Reply With QuoteIt is and always will be YOUR CHOICE, slugger. Whether or not the advertising is "deceitful."Originally Posted by g0zen
Say Ahhh
Well, yeah, obviously.
The point here isn't whether or not McDonalds should pay for making people fat, that's absurd, the point is that McDonalds LIES to the consumer and deserves to pay for it. You know why you don't see cigarette commercials anymore? Because they were filled with happy, healthy, smiling people. They were perpetuating a lie, and the government clearly called them out on it. Someday, hopefully, the same will go for all things that are unhealthy for you. They'll be there, but it will be YOUR CHOICE to indulge in them at your own risk instead of being continously bombarded by deceitful advertising.
Time for a change
Dippity-Do!
It is and always will be YOUR CHOICE, slugger. Whether or not the advertising is "deceitful."
McDonalds has never lied to the consumer. And if they had, the government would have stepped in. Deceitful advertising is a way of life in America. Should we sue car companies for ruining the earth because their SUV commercials make offroading and driving fuel hungry beasts look like so much fun? Sue beer companies for our alcholism because they insisted beer is nothing but a party?
If one is unable to see the truth behind advertising, then I'm sorry, they're unfortunately too stupid and deserve their fate.
Say Ahhh
I was trying to be civil about this, but since you seem dead set on being insulting I have no choice but to retort.
If the point isn't holding McDonalds accoutable for false advertising, then what IS the point? What makes a lawsuit frivilous? Is that for you or I to decide? No. I think that's for a judge and jury to decide. I see no reason why Congress has to get involved in something like this.
If in these cases McDonalds is so clearly not accoutable for the effects on the plantiffs then any sane judge would toss the cases out court without a flinch, right? So then, why do these cases persist? Because these judges obviously see something to the claims, if not something immediately liable then something at least worth further investigating.
Wrong, check your facts.
Just because this is true doesn't mean it's not something we shouldn't work toward changing.
I'd be all for that.
See, now you're catching on.
Companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising designed to make you want to buy their product. They don't do this by telling you the negative sides of it, and while that's certainly sound business practice it is morally and (more important) legally questionable. I find it ironic that conservatives want people to be more morally conscious, but corporations can be as amoral and deceptive as they like.
Time for a change
Dippity-Do!
The fact that the judges see something with the claims is the problem. The judges themselves seek to gum up the works by allowing for these rediculous cases to actually be heard instead of throwing them out, where they belong. The judges are removing accountability from the consumer. Something the judges were never meant to do.
That is why this legislation is good. It gives the consumer back their responcibility, and takes it out of the hands of these judges.
Sorry about the attacks. I'll be more civil.
Say Ahhh
I don't see this so much as Congress trying to champion consumer responsibility, but trying to appease special interests groups. The judges on the other hand are more (if not altogether completely) independant minded and come at this problem legally, as it was intended.
Time for a change
What False Advertising? I understand about those two cases you linked to AND those cases wouldn't be thrown out. McDonalds does not have a responsibility to tell you to get your fat ass out and exercise. They have every right to advertise to sell their product. It's not like it's addictive like cigarettes, any dipshit that eats a lot of fast food and gets obese deserves what they get. Do we as a nation really need babysitters?
You sir, are a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.
You should have acted
g0zen are you trying to sound like an obtuse idiot? Because it's working if you are.
is cuter than you
If you don't have enough common sense to understand a bit about the situation you are in, then it's your own damn fault. Taking a cigarette, an item that produces smoke, and inhaling that smoke into your body... if you aren't the least bit bothered by that idea, or don't understand even slightly that that might not be such a good idea, you get what you deserve.
Same thing here. If all you eat is McDonalds food and sit on your fat ass, then you deserve your fat ass. It doesn't take a rocket sceintist to look at, smell, and taste fast food, and understand that maybe it isn't the best quality food in the world.
More and more, Americans are sick of having to take responsibility for their actions. Instead, they just sue everybody. That trend should be stopped.
Damn, that's some impressive, intelligent powers of argument you've got there.
WARNING: This post may contain violent and disturbing images.
You should have acted
Thank you, I try.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks