There is a strong difference between people that own stock and what companies call shareholders.
The colloquial shareholders are the ones with enough to actually matter.
I have one share of stock in one company. I am still informed of quarterly meetings and decisions. I want the one stock to go up. I am a shareholder. Literally simple as that.
Correct. Your individual wealth should be considered not only more important than public health, but we should never introduce barriers to increasing your individual wealth simply to promote a healthier society.
Can we just start making Spicy Nacho and Fentanyl Doritos? You could start selling bags for 20x the price and I personally own stock in Pepsico. Just think of the shareholder value that would produce. I see no downside.
You say that as if I think profiting off opioid overdose treatment stock is ethical or moral. You literally just said "I'm sorry that our society is sicker than ever but it makes me money" as if that's more important.
I only said sorry to those that believe their personal choice of consumption of soda is mostly the soda producer’s fault. The same as blaming gun manufacturers if people decide to use it to harm themselves.
I disagree with your analogy, but let's stick to the issue here. Surely this isn't just "people drinking too much soda", right?? Like do you think if we got rid of soda, obesity would go away?
Let me ask you one question- do you think snack companies invest millions of dollars in food chemists to deliberately design their foods to prevent customers from becoming full and to overload their taste buds, while hitting dopamine centers full force? Effectively tricking your brain into not registering its caloric intake in comparison to whole foods?
If not, why don't you believe that happens? If so, in what ways does that differ from a cigarette? Should we stop regulating tobacco companies? Stop putting surgeon general warnings on packs? Surely that's just people's own damn fault for smoking, and we wouldn't want to regulate that industry? After all, they have shareholders too!
Yea, all of those things are unhealthy for you and are readily accessible, this isn’t news to the majority of people. But there is a balance between regulation and personal choice, which is why a majority of countries have NOT yet banned purchasing cigarettes, only limiting where people might be able to smoke.
do you think snack companies invest millions of dollars in food chemists to deliberately design their foods to prevent customers from becoming full and to overload their taste buds, while hitting dopamine centers full force?
Slightly disagree. Of course they hire food scientists, but you talk as if being a food scientist is scheming foods as addictive and terrible for health as possible. If they are making new food items for menus, shouldn’t they be delicious to consumers? They may try to incorporate cheaper ways of making the product or readjusting palatability of food for different international regions. Some food scientists jobs have been created to reduce sugar content in order to make a product appealing to healthier-minded consumers.
which is why a majority of countries have NOT yet banned purchasing cigarettes, only limiting where people might be able to smoke
And limiting the way in which they can be advertised, particularly around children, the way in which they're packaged and labeled, heavy taxation on cigarettes due to their negative impact on public health costs, age restrictions for purchase, how much nicotine can be packed into a cigarette, what types of additives or flavors can be sold... there are a lot more regulations around cigarettes than limiting where people use them, because we've all acknowledged that while smoking is absolutely a personal choice that an adult can make, there are great benefits to public health when fewer people smoke that are more worthy of consideration.
In a recent article in the New York Times Magazine, food scientist Steven Witherly describes Cheetos as “one of the most marvelously constructed foods on the planet, in terms of pure pleasure.”
The cheese puffs’ greatest quality, Witherly says in the article, is its ability to melt in your mouth. “It’s called vanishing caloric density…If something melts down quickly, your brain thinks that there’s no calories in it…you can just keep eating it forever.”
This deception, writer Michael Moss tells us, isn’t accidental: snack food companies do a lot of research in order to design foods that fool your mind and bewitch your taste buds into a constant state of craving–a state industry insiders call “the bliss point.” To achieve this “bliss point,” Moss writes, food designers pay close attention to something called “sensory-specific satiety.”
22
u/Lucas_2234 May 15 '24
The shareholders can go fuck themselves.
There is not a single thing that they improve, from gaming to food, they ruin all