Wrote:co·er·cion
[koh-ur-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.
2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.
It is not using force or intimidation. It is only trying to make a product look more attractive, or more attractive than competitors.

I want to know: have you ever watched an ad and gone out and bought a product you didn't want and had no use for? I never have. I've never once felt forced to buy a product just from seeing an ad. I always still had a choice. All ads so it try to make a certain brand seem more appealing than competitors (such as Pepsi vs. Coke). There are other reasons for ads, like novelty items and useful household items, but I don't think they are relevant here and the person still is not being "coerced." And no, I don't think money spent on ads is wasted, I just disagree with you that it FORCES people to buy shit they don't want for the purpose of harming them.

Quote:I don't know who said or implied that soft drinks were a government conspiracy.

Stating that Corporations spend billions of dollars on ads to convince people to consume their products isn't a "conspiracy theory" at all. I tend to assume things are common knowledge when I post on here. You weren't aware that corporations spend lots of money on advertising?
You suggested it was done to make people undermine their own health (instead of, say, supply and demand):
Quote:When you can convince people to choose to go against their physical health or convince people to choose people in office that take away freedoms THAT IS MOTHER FUCKING POWER, THAT IS A TRUE DICTATORSHIP.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes amyb's post
20-05-2013, 06:59 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
(20-05-2013 06:42 PM)amyb Wrote:  
(20-05-2013 06:05 PM)I and I Wrote:  How are ads not coercion?

According to you guys corporations are wasting money on ads because according to you guys it's not the ads that convince us to consume x product, it's all because we choose to consume it, 100 percent free choice.

dictionary.reference.com Wrote:co·er·cion
[koh-ur-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.
2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.
It is not using force or intimidation. It is only trying to make a product look more attractive, or more attractive than competitors.

I want to know: have you ever watched an ad and gone out and bought a product you didn't want and had no use for? I never have. I've never once felt forced to buy a product just from seeing an ad. I always still had a choice. All ads so it try to make a certain brand seem more appealing than competitors (such as Pepsi vs. Coke). There are other reasons for ads, like novelty items and useful household items, but I don't think they are relevant here and the person still is not being "coerced." And no, I don't think money spent on ads is wasted, I just disagree with you that it FORCES people to buy shit they don't want for the purpose of harming them.

Quote:I don't know who said or implied that soft drinks were a government conspiracy.

Stating that Corporations spend billions of dollars on ads to convince people to consume their products isn't a "conspiracy theory" at all. I tend to assume things are common knowledge when I post on here. You weren't aware that corporations spend lots of money on advertising?
You suggested it was done to make people undermine their own health (instead of, say, supply and demand):
Quote:When you can convince people to choose to go against their physical health or convince people to choose people in office that take away freedoms THAT IS MOTHER FUCKING POWER, THAT IS A TRUE DICTATORSHIP.


See, here is where I start to wonder if you guys are just fucking with me for shits and gigs. EXAMPLE: To me it is not hard to understand why corporations spend lots of money on ads, and hire people to figure out ads to entice the most people.

Do you know that companies do this? Please answer yes or no. Then explain your answer.

Why do you think they do this? Because they are bored? Because they need to? (they need to)

According to you they shouldn't need to because it's all a personal free choice.


I have a random non related question.... When a dictator puts his face on billboards, puts his quotes on billboards, makes videos about him etc etc. What is this to you? Brainwashing?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 07:03 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
Oh yeah, Amy, what is your favorite food to snack on?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 07:07 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
Quote:See, here is where I start to wonder if you guys are just fucking with me for shits and gigs. EXAMPLE: To me it is not hard to understand why corporations spend lots of money on ads, and hire people to figure out ads to entice the most people.

Do you know that companies do this? Please answer yes or no. Then explain your answer.
I've already explained it countless times. It's persuasion and not coercion. It can make them consider buying Pepsi even though they usually buy Coke. But it's still their choice. No one is being "coerced."Suggesting you might like Pepsi better than Coke is not coercion. You could buy Fanta instead. You could say fuck it all and just drink water. Another important reason for advertisements is to make you aware of a product you might not have heard of before.

Quote:Oh yeah, Amy, what is your favorite food to snack on?
Pizza.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes amyb's post
20-05-2013, 07:30 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
(20-05-2013 07:07 PM)amyb Wrote:  
Quote:See, here is where I start to wonder if you guys are just fucking with me for shits and gigs. EXAMPLE: To me it is not hard to understand why corporations spend lots of money on ads, and hire people to figure out ads to entice the most people.

Do you know that companies do this? Please answer yes or no. Then explain your answer.
I've already explained it countless times. It's persuasion and not coercion. It can make them consider buying Pepsi even though they usually buy Coke. But it's still their choice. No one is being "coerced."Suggesting you might like Pepsi better than Coke is not coercion. You could buy Fanta instead. You could say fuck it all and just drink water. Another important reason for advertisements is to make you aware of a product you might not have heard of before.

Quote:Oh yeah, Amy, what is your favorite food to snack on?
Pizza.

Do you think that what people eat and consume is learned from their culture? Why do you think that obesity is worse in the U.S.?

When did you decide to start liking pizza?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2013, 08:06 PM
RE: Should soft drinks be banned or heavily taxed?
Now we are going to hear about the great pizza conspiracy let by the CIA...

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: