Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Screw You, America

Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.
My work here is, finally, done.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 3:38:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

In all fairness, people are terrible at making optimal choices (relative, in this case, to the criterion of long-term health). Take the 401K, for example: multiple studies have been done to the effect that, if given a choice on whether to contribute (with the added incentive, mind you, of the employer matching contributions), very few people actually did the smart thing. Contrarily, when the program was designed to be "opt-out" (which, mind you, entirely conserves the power to choose whether to be involved), there was a substantially higher contribution rate. It's why plenty of utility companies and banks now offer auto-billing options designed to free you from the hassle of manually paying your bills every month. It's certainly cut down on the past-dues and the non-payments.

Similarly, just having options for healthier menu options isn't good enough, because most people, through the work of a massive complex of biases and iffy shortcuts, don't make well-formed decisions. If you have to go further out of your way to get the soda (while still, presumably, having the option--though, even if you didn't, it's the chain's decision to eat that potential profit by not offering soda), predictably fewer people will actually shuffle out of that status quo.

So, if, as you say, the company is "bowing to special interest groups", I'd argue that's not inherently a bad thing. If the "special interest" in this case is "drinking less soda", I'd argue that the pros of people (and especially children), on balance, drinking fewer sodas more than outweighs the benefit, if you can call it that, of having "soda with kids' meal" as your default.

I mean, what exactly is the beef? People are presumably drinking less liquid diabetes/cancer/heart disease, while still having the slightly-less-direct-than-before option to still consume those things? What possible benefit does the world actually derive from returning to the "soda by default with a kid's meal" paradigm? Are you arguing that kids should be drinking soda? That parents are better off not having to consciously make the decision to put the stuff into their children's bodies? What insidious consequence are you imagining such that you could be this outraged about a goddamned Dairy Queen?
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 4:47:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Dude. It's just marketing. Kids can still get soda. It's just not part of the kids meal package, which is entirely appropriate. It's not bowing to pressure as much as positioning themselves as a healthy family place because they think they will sell more stuff that way.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 5:04:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Actually, that kind of shocks me. Why would you have a kids meal package with no healthy options in it? I'd never take kids to a place like that. Taking soda off isn't enough because it's not just giving them unhealthy food but teaching them unhealthy habits in relation to food. Most parents probably wouldn't even go there, and they're trying to change that image.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 6:25:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I never get tired of the reactions from those who perceive some horrible injustice when a company makes a marketing decision they disagree with. Bravo.
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 7:19:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Vote Democrat
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 8:04:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 6:25:55 PM, Burzmali wrote:
I never get tired of the reactions from those who perceive some horrible injustice when a company makes a marketing decision they disagree with. Bravo.

My anger is directed more at this special interest group and the fact the business caved in. They already allow for milk or a "arctic blast" (basically a slushie). To say that a kids meal no longer comes with soda, even though it could already come without one if the parents told their kids they can't have it, is yet another example of deferring responsibility to someone else.

There is no injustice, since its a business and it can do what it wants. The fact that it caves in suggests they need to placate those who don't hold the parent's responsible for ordering the kids meal with a soda. That is what bothers me....and the hypocrisy of trying to make kids meals at fast food healthier, since it's garbage food. (even if I hold DQ in high regards in terms of quality)
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 8:08:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 5:04:39 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Actually, that kind of shocks me. Why would you have a kids meal package with no healthy options in it? I'd never take kids to a place like that. Taking soda off isn't enough because it's not just giving them unhealthy food but teaching them unhealthy habits in relation to food. Most parents probably wouldn't even go there, and they're trying to change that image.

Again, my issue is with this special interest that has been lobbying fast food establishments.
And, exactly right, it's fast food. Shame on the parent for even taking them there, right? Or, if it's okay once in a while, then so is the soda. And the fact that you can still get a soda, if you ask, is just lip service, which annoys me about these advocates.
My work here is, finally, done.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 8:52:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

Doesn't matter. If the parents decide they're not going to go to Dairy Queen for this reason, that's all the reason Dairy Queen needs to "bow" to customer demands.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Dairy Queen chases market share just like politicians chase after votes. I agree with your sentiment, but this is a prime aspect of democracy and free market economies. People have a choice...in government, it's the people's government, not the political party's, and in business, the customer is king. The king can do WTF he wants.

I suppose it comes down to that quote about how with power comes responsibility. But, what's going to keep those with power responsible in this case? If the people do WTF they want to do, who's going to be able to get them to do otherwise?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2015 1:20:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 8:04:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/15/2015 6:25:55 PM, Burzmali wrote:
I never get tired of the reactions from those who perceive some horrible injustice when a company makes a marketing decision they disagree with. Bravo.

My anger is directed more at this special interest group and the fact the business caved in. They already allow for milk or a "arctic blast" (basically a slushie). To say that a kids meal no longer comes with soda, even though it could already come without one if the parents told their kids they can't have it, is yet another example of deferring responsibility to someone else.

There is no injustice, since its a business and it can do what it wants. The fact that it caves in suggests they need to placate those who don't hold the parent's responsible for ordering the kids meal with a soda. That is what bothers me....and the hypocrisy of trying to make kids meals at fast food healthier, since it's garbage food. (even if I hold DQ in high regards in terms of quality)

Do you have an actual link to the alleged "special interest group" and what they complained about, which DQ is supposedly caving to? Trying to make kids' meals healthier at fast food places has been a trend for the last 10 years. And DQ consistently has so little market share that they don't warrant their own slice on the pie chart. Maybe they decided to finally do something about their poor popularity.

Also, at what point does a "special interest group" outgrow that term? I'm pretty sure if you did a poll, a vast majority of parents would be in favor of making kids' meals less bad. Folks such as yourself could be the special interest, here. If you think the food is junk, and I assume wouldn't feed it to your kids (if you have any), then why do you give a f***?
mindbender
Posts: 155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2015 10:33:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent. : :

It won't be long before McDonald's, Burger King, and some other corporate restaurants follow DQ's lead. It's the "in" thing to do now. Remember the "low cholesterol" days.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:14:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Really? Let me put this simply. DQ is taking this step for profits. They understand that consumer tastes are changing and diversifying. By putting milk or juice in a kid meal it only expands consumer choice to keep up with the market. That in turn means they don't loose business from consumers who don't want a soda in their kid's meal. Trust me when I say they will still offer sodas in the kids meal.

Stop trying to paint this as gov regulation or some minority group pushing their will on DQ. This is all about profits. This is how it is supposed to work.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:14:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Really? Let me put this simply. DQ is taking this step for profits. They understand that consumer tastes are changing and diversifying. By putting milk or juice in a kid meal it only expands consumer choice to keep up with the market. That in turn means they don't loose business from consumers who don't want a soda in their kid's meal. Trust me when I say they will still offer sodas in the kids meal.

Stop trying to paint this as gov regulation or some minority group pushing their will on DQ. This is all about profits. This is how it is supposed to work.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:57:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 10:14:08 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Really? Let me put this simply. DQ is taking this step for profits. They understand that consumer tastes are changing and diversifying. By putting milk or juice in a kid meal it only expands consumer choice to keep up with the market. That in turn means they don't loose business from consumers who don't want a soda in their kid's meal. Trust me when I say they will still offer sodas in the kids meal.

Why is this so hard to understand? They already have milk on the menu. The healthy option is there for parents to make. What DQ, and allegedly other places are doing, is taking soda off the menu for kids meals; it will not be offered or suggested, or mentioned on the menu.

Stop trying to paint this as gov regulation or some minority group pushing their will on DQ. This is all about profits. This is how it is supposed to work.

It is about groups pushing their will, otherwise, DQ wouldn't be doing it "for the sake of profits". The fact they need to placate people is why they are doing it, and the people that need placating are the ones I am angry at.

This moral hazard is prevalent in America - people protecting parents who can't say no to their children. It is the same mentality that brings San Franscico to demand no toys in Happy Meals, because it markets to children and I guess parents can't say no, or taking vending machines out of schools.

Whatever happened to caveat emptor?
For the land of the free, we sure like to limit our options and expect others to take responsibility for ourselves.

There is a world of difference between saying kids meals should not have soda and kids meals should have a healthy drink option.
My work here is, finally, done.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 6:37:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 10:57:21 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Whatever happened to caveat emptor?
For the land of the free, we sure like to limit our options and expect others to take responsibility for ourselves.

There is a world of difference between saying kids meals should not have soda and kids meals should have a healthy drink option.

Caveat Emptor is dead. The lawyers were making too much money apparently.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 9:49:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Isn't Burger King following suit? I feel like I saw an article saying BK was taking sodas off the kids menu too.

I agree it's pretty ridiculous that the restaurant eliminates an option from their menu because parents cannot say no to their children. However, because I never buy kids meals, I don't care too much. Now if DQ takes their desserts off the menu for the same reasoning, I'll be pretty ticked off.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 9:58:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 9:49:08 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
Isn't Burger King following suit? I feel like I saw an article saying BK was taking sodas off the kids menu too.
Probably. I don't know if one is following the other, or if they all got together add decided together. It's supposed to start later this year (which seems odd, but whatever).

I agree it's pretty ridiculous that the restaurant eliminates an option from their menu because parents cannot say no to their children. However, because I never buy kids meals, I don't care too much. Now if DQ takes their desserts off the menu for the same reasoning, I'll be pretty ticked off.

At least someone understands my point.
Pretty sure if DQ got rid of their deserts, they'd be out of business in a week.
My work here is, finally, done.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:00:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 9:58:07 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 9:49:08 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
Isn't Burger King following suit? I feel like I saw an article saying BK was taking sodas off the kids menu too.
Probably. I don't know if one is following the other, or if they all got together add decided together. It's supposed to start later this year (which seems odd, but whatever).

I agree it's pretty ridiculous that the restaurant eliminates an option from their menu because parents cannot say no to their children. However, because I never buy kids meals, I don't care too much. Now if DQ takes their desserts off the menu for the same reasoning, I'll be pretty ticked off.

At least someone understands my point.
Pretty sure if DQ got rid of their deserts, they'd be out of business in a week.

Yeah probably. I never go there for food, if I absolutely need to get a meal, the only thing I like is the chicken tender basket. Their blizzards and other stuff are awesome though.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:01:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 10:00:10 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 5/17/2015 9:58:07 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 9:49:08 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
Isn't Burger King following suit? I feel like I saw an article saying BK was taking sodas off the kids menu too.
Probably. I don't know if one is following the other, or if they all got together add decided together. It's supposed to start later this year (which seems odd, but whatever).

I agree it's pretty ridiculous that the restaurant eliminates an option from their menu because parents cannot say no to their children. However, because I never buy kids meals, I don't care too much. Now if DQ takes their desserts off the menu for the same reasoning, I'll be pretty ticked off.

At least someone understands my point.
Pretty sure if DQ got rid of their deserts, they'd be out of business in a week.

Yeah probably. I never go there for food, if I absolutely need to get a meal, the only thing I like is the chicken tender basket.
LOL
That is exactly the only thing I get as well.

Their blizzards and other stuff are awesome though.
Meh, they are too rich for me. Good, but I feel awful afterwards. (probably diabetes LOL)
I do like their cakes, but they are so damn expensive.
My work here is, finally, done.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2015 10:50:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 10:57:21 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 10:14:08 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 5/15/2015 2:47:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
So, I just read in the paper that Dairy Queen, a fast food restaurant, is taking soda off kid's meals. It will now include milk or juice?/water?, but soda is not allowed or extra - it was unclear.

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.

Dafuq?
Are people so concerned about children's health that, instead of putting the onus on parents to tell their children "no, you can have milk", or addressing the issue that the child is eating fast food (yet again), some people instead are saying the company needs to take action. Fvck that noise.

It is one thing to push for healthy alternatives that DQ should have as options, like you should have a milk/juice/water offering, but this is too much.
Government, please take care of me.
Evil corporations, please take care of me.
People whose job it is to protect me and raise me, be my friend.

I am so sick of this crap in America. Take responsibility and be consistent.

Really? Let me put this simply. DQ is taking this step for profits. They understand that consumer tastes are changing and diversifying. By putting milk or juice in a kid meal it only expands consumer choice to keep up with the market. That in turn means they don't loose business from consumers who don't want a soda in their kid's meal. Trust me when I say they will still offer sodas in the kids meal.

Why is this so hard to understand? They already have milk on the menu. The healthy option is there for parents to make. What DQ, and allegedly other places are doing, is taking soda off the menu for kids meals; it will not be offered or suggested, or mentioned on the menu.

Stop trying to paint this as gov regulation or some minority group pushing their will on DQ. This is all about profits. This is how it is supposed to work.

It is about groups pushing their will, otherwise, DQ wouldn't be doing it "for the sake of profits". The fact they need to placate people is why they are doing it, and the people that need placating are the ones I am angry at.

This moral hazard is prevalent in America - people protecting parents who can't say no to their children. It is the same mentality that brings San Franscico to demand no toys in Happy Meals, because it markets to children and I guess parents can't say no, or taking vending machines out of schools.

Whatever happened to caveat emptor?
For the land of the free, we sure like to limit our options and expect others to take responsibility for ourselves.

There is a world of difference between saying kids meals should not have soda and kids meals should have a healthy drink option.

You are nuts. The decline in children drinking sodas is greater than any age group. All groups are in decline with carbonated beverage consumption. It is not the businesses selling soda driving that metric, it is the market itself and Dairy Queen is adjusting to the market, which their competitors McDonalds, Burger King and others have already done.

Rest assured, Dairy Queen would love to have you drink as much soda as you could, especially since it is the highest margin product they sell. They are not trying to brain wash you or tell you what to drink or not to drink. Stop with the conspiracy theory.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:53:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/17/2015 10:50:47 PM, slo1 wrote:

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.
You are nuts. The decline in children drinking sodas is greater than any age group. All groups are in decline with carbonated beverage consumption. It is not the businesses selling soda driving that metric, it is the market itself and Dairy Queen is adjusting to the market, which their competitors McDonalds, Burger King and others have already done.

Then the newspaper lied to me, as they said it cowed to a special interest group. (and this was not an Op-ed)
The special interest group is my concern; the fact that is exists bothers me.
The fact that kids meals already can come with milk instead of soda already addresses the market desire to drink less soda.

Rest assured, Dairy Queen would love to have you drink as much soda as you could, especially since it is the highest margin product they sell. They are not trying to brain wash you or tell you what to drink or not to drink. Stop with the conspiracy theory.

It's almost like you refuse to read what I write. Oh, well.
I could care less if a company has "healthy" alternatives, as it is their business. I don't have to go there.
My work here is, finally, done.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 11:53:05 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 10:50:47 PM, slo1 wrote:

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.
You are nuts. The decline in children drinking sodas is greater than any age group. All groups are in decline with carbonated beverage consumption. It is not the businesses selling soda driving that metric, it is the market itself and Dairy Queen is adjusting to the market, which their competitors McDonalds, Burger King and others have already done.

Then the newspaper lied to me, as they said it cowed to a special interest group. (and this was not an Op-ed)

If that's seriously how the paper put it, then that "journalist" should be reprimanded or you need to stop reading that paper.

Or is this just the state of newspapers these days? Have they forgotten that editorializing belongs in the op-ed section?

The special interest group is my concern; the fact that is exists bothers me.

The fact that a group of like-minded individuals got together and expressed their concerns about an issue bothers you? WTF?

The fact that kids meals already can come with milk instead of soda already addresses the market desire to drink less soda.

Rest assured, Dairy Queen would love to have you drink as much soda as you could, especially since it is the highest margin product they sell. They are not trying to brain wash you or tell you what to drink or not to drink. Stop with the conspiracy theory.

It's almost like you refuse to read what I write. Oh, well.
I could care less if a company has "healthy" alternatives, as it is their business. I don't have to go there.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:50:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:53:05 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 10:50:47 PM, slo1 wrote:

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.
You are nuts. The decline in children drinking sodas is greater than any age group. All groups are in decline with carbonated beverage consumption. It is not the businesses selling soda driving that metric, it is the market itself and Dairy Queen is adjusting to the market, which their competitors McDonalds, Burger King and others have already done.

Then the newspaper lied to me, as they said it cowed to a special interest group. (and this was not an Op-ed)

If that's seriously how the paper put it, then that "journalist" should be reprimanded or you need to stop reading that paper.

Or, it's true that special interests were demanding it....

Or is this just the state of newspapers these days? Have they forgotten that editorializing belongs in the op-ed section?
It wouldn't surprise me. News sucks nowadays.

The special interest group is my concern; the fact that is exists bothers me.

The fact that a group of like-minded individuals got together and expressed their concerns about an issue bothers you? WTF?

Are my communication skills really this poor, or are you intentionally being this dense?
The concerns they have is what bother me, and is prevalent in American society, hence the title.

Why is the corporation held responsible for parents' poor decisions? The fact that people view restaurants have a responsibility to protect children, who have no money, from their parents' poor decisions is ridiculous.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:54:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
http://www.startribune.com...

Here is the article.
If they can still get it soda, then, what is the point of this movement? At best, it is to avoid parents to say "no, you can't have soda" to their kids, since it isn't pictured. That is pathetic on its face, and its own issue.
In fact, that is the issue that needs addressing.
My work here is, finally, done.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:04:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:50:31 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:53:05 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/17/2015 10:50:47 PM, slo1 wrote:

My issue is not that they are doing this - it is why they are doing this.
They are bowing to pressure from special interest groups.
You are nuts. The decline in children drinking sodas is greater than any age group. All groups are in decline with carbonated beverage consumption. It is not the businesses selling soda driving that metric, it is the market itself and Dairy Queen is adjusting to the market, which their competitors McDonalds, Burger King and others have already done.

Then the newspaper lied to me, as they said it cowed to a special interest group. (and this was not an Op-ed)

If that's seriously how the paper put it, then that "journalist" should be reprimanded or you need to stop reading that paper.

Or, it's true that special interests were demanding it....

Then that's what they should say: the group said X. DQ did Y. Using the word "cowed" is editorializing because of the connotation. I could write that a dozen different ways designed to elicit different conclusions and emotions from the reader. But a journalist is supposed to be reporting on what happened without trying to guide the reader to think one way or another about the subjects of the story.

Or is this just the state of newspapers these days? Have they forgotten that editorializing belongs in the op-ed section?
It wouldn't surprise me. News sucks nowadays.

The special interest group is my concern; the fact that is exists bothers me.

The fact that a group of like-minded individuals got together and expressed their concerns about an issue bothers you? WTF?

Are my communication skills really this poor, or are you intentionally being this dense?
The concerns they have is what bother me, and is prevalent in American society, hence the title.

I don't generally try to criticize others' communication skills. What you're writing seems to be at odds with what you're actually trying to say, though. You wrote that the group was your concern, and the fact that it exists bothers you. So the existence of the group itself doesn't bother you?

Why is the corporation held responsible for parents' poor decisions? The fact that people view restaurants have a responsibility to protect children, who have no money, from their parents' poor decisions is ridiculous.

Who is saying that the corporation should be held responsible for parents' poor decisions? Please spell it out. Because all I see so far is a group stating a concern, and a corporation getting on the healthier eating train.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:12:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:54:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
http://www.startribune.com...

Here is the article.
If they can still get it soda, then, what is the point of this movement? At best, it is to avoid parents to say "no, you can't have soda" to their kids, since it isn't pictured. That is pathetic on its face, and its own issue.
In fact, that is the issue that needs addressing.

Here's one possibility. Ordering at a fast food place is supposed to be fast. This is why combos and kids' meals exist in the first place. Instead of having to say "I'd like a cheese burger, make that two, and a medium Dr. Pepper, and a kids' milk, and a medium order of fries, and a kids' order of fries," customers can instead say "I'd like a #4 and a cheeseburger kids' meal." Now imagine that it's 15 years ago before healthier alternatives were standard. A concerned parent back then would still have to say "... and a cheeseburger kids' meal with juice and apple slices." I know that doesn't seem like a big deal, but making the juice or milk and apple slices the norm, rather than the exception, the ordering process for the increasing number of concerned parents drops back to normal.

Complain about the supposedly problematic special interest group all you want, but they're voicing of concerns help companies see trends earlier and adjust.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:14:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 2:04:40 PM, Burzmali wrote:

Who is saying that the corporation should be held responsible for parents' poor decisions? Please spell it out. Because all I see so far is a group stating a concern, and a corporation getting on the healthier eating train.

Fact: DQ currently offers non-soda alternatives.
Fact: DQ's kids menu states they can have soda, "arctic freeze", or milk.
http://www.dairyqueen.com...

This change is to take off soda, but still offer it upon request. (apparently it also adds water)
So, what, exactly, is the concern that is being addressed, if kids can still get soda?
As I said, at best, it makes it easier for parents to lie to their children and say "it doesn't come with soda", instead of just telling them "no".
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:28:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 2:12:59 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 5/18/2015 1:54:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/18/2015 1:32:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
http://www.startribune.com...

Here is the article.
If they can still get it soda, then, what is the point of this movement? At best, it is to avoid parents to say "no, you can't have soda" to their kids, since it isn't pictured. That is pathetic on its face, and its own issue.
In fact, that is the issue that needs addressing.

Here's one possibility. Ordering at a fast food place is supposed to be fast. This is why combos and kids' meals exist in the first place. Instead of having to say "I'd like a cheese burger, make that two, and a medium Dr. Pepper, and a kids' milk, and a medium order of fries, and a kids' order of fries," customers can instead say "I'd like a #4 and a cheeseburger kids' meal." Now imagine that it's 15 years ago before healthier alternatives were standard. A concerned parent back then would still have to say "... and a cheeseburger kids' meal with juice and apple slices." I know that doesn't seem like a big deal, but making the juice or milk and apple slices the norm, rather than the exception, the ordering process for the increasing number of concerned parents drops back to normal.

Except, they still have to choose a side, choose an entree, and choose a drink (milk or water). So, there is no speed factor. The same questions will be asked, just different.

Complain about the supposedly problematic special interest group all you want, but they're voicing of concerns help companies see trends earlier and adjust.

They can and do. I do not dispute that.
The mentality of these groups is what I find troubling. In fact, I say it is anti-American.
I also don't like businesses caving into stupidity, as it just reinforces stupidity, but that is not to say they shouldn't; after all, it is their choice to value money over principle.
My work here is, finally, done.