The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The governments should regulate the fast food industries

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 747 times Debate No: 65003
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)




The first round is only to accept the debate. The debate can go a bit of the topic, if needed. After the debate we still can post comments for extras. The CON should say why he/she thinks that the governments shouldn't regulate large food corporations and why she/he thinks that the excessive selling and monopolisation of food is good for a society.


Hello, I hope this will be a good friendly debate. I hope this will not end like all other debates, which lead to forfeiture.
Good luck, and please state your first argument.
Debate Round No. 1


G"day and thank you for joining my debate.
Well an quite sensitive topic, isn't it? Why, probably because people think that every regulation that a government makes is bad. Because its everywhere, well this is quite true, but its not needed to believe that this is bad as long as people live in a democratic country. so some countries simply have a full control. But a big government can also be quite good like the Nordic model. But now let get back to food regulation. It is good that we live in a free, modern and accessible society, but since the monopolisation and rise of the food and agricultural industry, there have been many impacts on our way of living. Before I begin, you should know that I'm fully aware that this can hurt the economy, but is money realy more important than lives? The first effects of the food industry rise. Giant fields became owned by corporations, food became cheaper and more accessible and small companies died, because of the impossible prices. Many people stopped starving and there was even some basic development in it. For the first time people stopped starving and began dieing of eating too much. This hasn't changed even today, in fact corporations disuse the globalization, and at the same time many undeveloped countries report mass starvation. The idea of Absolute no regulation, would be jet worse since corporations would totally role the foods. The problem comes also because many people today cant buy real food (fruits, real meat...), the middle and the lower class are getting poorer and they can buy only these cheap products, this makes the smaller companies weaker and the bigger stronger. We all know that the worst case is McDonald's. Another alternative was propaganda by the government (amazing right), and TV,Radio and Hollywood. Did you ever notice an advert on the TV of burgers with gifts for children from cartoons. This sounds evil, but it was the best way how to get money, get children on ya" side.Now we come to the biochemical part: Since the first nutrition scientists have began reporting the bad properties of fat, companies found a another way: More sugar instead of fat, and adding first chemicals. Also genetically engineered food (Me personally, I think that this is good since these products are better, but we should label them, and avoid from nature and corporations). It took quite some time before the labeling got more serious, and some still fight against it. I don't get it ,Labeling food is a serious right of information, very important. Then we come to the Chemistry-era. Since people learned about Fat,Sugar and calories, the companies said that they will reduce all that. Like Coca-cola Zero (it doesn't contain much, but it does contain many liver-dangerous material). About that poisons can be found even in potatoes. And after that corporations began to advert less fat, put more sugar in it, but what sugar. They say that its a new sugar but usually its only a different compound of the sugar molecules (like fructose's and lactose's). And some even removed 10 Kcal (that is literally nothing). But about sugar. It is a quite good alternative, but mind this sugar can cause organ failure, diabetes (type 2 at children!) and do you know what the body does with excessive glucose's? Yeah, it transformes it via. insuline form the pancreas (its an basic hormone) into FAT. so eating less fat, and more sugar (if too much), than you literally made no progress. Oh and about calories, you can eat a candy 100g of full sugar or a bean 50g of protein and 30g of fat and 10g water(imaginary composition). So saying that you have to move and to eat less isn't enough. Chemistry is a good, but misused thing in the food industry.

About science. If a company hires an food scientist and gives him like 500000$/"..., than how high is the possibility that the scientist made theories on the money"s side? We can defeat the food industry just like the tobacco industry, just imagine. And I cant white much more: Good luck.


Golfer15 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Ops, you forfeited, your biggest worry. Well nevermind, this can happen to the best of us.

Well, since you didn't state your argument, I cant deny any of your statements, so we might continue in comments.
Well, relying on the food industry monopolies is bad. Some say that the worst monopoly is the government. But what would you like more a democratic government or a money thirsty industry. The problem is in capitalism itself, in the search for profit there are no real limits,or? Yes, its the public, but if you mislead your public, use propaganda and buy your enemy you rule your territory. Its the control, when the society gets relied on you. If someone like me denies it, then He's automatically a communist. Just like people call obama a socialist (I don't support him or hate). But this isn't the only thing. The government is subsidising large corporations, like the programme of Romney. But the government is supposed not to be connected with corporations. Well like Michele Obama's lets move, and companies actually connected with the idea, but nothing was done, except saying that there was some progress.
The food industry hurts the Society,Environment,misuse the Science and Small companies. The WHO (World health organisation) is trying to ban fast food adverts. But why is there no progress, because of money. This is dangerous.
Monopolisation is bad, since every food gets controlled by a company. I have similar problems with Google play store, since I disagree with them, but there is no other store and I am not able to download.
Influence on society. Since the low and middle class are getting poorer, people buy only cheap junk. The societies world-wide are dieing, but the few are living great. For the first time people will die younger then their parents.

We can stop the food industry, just like the tobacco industry. The tobacco industry denied scientists and doctors, but today we know that smoking is bad. So the same way we could do with the food giants.

Industry of fast food has to be regulated. And just like in Austria, the world should support small, local and organic farms.

The amazing ability of our nature is that it can adapt to its chemistry, so chemicals in food cant last long, this is visible as bacteria are slowly evolving to get immune against antibiotics.

Nice link:
Nice movie: Fed Up

Good'y luck for the last argument of yours.


My apologizes on forfetting the round, school has been very demanding.
I cannot deny any of those facts.
My argument is that McDonald's had over 440,000 employees in 2012 which I'm sure has drastically increased. Most of the people working for them have no college education due to the fact that they couldn't afford college. I believe that if we regulate fast food industries it will affect the economy in a bad way, and it will also lead to all other businesses being regulated. What happens when they regulate car industries, and other big corporations.
IN my opinion government interference is never good.

Thank you for debating this with me. My apologizes again on forgetting.. Gotta love school haha.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Lukas8 2 years ago
The US is the No. 1 in subsidizing its large corporations. The ideology of the Republicans say that they want less government intervention, but acctualy they subsidize large companies. Democrats arent much better. The US government (and some other governments like China) dont support stimulus spending or spending in infrastructure, they rather invest in private, so that the private invest in it( aldue the US doesnt completley invest in private). The US is one of the worse cases, but the US itself isnt bad, it shows only what true capitalism does to a society.

But other less capitalistic systems like EU,Aussie,Canadian,Scandinavian and NZ governments showed that true capitalism isnt needed for living. Norway is the most developed country, but it does support a social democracy. The EU has many regulations that give more life to people. And Canada has shown that less social inequallity makes less crime. The Economy isnt important at all, if we look for beter alternatives.

Like in Switzerland , where the government is very intervative, but because of direct democracy, people choose the spendings---- Thats a true democracy---

Small organic farms can unite. And its better if the food is localised.

Large corporations have way to much power.
Posted by Lukas8 2 years ago
Never mind, it can happen to all of us. And as I said it will have a bad influence on the economy, but money is less important than lives. And gov intervention, can be bad, but it cant be bad if democratic. Like in scandinavia.
Posted by Lukas8 2 years ago
We can destroy the food corporations just like the tobacco industry. Due they denied all scientific facts, today we know that the smoking has bad effects on our body. So why cant we make this on the food idustry to tell that this is bad. For the first time people will die yunger than their parents.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
The only possible monopoly would be government. No other business can stop another from doing business.Unless that had the heavy hand of government to wreck anothers business.
Posted by Golfer15 2 years ago
Adam i agree that they can be gross but it's not the governments position to intrude on businesses.
Posted by Adam2isback 2 years ago
They should just bomb them. lol
Just kidding.

Nah, I hate fast food places though. YUCK!!!!!!!!!!!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: ff, con never proves that total regulation is bad