when I was working at macy's (for all of two days. I quit before I got through training) I got a discount at all food courts in the malls (mostly because I dressed snappy, but the little macy's badge we made on the first day of training helped).

Hot Dog On A Stick? The two-dollar corndogs? For me? 1.75.

McDonald's dollar menu?

I got that shit for ninety-seven cents.

yeah. I love me some retail kickback shit.

I'm glad I got another job here, though, because I could totally picture myself buying two mcchicken sandwiches every day for lunch (for 1.94). i'm sure i live dangerously enough already, what with all the tar and alcohol i pile upon my varied internals each and every day.

i figure my liver is already forty.

'course, I'm trying to get it up to sixty by the time I'm twenty-seven, but I'll need your help.

buy me a drink next time you see me, won't you?

Posted by: fishfucker at June 13, 2004 05:43 AM

But McDonald's really is the best thing for a hangover. Right now, I just wish they delivered.

Posted by: Bunty at June 13, 2004 10:41 AM

Supersize me and Oryk and Crake . . oh god this is how it's going to end (as I always knew it would but was doing SUCH a good job of hiding out and distracting myself). But I am glad this film got made. But I am too much of a cynic to think it will ever stem the tide.

Posted by: bluepoppy at June 14, 2004 11:55 AM

yes, bluepoppy.

fishfucker i will buy you a drink the FIRST time I see you. For Sure. (but I expect reciprocity)

Posted by: hereitype at June 14, 2004 02:10 PM

*It's perhaps important that children in America are eating shit and the shit that they are eating is giving them shit for brains.*

Eh. I was raised on junkfood and eat it by the truckload now and I'm no dumber than anyone else. And I've met tons of healthy idiots. But the DARE analogy is interesting,both health nuts and anti-drug fanatics feel that it's somehow their business what you choose to ingest.

Posted by: jonmc at June 14, 2004 03:35 PM

Uh, the DARE analogy would be appropriate if not only were drugs allowed in schools, but drug making companies were funding lots of schools in exchange for getting their products marketed to kids.

the fact that you believe yourself to be healthy and intelligent doesn't mean that its ok to feed children hohos instead of healthy food. it's not outrageous to suggest that the advertising industry's explicit reliance on the importance of getting children to choose a brand for life is adversely affecting america.

Posted by: hereitype at June 14, 2004 03:59 PM

*it's not outrageous to suggest that the advertising industry's explicit reliance on the importance of getting children to choose a brand for life is adversely affecting america*

Fair enough, but that's not a crticism of junk food per se. Would it make any difference if the brand kids chose for life was Trader Joe's or something?

And a lot of the rest is merely taste. Kids tend to like sweet sugary stuff more than adults. You're tastes in food tend to change as you get older.

And to be honest, what's the alternative? We're gonna go house to house and dictate to parents what they can feed their kids? Makers of less-than-healthy foods disallowed from advertising?

I'm honestly not trying to be a asshole here. I'm just saying.

Posted by: jonmc at June 14, 2004 04:37 PM

the movie, and nobody that i've ever talked to advocated going door to door and telling people what they should eat. There were two major themes that I touched on in my post about the movie, that I think you might have missed (probably because I was not clear.)

I'm not going to argue that junk food is bad for you with you. I urge you to consult any nutritionist or any healthcare provider about whether or not that food is good for you. There are many resources and there isn't really a debate about it.

1. McDonalds and other fast food manufacturers target children with their advertising. They make food that is bad for you, and they try very hard to sell it to children to get them 'hooked'. Just like cigarette companies did, until they got in trouble. They do this using advertising and stuff like drawing children in for birthday parties and with playgrounds.

2. School lunch is being run by companies that profit from selling the same junk food to children.

So: the alternatives are to prevent McDonalds and junk food manufacturers from marketing to children, like the Camel was prevented from marketing to children, and to ensure that school lunches are nutritious.

Neither of those two tangible modifications are difficult or unprecedented.

Posted by: hereitype at June 14, 2004 05:32 PM

I'm never eating a school lunch again.
No, really.

Posted by: turbulent priest at June 15, 2004 02:13 PM

McDonalds is not bad for you, unless overconsumed. There are always occasions, where too many calories, grams of fat, sodium, etc. are consumed. And you know what, McDonalds has responded to all this and offers alternatives to the BigMac and QuarterPounder on its menu. A McDonalds hamburger is not bad for you or high in calories - 210. The problem with most people is they want to eat like a horse and be a size 6 (or the equivalent for men). Plus, McDonalds got rid of the super size and hey, one more thing - you could also ask to hold the mayo!

Posted by: VRK at June 22, 2004 01:46 PM

in response to you, jon mc: kids actually do like a variety of foods and it is actually older people (senior citizens and the like) who really like sweet stuff.

Posted by: ... at June 22, 2004 03:11 PM