/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>11371599
I never understood Gatorade being sold and consumed like juice. Stuff is loaded with vitamins and minerals that only a serious athlete or body builder would need to replenish their bodies after their workout/practice.

>>11371599
just drink water

>>11371599
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
FUCK FAT PEOPLE

>>11371607
Are you saying regular people don't need vitamins?

>>11371613
Water sucks, Gatorade is better.

>>11371607
its becoming a joke at this point. like 3/4 of people who drink Gatorade are fat people.

>>11371629
Not at all, but Gatorade is for someone who just depleted all their vitamins on an intense workout and need something to refuel them quick. But hey if you love it and enjoy it as a refreshment more power to you.

>>11371634
>I hate him I hate him I hate him

>>11371599
>tax gatorade
>don't tax powers or sugar
What's the point? Artificially raising the prices of food probably won't fix the issue. People will just start buying powder and sugar to mix at home.

Caffeine tablets/powder. It's dirt cheap

>>11371666
>don't tax powers
powders*

>>11371666
You underestimate the laziness of fat fucks. That beverage tax has already raised more money than the jews on the city council predicted.

>>11371666
If you want to add sugar on your own, that's fine
but sports drinks like gatorade are marketed like they are produced for athletes when really they have a lot of sugar

What op should be drinking is stuff like coconut water with lemon juice or pedialite
a liter of pedialyte has basically 1/5 the calories of 16 oz of gatorade and does a much better job at hydrating you

But that's about gatorade and not specifically energy drinks

>>11371687
>200% soda tax
>bring in enough revenue to eliminate both sales tax and property tax

>there are people actually defending a 65% tax on ANYTHING
Holy shit our ancestors would be setting fire to government buildings and killing anyone wearing a uniform. You realize how fucking absurd a 65% tax is?

>>11371719
Seriously though, a Fat Fuck Tax may be the best thing to ever happen to this country.

>>11371728
I mean, I pay 30 percent income tax on every single fucking dollar that comes in, why not tax the bejesus out of it as I spend it, too

>>11371728
We know how math works anon
65% is pretty crazy, but people are literally addicted to sugar

We haven't upended the pharmaceutical industry for willingly raising the price of drugs by more than 600% in some cases, you really think we'd be mad about pricey soft drinks?
There was like, 1 major arrest despite 10,000s of people being complicit

>>11371728
Based costco tells them where to go to buy them cheaper. Also, the government just opened the door for a sugar drink blackmarket. Some beaner is going to start selling sugar drinks as if they were drugs. Some high schoolers are going to be able to pay for college if they start selling stuff during school hours.

>>11371728
Too bad the people who are upset about this are literally too fat to set fire to anything and escape from the ensuing flames in time.

>>11371599
Drink water you fuck. I'm not one for government intervening and telling people how to live their lives but unfortunately fatties have to be forced or they just pass the cost onto us when they inevitably end up in the ER with their 4th heart attack.

>>11371740
Income tax is already unconstitutional lol.

>>11371749

All part of the plan

>>11371759
All taxation is theft.

>>11371766
Some form of organization via government is necessary. People are too damned stupid to survive without it.

Point to me the anarchist country that's successful enough to be a threat to first-world countries. We need government to survive now. Unfortunately there's too goddamned many parasites in government. If only we could make a capitalist utopia free from foreign governments...

>>11371806
Parasites are everywhere OP. Not just in foreign countries. The problem isn't foreigners, the problem is greed and corruption.

>>11371666
>People will just start buying powder and sugar to mix at home.
too much work for these fatties

you get people who do 15mins on the treadmill and then think they deserve a full bottle of energy drink and then wonder why they are still fat

>>11371766
The real problem is that you'll buy $0.30 worth of ingredients, the majority of which aren't that healthy for you, throw away the bottle that will clog up the ecosystem for the next 100 years, and complain that the government is hurting you by trying to get you to choose literally anything healthy for once

Ridiculous. Just refuse free healthcare coverage for obesity-related illnesses and stop punishing anyone who isn't a fatass.

Anyone who is in favor of this because they hate fat people is a brainlet who would gladly accept a boot on the back of their neck as long as it's stepping on the fat necks slightly harder.

>>11371806
Why do you think government requires taxes?

>>11371607
People drink it for the sweet glowing sweat.

>>11371733
Now we just need to tax the fuck out of guns and ammo.

>>11371749
In Chicago they just screamed about how the sugar tax was racist (the reasoning basically being because fat people tend to be poor people and poor people tend to be niggers). Shit was gone in like a week.

>>11371868
Aren't they also the same fuck that tried to say that bullet proof glass is somehow racist?

>>11371845
Why even bother making this argument? No politician will back this as its going to lose them millions of votes.

>>11371864
They already are.

>>11371599

Weird how I have a full pound of raw refined sugar in the pantry along with a quart of honey. Fuck neoliberalism.

Anyways, make tea. I like rooibos with honey. Usually some really fruity stuff that I cold brew. For energy if you don't want to drink coffee, which is also weirdly in my pantry next to a pound of fucking sugar (fuck you again Seattle), try yerba mate tea. You can get different blends that will have floral or fruit flavors, or go straight, or treat it like black tea with cream and pour in all the sugar you want.

For that refreshing soda taste at home just simmer down 2 cups of fruit to 1 cup sugar and 1cup of water for 20 minutes, strain, and let cool. Any soda syrup you want. I assume seltzer water has defeated your soyboy tax.

>>11371748
>ey bro, you wanna buy some *unzips jacket* soda?
>imported fresh from georgia bro
>oh you want the hard stuff huh? try this *hands over Monster can*

>>11371889
Because it's a morally correct and actually fiscally responsible method.

I don't think any politician would ever go for it, but that's part of the point. I'm insulting shitty politicians and the people who spoon their bullshit down their gullets happily.

>>11371896
They need to do it more.

>>11371915
Just wait until they start packing on exorbitant taxes for internet usage.

>>11371877
I’ve never heard that one, but I guarantee anyone dumb enough to say that shit has never lived in the neighborhoods where that shit is necessary.

Just buy the drinks you like. It’s a tax, not a ban.

>>11371922
But at least librulz will cry kek!

>>11371913
I know being edgy is cool and all here but the smart answer is to just simply raise their premiums just like they do with smokers. You get the benefit of more people paying in without eliminating an extremely large no pun intended portion of the population from the cash pool. You also get the incentive for people to drop the weight to save money.

>>11371937
I don't know if you're directing this at me, but I don't give a shit about /pol/ memes and reddit NPC garbage. Stupid unnecessary taxes are just that - stupid and unnecessary.

>>11371946
Most fat people aren't putting much into the 'cash pool', at least in my neck of the woods.

And, yes, your plan makes sense, except for the aformentioned poor fatfucks who don't pay for their insurance.

>>11371766
cringe

>>11371877
I think that was philadelphia

>>11371946
>>11371953
Yeah being out of shape and unhealthy feels horrible, if that's not incentive enough dangling the idea of lower premiums isn't going to do shit

Source: know several fat people who get winded just getting up to grab another soda from the break room, I guarantee they'd take a drastic pay cut rather than even think about exercising

>>11371951
It depends on your goal. Are low taxes the ultimate goal? Should public health be a factor at all?

>>11371607
Its great to combat hangovers as well. I use it like petalyte generally. Drinking it like its water is braindead but its not just good for heavy workouts.

>>11371599
Sips.

>>11371646
It's also pretty good if you're sick and can't keep down solids! Pretty much the only time I drink 'sports drinks' since I am a fatty.

>>11371599
Do they tax diet versions too?

>>11371864
cringe and bluepilled

>>11371599
If you willingly put that shit sugar water in you, the government knows better than you. Follow government dietary guidelines and you will probably stop being fat.

>>11371599
>Since my local government knows what's better for me than I do
You say this sarcastically, but it's obviously true if you're upset you can't drink gatorade

>>11371766
Based and checked

>>11371599
>Gatorade
>an energy drink
it has electrolytes
it's what plants crave

>>11372924
>>11372933
>shit-eating authoritarians completely missing the point
throw yourselves from a freeway overpass

>>11372939
it has carbs.
It’s what your body needs for energy.
How is this an alien concept to you?

>>11372941
simple sugars give a quick burst of energy so it almost makes sense to drink them if you're an athlete or extremely active, but they aren't ideal for maintaining energy for more than an hour or so. you might as well be drinking coca cola for energy since it also has carbs.

>>11371806
>anarchist country
lol
Yeah, you sound like a real expert on the subject.

>>11372941
Gatorade is marketed as a sports recovery drink. Did you look at the lightning bolt on the label and come to the conclusion that a lightning bolt logo means it's an energy drink?
>>11372941
>thinks carbs from HFCS constitutes an energy drink
Get a load of this guy.

>>11372908
Look into Pedialyte.

>>11372940
The government also paves your roads, cleans your water, keeps your lights on and keeps criminals out of your backyard.

Do you really think you could do all that yourself, cowboy?

>>11371922
based ajit pai abolished net neutrality already

>>11372988
They're not doing a very good job at any of that, idiot, and if you think most of your taxes are going to roads and utilities I have some very bad news for you.

>>11372840
>Should public health be a factor at all?

Not of government policy

>>11373015
I didn't say they were doing a good job, nor did I say that's where most of my taxes are going.

>>11373032
>backtracking

>>11373032
Well then, cowboy, to answer your original question; I think I could get the same services from private contractors without also spending a serious chunk of my paycheck on wars in the middle east and welfare for others.

>>11373063
Right, but wouldn't you just be paying the same amounts to those private contractors? Who's to say they'll do a better job or that they won't take more money than you think they should?

>>11373066
More than likely any such company would, with no oversight, eventually become a giant monopoly and charge insane fees.

>>11373066
>but wouldn't you just be paying the same amounts to those private contractors?
Which part of "most of your taxes go to war and welfare" did you not understand?
The prices would be set by the free market. That's why toilet paper isn't a hundred dollars a roll.

>>11373066
>who’s to say they’ll do a better job
History

>>11371607
Gatorade and Powerade are both unhealthy as fucking tits regardless unless you go for the organic line which cuts out everything bad.

>>11373080
You can't compare toilet paper to an electrical grid supplying power to entire cities.
You can't simply switch over to a competing power grid when your current provider does something you don't like.

taxes spent on the military is really just money going back into your own economy
these defense contractor in turn pay taxes (and a whole lot more than john or jane doe will in their lifetime)

>>11373080
>That's why toilet paper isn't a hundred dollars a roll.

Why shouldn't it be, if demand exists?

TP is a spook anyway, I hope you don't legitimately believe Big Toilet's lies.

>>11373100
>the defense contractor in turn pays taxes

Yeah, like 3.5% right? What a return!

>beverage recovery fee
Explain this for a GA boi. I never thought that the west coast taxes meme was this bad.

>>11373100
>and a whole lot more than john or jane doe will in their lifetime
>a company making millions, if not billions of dollars a year will pay more in taxes than a middle class person making less than 100k/yr in their entire lifetime
You must be Sherlock Holmes.

>>11373123
>Explain this for a GA boi
Sweet Tea

>>11373118
3.5% of 25 billion is still 875 million dollars

>>11373129
how do you play to make up their tax deficit if you take away their funding

>>11373100
I'm a defense contractor and I don't pay taxes.

Fuck that npc shit.
If they want my money they can come get it. Bring yer guns.

>>11373123
Quality of life is way better out there, it's a fair trade

>>11373137
And? Is this supposed to be some sort of green light to give our money to Israel because politicians embezzle our cash?

>>11373144
cutting your nose to spite your face doesnt seem like the best plan

>>11373146
Agreed. So stop funneling money into Israel and wars because Lockheed Martin sometimes pays taxes that don't do shit for the actual people

>>11373155
you dont use commercial air travel?

>>11373157
>kill American soldiers in Iraq because of airplanes

Woah, that's compelling

>>11373159
no, but new technology is developed because the military requires it

>>11371907
>raw refined
What?

>>11371864
SHALL

>>11373162
New technology is also developed because the consumer requires it. Air travel has been a concept for millenia and has no implicit link to the military. The airplane was not invented for the purpose of the military

Are you going to make an actual argument here or are you just going to mindlessly shill?

>>11373170
>The airplane was not invented for the purpose of the military
no but the military refined and continued to develop the technology to the form we are familiar with today

the same can be said for many everyday pieces of tech, like the internet

cutting military spending because you are under the impression its all just wasted in the middle east is an extremely uninformed viewpoint

>>11373178
>internet

Was a mistake. You're making the case for cutting military spending even more

>>11373182
then cease communication here immediately instead of being a hypocrite

>>11373178
>no but the military refined and continued to develop
Yes, because clearly this is impossible for any commercial use.

>the same can be said because it fits my argument
How convenient.

>impression
It's a matter of fact, but sure, whiteknight companies that have absolutely no interest in your general well being and only contribute to advancements of technology for the sole purpose of lining their pockets and lead to absolute economic ruin

>extremely uninformed
Says the retard that thinks airplanes would only exist because we gave our money to Dick Cheney

>>11372840
you want public health, then actually punish unhealthiness directly. increased tax for everyone above a certain body fat percentage, that kind of shit.

but making random foods that some libshit retard deems "unhealthy" more expensive for everyone is simply unacceptable.

>>11373184
no u

>>11373185
>companies that have absolutely no interest in your general well being and only contribute to advancements of technology for the sole purpose of lining their pockets and lead to absolute economic ruin

The best place to start is by boycotting Big Toilet.

Mankind survived centuries without expensive proprietary shitting technology, we need to return to those simpler days and excise capitalism's grasp from the simple pleasure of dropping a deuce.

>>11373188
>tax people on body fat

>the foods that cause it though, out of bounds!!!

Maybe it's all just retarded and you're stupid for thinking otherwise

>>11373185
>Yes, because clearly this is impossible for any commercial use.
without the significant funding the military put towards aviation we would not have commercial airlines

>How convenient.
and yet you have no counter point


>only contribute to advancements of technology for the sole purpose of lining their pockets and lead to absolute economic ruin
and if humanity happens to benefit from all those advancements we are just suppose to ignore those benefits?

>Says the retard that thinks airplanes would only exist because we gave our money to Dick Cheney
thank you for confirming my assessment

>>11373193
>compares the military industrial complex to a shitter
100%

>>11373196
Retarded assumption. Maybe not as quick but the need for commercial aviation would have still been a desire so it would be developed in time.

>>11373194
>the foods that cause it
all foods can make you fat
doesnt matter what you eat, just how much you eat

>give us your tax dollars goy! or else we'll halt air travel advancement by three weeks this one time!

>>11373203
Do you think fatness is the only indicator of health? That an apple isn't remotely different from fucking fried lard from a nutritional and metabolic standpoint?

>>11373201
who would pay for that development?
a private corporation isnt going to take on significant losses for the mere prospect that their research will one day pay dividends

>>11373194
Right wing philosophy is essentially tax and/or ban everything I don't like. This site is infested with 20 year old r/the_donald users who think reading a wikipedia article on Libertarianism and saying libtard means they understand politics.

>>11373209
Investors who would have seen the obvious money to be made from the development of commercial airlines

In this case they double won since the government did the leg work for them

>>11371599

my wife's son's father is in jail, and let me tell you that tax dollar are DEFINITELY not going to prisons. I take my wife and her son to visit him, and am appalled by the conditions. The only part that seems somewhat nice is the trailer that my wife and her ex get to spend some alone time in (they discuss her son's development)

>>11373219
seething

>>11371766
libertarian brainlet

>>11373216
>Investors who would have seen the obvious money to be made from the development of commercial airlines
this is only viable from the perspective that commercial airline are achievable in the first place

>In this case they double won since the government did the leg work for them
and the government triple wins since their industry pays taxes and generates more activity for the economy
their initial investment in the military had huge impact on civilian life

>>11373209
>this retard thinks Raytheon has invented literally everything of substance in modern society
lmao

>>11373197
>not realising that the toilet industry is literally based on an artificially created problem

Explain, without invoking social constructs, why we need toilet paper and proprietary shitting apparatus.

An open source alternative exists, and was used at Versailles.

>>11371599
>Tax the fuck out of sugar because its bad for health
>Artificial sweeteners is ok tho

>>11373225
Fair enough I just don't buy it that commercial aviation wouldn't have been a thing without military funding. War speeds everything along no argument there but eventually this shit would be developed.

>>11373228
its just an example mate, you're welcome to form a counter argument
but i doubt you have the mental capacity for thought beyond calling someone a retard

>>11373234
we still dont have commercial space flight despite the government peaking development in the 70s

>>11371599
Coffeine pills and dextrose

>>11373208
of course not you moron

the point is that i dont want a bunch of government bureaucrats to interfere with and micromanage my fucking diet.
if you have a problem with fatties, then go and explicitly fatties with your shit.
if you have a problem with "unhealthy" people by some other definition, then go and explicitly target them with your shit.

but if you want to use them as scapegoats and "arguments" for fucking with everyone, including skinny and healthy people like me, then just fuck off.

>>11373225
>this is only viable from the perspective that commercial airline are achievable in the first place
Yeah, not like it's been told in Ancient Greek myths and studied since then, right?

>since their industry pays taxes
What does this have to do with the military being the only way to invest in technology?

>their initial investment had huge impact
Source: Your retarded boomer ass, keep licking the boots, Goldberg

>>11373236
Counter arguments have been formed, every response has been "nuh uh big daddy military did it!!"

>d-d-dont call me names!!!
Cry about it you little pathetic bitch

>>11371666
>Be a fatty
>Buy 24 pack of diet Coke
>Take it home and funnel sugar into each can
Would anyone actually do this?

>>11371719
>Thinks rich politicians with the monies will just give it back to the populace
Were you born yesterday?

>>11373238
We didn't have it when they were still funneling money into the black hole of NASA up until the 2010s

Elon Musk has done more to advance space travel than anyone else in the modern era

>>11373240
This issue specifically also has to do with a company advertising themselves as a "sports drink" when it's literally no better than soda, if you lead a sedentary life.
People who make uninformed decisions about drinking said sports drink sure as fuck aren't about to inform themselves about making healthy choices. And until you can educate the next purchasing generation, this is probably the best stopgap measure.
People who aren't lazy fucks can also make their own "sports drink," it's not that fucking difficult.

>>11373243
>Yeah, not like it's been told in Ancient Greek myths and studied since then, right?
then why did it take til the 1900s to develop commercial flight, surely private industry had enough time to create something
>What does this have to do with the military being the only way to invest in technology?
who said anything about the only way? it just happens to be one avenue of government spending that nets massive rewards for society

>Source: Your retarded boomer ass, keep licking the boots, Goldberg
are you suggesting that military investment in aviation has not had massive impact on civilian life? cause that would be you're uninformed opinion stepping in again

>>11373252
can it really be considered "commercial" space travel if 99% of the customer base is still the government

>>11373240
>i was merely pretending to hold absurd viewpoints

>>11371757
Isn't that funny how that works?
>Gubermint is bad I'm a free man libertarian I'll shoot ya we don't need roads
>Government enacts rules because people are retarded, rules help the country change for the better
>Government is still bad tho SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

>>11373245
>Counter arguments have been formed, every response has been "nuh uh big daddy military did it!!"
they were poorly formed then if one real life example is enough to negate them

>Cry about it you little pathetic bitch
guess you really didnt want to have a discussion in the first place

>>11373256
>then why did it take until the 1900s
Because industry hadn't advanced yet, this has nothing to do with the military. Why didn't we have computers in 200 BC? Must be because people didn't give up their livelihoods to Israeli and corporate interests!!!

>who said anything
You, dumbass. Otherwise you wouldn't be whiteknighting one of the most cancerous industries of the past 100 years

>dude i swear i know what im talking about lol
Sure.

>>11373252
>Elon Musk has done more to advance space travel than anyone else in the modern era
which is that exactly? proving that a rocket can land upright?

>>11371766

>>11371766
Hillbilly

>>11373255
>People who make uninformed decisions
people who make uninformed decisions ar fucking retarded morons and have to deal with the consequences of their dumb choices.

some subhumans being too moronic to read the ingredient labels of the foods they put into their bodies is in no way a valid justification for ruining things for the rest of us.

>>11373261
>is enough to negate them
You didn't negate anything. You keep saying military is the only reason why these advancements occurred without any substantial basis

>still crying over insults on 4chan
Maybe you should go back to licking Netanyahu's mutilated cock, faggot. You're a dumb bitch that can't hold an argument together regardless if someone is calling him a faggot

>>11371946
>our people are literally addicted to an extremely unhealthy way of life
>instead of helping them let's take advantage of their crippling addiction to steal more money of them
>this is a good and smart decision!

>>11373258
99% of the shareholders of Tesla are not government

>>11373265
As opposed to?

>>11373264
>Because industry hadn't advanced yet
we have aviation taking flight in the 1800s yet it took military spending to turn that advancement into a usable everyday tech

>You, dumbass. Otherwise you wouldn't be whiteknighting one of the most cancerous industries of the past 100 years
so no one said it, you just cant be bothered to think beyond the examples ive given

>Sure.
meanwhile you can disprove my statement, sure instead you act smug

>>11373269
>have to deal with the consequences of their dumb choices.
The problem with fatties is that society as a whole has to deal with their dumb choices.
This is the same reason we also tax alcohol and cigarettes. And I say this as a smoker. Sugar should not be the exception.

>>11373271
>You keep saying military is the only reason why these advancements occurred without any substantial basis
where is the substantial counterpoint then that that the commercial aviation industry would have advanced to the point it is today without that military investment?

>You're a dumb bitch that can't hold an argument together regardless if someone is calling him a faggot
nuh uh isnt a argument, faggot

>>11371599
>he's so fat he buys gatorade by the case at costco
>probably actually gets a dolly and loads up enough to fill the bed of his f-150

>>11373276
>As opposed to?
NASA already had a reuseable rocket in the 80s

>>11373015
Why do graphs on 4chan never have sources

>>11373278
>yet it took military spending to turn that into usable everyday tech
No it didn't. We were already establishling commercial flights schools and scaling Western Europe before the military ever "advanced" the technology, this is again you just desperately bootlicking any Israeli cock that comes your way

>so no one said it
Yeah, nobody would consider your dumb ass having any resemblance to a human I suppose

>meanwhile you can disprove my negative
Such a mature gentlemen, a true sir

>>11373088
>Organic line
It's still fucking sugarwater, no different than cola.

>>11373276
>99% of the shareholders of Tesla are not government

i didnt say shareholder you lunatic, i said customer base

tesla functions by selling spaceflight services to customers. on paper this sounds like a free market kind of deal, but in reality pretty much the only one buying these services (and thus keeping the company in business) is the government.

>society as a whole has to deal with their dumb choices
the solution to that problem is to remove them from public insurance systems. same for heavy drinkers, smokers, druggies, and other self-destructive behavior.

>>11373282
>where is the substantial counterpoint
We were already developing commercial air travel before the military? Do you not know any history? Do you have any claims to support yours?

>nuh uh isnt a argument
Neither is "just listen to me, military dindu nuffin wrong!!! is not AN argument, you meany namecalling faggot!!!!!

>>11371599
You don’t know where the next Costco is beyond the city Limits?

>>11373293
Yeah but at least it loses 99% of the other shit.

>>11373294
>i didnt say shareholder
Who do you think is investing and being a part of these tests? Random civilians?

>Tesla functions by selling spaceflight services
Lol no they do not you fucking idiot, they "function" by getting hundreds of millions in investments for space technology, Tesla as a company has a multitude of other products it sells and that Elon Musk conglomerates with.

>>11373266

>>11373023
>Says the only country where that's not the case where people die regularly because they can't afford healthcare
This is not a rich vs poor or lazy vs hard working problem, you tiny, tiny brained monkey. There's about a 50% chance you get cancer, if you get cancer, or your husband does, maybe your health insurance covers some of it at first but you either die quick or go broke trying not to die to it eventually. Do you know how many stories there are of that happening?

The fact that this is even a political talking point is disgusting. I love this country but having half of it full of brainlets who are constantly stopping progress because they don't understand that their retarded actions have consequences is very frustrating.

>>11373288
After 30 years? Thank God for the military!

>>11373102
Because demand is only one half of it.
If toilet paper is a hundred bucks a roll I can completely take over the market by making and selling my own for two bucks a roll. That's how competition works.

>>11373100
lol no. Citizens pay the vast bulk of the taxes. You're saying that I should hand over a hundred of my own dollars to do you since you promise to give me back five.

>>11373208
Weight is one of the most significant health factors for the population at large. Which is the perfect thing to base policy around.
>inb4 muh anecdote for poor health in skinny people

>>11373291
>>11373298
planes were barely making it off the ground before ww1 broke out
then the military industry took over and we have fully functional aircraft battling in war zones

Havilland was already receiving government funding by 1910

where was the commercial flight industry of that era again?

>>11373320
Weight isn't bodyfat. And atherosclerosis does not discriminate in skinnyness or fatness

>>11371599
you could just drink water with a little salt....basicly what gatorade is minus the sugar

and tbf, this is probobly a smart move...historicaly speaking we were healthier when sugar was prohibitivly expensive....and seing as people are stupid making the choice for them might not be so wrong

>>11373305
It hardly matters. Pretty much all sugarwater is empty calories. Drink a glass of water and a multivitamin if you're so damn concerned about the vitamin content. Protip: you're not and just want to feel good about drinking sugarwater. Organics are a meme.

>>11373170
Do you... Do you not know what the word millennia means?

>>11373320

I disagree. After my wife gave birth to her son, she has been unable to lose any of the weight no matter how much she tries. She gained close to 180lbs when she was pregnant with him, and was constantly eating fried foods. Im guessing thats why the little bundle of joy seems to enjoy fried chicken so much!

>>11373324
>planes were barely making it off the ground before WW1 broke out
Right, scaling Western Europe is "barely making it off the ground"

>muh military saved us with WW1 and virtually no commercial flights until after WW2
Keep licking those boots, cuck.

>>11373333
>3333
>my wife's son

>>11373230
Just so I'm clear are you arguing against toilets, toilet paper, or indoor plumbing?

>>11373290
Because the google image search option is right there for a clever boy like you to use.
Do you see something in the graph you find doubtful, though?

>>11373345
>responding to -7/10 bait

>>11373333
maybe she wouldnt have gained so much wieght if she didnt eat so much fried food.....the 'eating for two' idea is pretty broken and not realy an excuse to eat junk.....gaining that much weight is not normal or healthy, especialy when we know that biologicaly speaking women(especialy around pregnancy) gain weight with greater ease and loose it with more dificulty(biology/evolution kinda sucks like that)

>>11373343
>Right, scaling Western Europe is "barely making it off the ground"
where is the source behind this? surely you wouldnt be making this up

>muh military saved us with WW1 and virtually no commercial flights until after WW2
so you do agree that military investment in aviation was already paying dividends in the 20s/30s

>>11373325
>replying with muh anecdote
>Overweight people BY EN LARGE are just muscly, not bodyfat
Hit the gym and eat better fat fuck

>>11373332
You're right, I should have said TWO millenia. Do you have anything to add?

>>11373357
>loose it
(You)

>>11373357

Yeah thats what I was thinking too. Thankfully her son did not inherit the same genetics as her, and is more like his father. He is extremely athletic, and really really enjoys basketball. The only thing I worry about is his temper, and I just pray that he doesn't end up like his dad who is currently serving 30 years in prison for killing someone.

>>11373351
Honestly I thought military spending was a bigger slice

>>11373356
>where is the source behind this
The Bleriot XI. What exactly is your source that these were "barely making it off the ground"?

>so you do agree
It's evident you're more interested in just having catch "gotcha" moments than in any discussion (the latter of which you had none of in your defense). Are you going to contribute anything else other than the pathetic bootlicking cocksucking baseless blind defense of military industrialism? Because none of your arguments hold any way

>>11373360
The story of Icarus doesn't count as "concept of air travel" you massive, massive tard

>>11373358
>muh anecdote
It's not an anecdote you dumb shit

>overweight people by en large
First you said bodyfat, then you said bodyweight, then you said overweight. My solution all along is not to tax any of that because it's incredibly stupid.

>hit the gym and eat better
I can run a 5 minute mile, I'd be surprised if your quarter mile was that short

>>11373376
>it doesn't count because it doesn't fit my argument
How convenient and way to miss the point you obtuse shithead. Thank god the military can clear this all up for us!

>>11371719
>eliminate taxes
toplel

>>11373374
>The Bleriot XI. What exactly is your source that these were "barely making it off the ground"?
the bleriot xi crossed the english channel in 1909
meanwhile a few years (1906) earlier Santos-Dumont was only able to cover 60m of powered flight

crossing the english channel in a single seater aircraft is hardly "commercial flight"

your huge ah-hah moment is you overselling the capabilities of dumont's aircraft, sure european aviation was making baby steps, but it wasnt until the war broke out that we had anything conceivable that could be called sustained powered flight

>>11373389
>we can barely get off the ground

>okay we can but it doesn't fit my arbitrary standards

>your huge ah-hah moment
It's not a moment of anything. It's a pure statement of fact, you've referenced absolutely zilch to support any of your claims other than 'well the military advanced it because i said so!!!

You can just admit you have no clue what the fuck you're talking about and are an ex-welfare queen looking to catch zingers

>>11371911
You don't even have to go that far, just outside the city of Seattle. You could go to the costco where all the leaf poos come over and buy milk by the SUV full and not have the tax.

>>11373349
Toilets and TP. Both frivolous products of late stage neoliberal capitalism

>>11373392
> you've referenced absolutely zilch to support any of your claims other than 'well the military advanced it because i said so!!!
so you chose to ignore Havilland's contributions because it completely blows out your stance

you claimed that we had commercial flight prior to the military investment
which civilian was able to buy a ticket on Dumont's english channel crossing aircraft?

for someone who is quick to dismiss my argument you sure make a piss poor argument of your own

>>11373403

Speaking of the english channel, the other day I tried to get my wifes son to watch BBC, and when I said that his mom came running into the room and then left dissapointed. Apparently the word BBC really interests her, or she thought I said something else. He watched BBC for like 2 minutes, and then switched the channel over to BET like he usually watches.

Vid related: make Kool Aid instead.
https://youtu.be/O0b9NyQTR44

>>11373378
You can't imagine the thought of MULTIPLE people disagreeing with you. I wasn't the one you were bitching at. I personally never said bodyfat. I said weight. >>11373320 was my first reply to you btw.

Anyways since you're gonna get this mad, claim atherosclerosis is a widespread issue in everyone and discount how much weight is a factor (for the population at large) and e-stat that hard you're not really worth having a discussion with. Enjoy your (You)

>>11373403
>so youve chosen to ignore Havillands contributions
I didn't ignore anything. You decided to ignore and shift the goalposts on the Bleriot. Considering the military got control of those exact airplanes for WW1 then apparently did nothing until WW2 your claims of them being super extra spectacular important crumble under scrutiny. Looking into De Havilland they developed the first ACTUAL commercial airliner without any government subsidiy in the Fox Moth, so your claims continue to crumble, maybe the Nazi funded first turbo jet? Oh wait the inventor was already materializing before their intervention :(

>>11373015
>welfare grouped together with "mandatory spending"
It really makes you think.

>>11373328
>projection
I don't drink either of them, and rarely if ever touch soda. When I do, it's exclusively diet. People drink Gatorade and Powerade because muh hydration through electrolytes, but electrolytes are present in most bottled waters these days.

>>11373427
>make absolutely zero distinction you're someone different while joining in on a conversation making contradictory points

>LOL HOW DIDN'T YOU KNOW????
Oh look, more faggots that have nothing better to do than argue just to throw snarky jabs

>discount how much weight is a factor
As he discounts how much cholesterol and saturated fat consumption independent of weight is a factor. If you actually paid attention for once in your life you'd realize my whole point this whole diatribe is utterly retarded and taxing individuals over stupid shit like this is worthless

How's that 20 minute mile you treating you? I'd imagine it's the same length it's going to take you to run away from this argument too

>>11373441
If you were half as fit as you claimed to be, you wouldn't be falling for the saturated fat/dietary cholesterol meme

>>11373429
>I didn't ignore anything.
yes you did, I posted about Havilland here
>>11373324
and yet you thought that I " you've referenced absolutely zilch to support any of your claims other than 'well the military advanced it because i said so!!!" here >>11373392
which is clearly false
>You decided to ignore and shift the goalposts on the Bleriot.
the goalpost was commercial flight, a claim you made yourself here >>11373298
you're welcome to explain how the Bleriot was a commercial flight.

>Considering the military got control of those exact airplanes for WW1 then apparently did nothing until WW2 your claims of them being super extra spectacular important crumble under scrutiny.
where did i claim this?

> Looking into De Havilland they developed the first ACTUAL commercial airliner without any government subsidiy in the Fox Moth
except when you consider havilland had nearly a decade under the royal seal before moving on, the government had already invested plenty into his techologies
your research on wikipedia seems to be moot as well as the claim that the fox moth was made without government subsidy has no source
but, you made yourself seem like an expert on the subject, and now you have to inform yourself via wikipedia? your argument is crumbling under the same scrutiny

>>11373456
Guess I triggered the fatty who thinks broccoli is the reason he can't bench over a 100 pounds

>>11373466
I bench 115 thank you :)
>Inb4 dyel memes

>>11373486

please be in kilograms

>>11373462
>yes you did
That's not ignoring his contribution, and considering the Bleriot proceeded it by many years which is why it's far more relevant to the discussion of how commercial air travel started. You've yet to support your claims that the military in any way was some panacea to advancement.

>the goalpost was commercial flight
And you dismissed it based on your own arbitrary standards of commercial flight, you also said it was "barely off the ground" when it evidently wasn't

>where did I claim this
It's exactly what you've been implying. You're basically just going through mental gymnastics hoop jumping to get around the fact you didn't make word for word proclamations that were totally false

>except when you consider havilland had nearly a decade under the royal seal
What does that have to do with his own non-subsidized research? Why do you continue to make such astounding shifts in the argument?

>the government did it because I said so!!!
Your entire argument

>no source
It's sourced in the Bibliography, you've yet to provide a single actual source for any claim you've made. You've made contradictory claims, you've made claims then completely shifted what you wanted to say, and you can source NONE of them

>>11373456
>meme
Saturated fats, trans fats, and refined carbs increase serum cholesterol and atherosclerotic risk
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/77/5/1146/4689813

Dietary cholesterol increases LDL oxidation
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10704618/

Dietary cholesterol increases serum cholesterol, a meta analysis.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1534437/

The progression of cholesterol and atherosclerosis
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/01.cir.0000103664.47406.49

Saturated fats impair antioxidative properties of HDL and disrupt endothelial function
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16904539/

Coconut oil is as horrible as butter for LDL cholesterol and serum lipids
http://www.jlr.org/content/36/8/1787.full.pdf

Meta analysis claiming saturated fats are harmless is seriously misleading
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2014/03/19/dietary-fat-and-heart-disease-study-is-seriously-misleading/

Egg consumption increases LDL levels and LDL oxidation
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9001684/

If you have a paywall, use sci hub tw

>>11373513
We live in a time of pre fact analysis, disregard of experts and general contrarian opinion.
Do you think the retards who post here are going to be any different?

>>11373400
So like I should just poop into an open pipe in the floor or what? I'm confused about the solution you're proposing.

>>11373498
>That's not ignoring his contribution, and considering the Bleriot proceeded it by many years which is why it's far more relevant to the discussion of how commercial air travel started.
except the bleriot xi debuted in 1909 not even a year elapsed before Havilland was making aircraft for the crown
>And you dismissed it based on your own arbitrary standards of commercial flight, you also said it was "barely off the ground" when it evidently wasn't
commercial flight is not an arbitrary standard you conflate the principal with private flight, a commercial industry serves customers
>It's exactly what you've been implying. You're basically just going through mental gymnastics hoop jumping to get around the fact you didn't make word for word proclamations that were totally false
so you completely misconstrue my statement to fit your narravtive
>What does that have to do with his own non-subsidized research? Why do you continue to make such astounding shifts in the argument?
because without the prior military funding Havilland would not have had the technology available to continue his own research, i figured this would be obvious

>It's sourced in the Bibliography, you've yet to provide a single actual source for any claim you've made
then why wont you post it, instead of claiming it exists
you want to refute all my claims and yet provide no evidence of your own

>and you can source NONE of them
sure i can, Havilland first military aircraft can be found here
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1952/1952%20-%203534.html

>>11373513
>being this mad

>>11373496
am grill pls no bully :(

>>11373526
>except the bleriot debuted, yada yada
And? What does that have to do with anything? This doesn't refute anything I said?

>commercial flight is not an arbitrary standard
Your definition of commercial is, and since the planes were being made ready for commercial use which has been one of the consistent points through this whole discussion, you seem to be waffling on that too

>so you completely miscontrue my statements
Nope. Now you're just backtracking.

>i figured this would be obvious
It would if it had any remote basis for it, any sources, anything with a speck of reason and logic
Considering https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/32769
Only references he borrowed money from his uncle to start everything up after the Wright Brothers

>then why wont you post it
What? It's literally on the page and referenced from a book, you even went to the page yourself to confirm there was no direct citation. Are you just hoping that playing dumb will win you an argument? Are you going to actually source any of your claims?

>sure I can
All you're doing is showing me a picture of one of de Havillands planes and an article talking about the military buying one of them after he made everything himself. You're not doing yourself any favors with your frantic research

>>11373210
>haha politics is SO nuanced, stupid flyover
>just make sure to vote for the democrat every time, they can understand it all and take care of it for you ;^)

>>11373552
>he thinks copypasting a bunch of links is being mad

Yikes....

>>11371719
>He thinks they will ever get rid of any tax
You coastie really are as dumb as everyone says.

This entire board

>>11373574
>This doesn't refute anything I said?
sure it does
"considering the Bleriot proceeded it by many years"
>since the planes were being made ready for commercial use which has been one of the consistent points through this whole discussion
and what about Bleriot's aircraft was ready for commercial use?
>Nope. Now you're just backtracking.
according to your own logic

>Only references he borrowed money from his uncle to start everything up after the Wright Brothers
which covered the costs of his first failed aircraft, by the time he had recovered from those failures he was already working for the RAF
"The second de Havilland
aeroplane was completed about the end of May, 1910, and was
successfully flown near Litchfield, Hants. At the end of the year
Geoffrey de Havilland took up an appointment as test pilot and
designer at His Majesty's Balloon Factory (as the Farnborough
establishment was then called), and his aeroplane was bought by
the War Office for test purposes."
from my previous cited article

>What? It's literally on the page and referenced from a book, you even went to the page yourself to confirm there was no direct citation. Are you just hoping that playing dumb will win you an argument? Are you going to actually source any of your claims?
so you continue to fail to cite the source and yet claim it is infallible

>All you're doing is showing me a picture of one of de Havillands planes and an article talking about the military buying one of them after he made everything himself
a historical military account of the origins is not considered a reputable source? meanwhile the books oxford cites are?

if you struggled interpreting my original statement why did you not ask for clarification instead of making baseless assumptions, you havent even met the goalposts and continue to move them yourself in a desperate attempt to prove something

>>11373636
>sure it does
Oh because you said so? Thanks for clearing it up

>ready for commercial use
You've yet to make any clear definition of commercial, so I guess it doesn't fit whatever is convenient for the argument, it won't cont anyways, right?

>no you
Great job!

>which covered the costs
? His first aircraft happened AFTER he borrowed the money, he made multiple after that as referenced in the article, the article mentions he joins the Air Corps but in no way implies any sort of special training or technologies he received, your claims continue to be utterly baseless, contradictory, and devoid of any actual meaning

>continue to fail
You literally said the source didn't exist despite visiting the page, the source is within the Bibliography, the source is quoted from a book, you're welcome to dispute the veracity of these, but the source exists, you've yet to provide a single source that supports anything you are saying

>a hisotrical military account of the origins
What does this have to do with anything you're claiming? You're article literally mentions them buying a plane, it mentions none of your made up sourceless nonsense. When did I attack the credibility of the source? I'm attacking your use of it as some proof of your claims

You've made a billion baseless claims and supported absolutely none of them, you cannot even keep up with your own constantly waffling and contradictory claims

You're basically just obfuscating any argument and deliberately create confusion at this point. I may be giving you too much credit actually, you might just be mind numbingly retarded

>>11373663
>You've yet to make any clear definition of commercial
Are you really this fucking stupid?

>>11373670
How cute, getting so angry you make separate posts just to namecall

>>11372843
Difference is that Gatorade has like 2% of the stuff that you need vs Pedialyte which has LOTS of electrolytes. Just get some lite salt and lemon juice in water.

>>11373663
>Oh because you said so? Thanks for clearing it up
again you choose to ignore your own inconsistencies completely, not surprising

>You've yet to make any clear definition of commercial, so I guess it doesn't fit whatever is convenient for the argument, it won't cont anyways, right?
except i did that very thing here
>>11373526
"a commercial industry serves customers"
you're welcome to add your own interpretation

>the article mentions he joins the Air Corps but in no way implies any sort of special training or technologies he received
so the fact the article mentions how the RAF purchased his aircraft and that they provided all subsequent funding, you cant seriously suggest his small initial loan was enough to cover the costs of creating the aircraft built for the RAF.

>You literally said the source didn't exist despite visiting the page
yes, cause the page i visit specifically says
"The DH.83 Fox Moth was the first aircraft to earn a profit in commercial airline service without subsidies.[citation needed]"
you claimed this as fact and yet the article you cite has no citation. ive asked several times for you to provide a source for this claim, and you continue to refuse to

>You're basically just obfuscating any argument and deliberately create confusion at this point. I may be giving you too much credit actually, you might just be mind numbingly retarded
the hypocrisy here is outstanding since you are doing this very thing
""the source is within the Bibliography, the source is quoted from a book, you're welcome to dispute the veracity of these, but the source exists, you've yet to provide a single source that supports anything you are saying "
all this obfuscation and you state nothing substantial


now you are conflating me without anons
its sad really

>>11373702
>no you!!!!
Really good job

>a commercial industry serves customers
So you just ignored the part where I said was he giving flight school lessons and renting out his planes? Cool. Here's him selling his planes https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1909/1909%20-%200593.html

Is that TOO commercial for you?

>and that they provided all subsequent funding
Lol it does not say that, stop being such a lying fucking faggot, you're only support of this is yet again ANOTHER sourceless claim, for someone so obsessed with sources you've provided absolutely none that support any of your claims

>specifically says
And on the page there's a bibliography, like I've said multiple times now, and like I just said you're free to dispute the veracity of the source considering how indirect it is. I've asked you to source ANYTHING you've said and the only thing you provided was an example of the military buying a Havilland and then tried twisting this into your own unsupported narrative, you're really fucking stupid, you know that? Did your mother drop a bowling ball on the soft spot of your head? You're really fucking stupid dude

>all this obfuscation
You don't even know what that means, that's about as clear and honest of a statement someone can make.

>conflating me without anons
Someone's getting flustered

This discussion is over unless you can source any of your claims (you can't), so I'm done wasting my time on some bumbling retard who can't even keep up with his own arguments and won't even cite any of his stupid narratives. Have fun typing out a novel, faggot

>>11373593
>digging for 8 scientifically reviewed papers, copying the summary, and telling someone how to get past the paywall isn't mad
How long did that post take? It speaks for itself
>I'm not mad because I'm claiming I'm not!!!

>>11373600
Let me fix that then.

>200% soda tax
>corporate tax cut to zero
>tariff cut to zero
>no more inheritance tax

>>11373729
Never underestimate the passive aggressiveness of a plebbitor.

>>11373729
>looking up widely available previously studied research and copypasting it from the archives is being mad
Oh youre just a brainlet, how sad.....

>How long did that post take
Shorter than the 40 minutes it took you to concoct this pitiful reply lmao

>You're mad because I say so!!!
You're getting noticeably upset

>>11373743
>ha i made a dumb claim!
>*gets disproven*
>fucking reddit you suck!!! *wheezes from 350 pound body gasping for air in fury*

>>11373729
See
>>11373747

>>11373744
>but I'm not mad at all

>>11373747
Reddit has a persona, a you fit it perfectly. Be honest, what subs do you browse there?

>>11373759
Huh?

>>11373760
Why do you Redditors always talk about Reddit?

>what subs do you browse
Your fat whore mother's cunt, I fuck her then fuck your dad in the ass. I live in the jungle motherfucker I'd eat your shit and push it in outside your fucking mouth

>>11373763
>reddit spacing
Oof you almost got me

>>11373744
There he goes thinking one person thinks he's retarded again

>>11373763
kek you are getting so assblasted. I know you're a democrat at this point but i'm curious on what side of the west coast you live on? Portland? San Francisco?

>>11373727
>Really good job
it wasnt in fact a "no you" statement, but you have a habit of ignoring any proof you've made false statements

>So you just ignored the part where I said was he giving flight school lessons and renting out his planes? Cool
no, i asked you to provide a source for that claim. you finally have
are the good intentions of providing his airplanes to consumers enough evidence of a commercial enterprise? plausible at best

> you're only support of this is yet again ANOTHER sourceless claim
so you was working for the RAF, in an RAF facility but not receiving any RAF funding?

>And on the page there's a bibliography, like I've said multiple times now
except telling me where to look for the source is not a source
the onus is on you anon, since you made the claim

>You don't even know what that means, that's about as clear and honest of a statement someone can make.
yet you are completely guilty of it. you could take responsibility for making bogus claims but you refuse to, and instead try and burden me with proving your statements

>Someone's getting flustered
yes, arguing with a retard is getting me flustered, so i made a small error, doesnt change the fact that you think im posting as other anons, perhaps you are a bit flustered as well.

>This discussion is over unless you can source any of your claims
i have, you ignore them

you are so mad right now all you can spew is ad hominem, while you continue to detract from the fact you have no idea what you're talking about

>>11373773
>>reddit spacing

Yikes, gonna be a big cringe from me, reddit

>>11371864
found the homosexual

>>11373778
You're just mad because it took you longer to think of a response than run a mile.

>>11373779
>y-youre this please be this!!!!
Yikers.

>>11373790
>y-youre this please be this!!!!
>Doesn't deny it
So where do you live San Francisco or Portland?
Are you excited for Joe Biden in 2020?