|
|
|
|
|
| | In your opinion why doPage 2 of 3 (1, 2, 3) | Msg 25 - I'm with you .
I see the need for constant entertainment as a pervasive illness, another form of addiction, if you will. Is it really healthy to sit at your video game, sports bar, big-screen TV, pc screen, for more and more hours?
If we could eliminate all this electronic "dope", people would forced to (gasp) read books, play musical instruments, go outside and talk to others, dig in the dirt and grow stuff, maybe even play your OWN sports instead of watching it!!
Think of how this would affect our national health, both mental AND physical :) | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 12:11:54 PM | ^^^^Turn off electricity. It isn’t unusual or unexpected why people go home, turn on the lights, turn on the tv, watch a few things and fill up the 6 or so hours until they turn in and wake up after the sun rises. We have refrigerators to store food that was purchased in the store. We don't all live in houses with yards to dig in. How do you 'play sports' after coming home from work after sundown?
It isn't dope. Other than being Amish or promoting the Amish lifestyle that isn't going to change life in cities.
Our lifestyle means we have more to eat then we burn in a days work at the office or assembly line. Our work dictates our schedule and our activity. Our body metabolisms try to cope with our activity level and in the city you can see all the gym rats staring at themselves in the mirrors at the 24hr fitness centers… They aren’t watching TV. They are listening to their IPOD while running in place.
There is no easy answer and it isn’t because people are defective. Being poor and not able to afford electricity and theretofore not having TV doesn't all of the sudden turn people into healthy intellectuals either. What does? | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 12:22:03 PM | | I have an employee who makes $10 an hour doing general labor. At least every other week he and his friends take a road trip to see some concert. It's not unusual for him to spend $200-300 on a ticket, plus gas and hotel accomodation. Other guys are buying homes, raising kids, owm a nice car or saving up to go to school. He lives in a run down apartment with 3 of his buddies, rides a bike to work, and can barely afford to pack himself a lunch some days because he blew all his money at the bar or going to a show. But it's what he wants. All he cares about is what bands he's seen. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 1:18:25 PM | OP said the magic word.
This is AMERICA...a country full of greed. There is no such thing as being overpaid here. White America would tell you that..or perhaps corporate America.
What the heck. If I could sit on a reality TV show, looking pretty, whilst giving contestants musical advice thus collecting a $15-$20 million paycheck like J.Lo, and Britney, I would most definitely take that gig. But in the eyes of poor folks, in your dreams, little girl. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 1:33:45 PM | Is it really healthy to sit at your video game, sports bar, big-screen TV, pc screen, for more and more hours?
http://healthland.time.com/2012/07/10/get-up-sitting-less-can-add-years-to-your-life/
Sitting for more than three hours a day can cut two years off a person’s life expectancy, even if he or she exercises regularly, a new study finds. Watching TV for more than two hours a day can shorten life expectancy even further, by another 1.4 years.
The findings suggest that when it comes to gleaning health benefits from physical activity, it may not be enough just to get the recommended amount of daily exercise — the government advises about a half-hour of moderate activity a day for adults. But what about the other 23.5 hours of every day? Researchers say it’s important not to spend it sedentary or sitting.
In the same way that both pushing the gas and hitting the brake can adjust the speed of your car, researchers say that physical activity and sedentary behavior independently affect your health and life expectancy. Whether “you’re physically active and meet the exercise guidelines, or if you’re not active,” says Peter Katzmarzyk, professor of epidemiology at Pennington Biomedical Research Center and lead author of the new paper published in the online journal BMJ Open, “sitting is bad.”
Katzmarzyk’s isn’t the first study to document the ill effects of sedentary behavior. An Australian study published last August found that people who watched an average of six hours of TV a day lived 4.8 years less than those who didn’t watch any television; what’s more, every hour of TV that people watched after age 25 was associated with a 22-minute reduction in their life expectancy.
The current analysis differed from previous research in that it took a broader look, calculating the cumulative effect on overall life expectancy of a sedentary population. Recent surveys show that worldwide people spend about 300 minutes, or 20% of their day, sitting; many people spend much longer. Shaving at least a couple of hours off that time — by turning off the computer, TV or other digital media, for example — could add years to life expectancy, the new study suggests.
To gauge the effect of being sedentary, Katzmarzyk and his colleagues pooled data from five studies that asked participants about their sedentary habits, including how much time they spent sitting, watching TV or using the computer screen. The researchers folded in the mortality risk associated with sedentary behavior, and then calculated how many years of life would be gained if these risk factors were removed from life expectancy calculations.
Sitting, it turns out, can shorten life expectancy almost as much as smoking can, which highlights just how damaging inactivity can be, particularly for the heart. “What the results mean is that we got everyone in the U.S. to sit less, our population life expectancy would be two years higher, so instead of living to 78.5, we would be expected to live to 80.5 years old,” says Katzmarzyk. “That’s a really big deal.”
But getting people to spend less time in their chairs isn’t easy, especially for those who work sedentary jobs at an office desk. Even people who meet the government’s exercise guidelines may spend most of the rest of their days parked on a sofa or chair.
You can start by getting up from your chair intermittently at work. Take walks around the hall in your office or try holding walking meetings instead of sitting around a table. Get up to chat with your colleague instead of sending an email. Standing doesn’t take the place of exercise, but it should replace a good chunk of time you spend in your chair. The key is to spend as little time as possible sitting down. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 1:41:17 PM |
There is no such thing as being overpaid here. White America would tell you that.
rush my dear...let's not make this about race. There are a whole lot of black athletes and entertainers getting very rich too. Like 80% of the NBA.
hugs. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/15/2012 1:43:50 PM | ^^^^^^J Lo did a lot more than sit and look pretty. She took dance lessons her whole life, I remember her first job as a dancer on TV, she was a star, no doubt about it.
Same for Britney, she was in acting and singing since age 3, won lots of contests all along, THEN got on TV.
White America seems to pay it's Black stars well too. Just ask Oprah, she's worth maybe 3 billion.
But there's also Sean Combs, Robert Johnson, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Jay-Z, Bill Cosby, Sheila Johnson, and Tyler Perry - each worth about 1/2 a billion.
I'll stop right there, it's not worth our time to discuss mere multi-millionaires. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/21/2012 8:47:48 PM | | i definitely think they are over paid,... but, as long as we're willing to watch them, and pay to see them at events and such, things should never change,... they ask for what they want, and we give it to them,... its a fair trade imho. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:59:34 AM | | I wonder more why "we" are so willing to pay such exhorbitant prices for tickets to games to watch them play and for the licensed merchandise like team jerseys, etc. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/22/2012 1:26:25 PM | | this is interesting, i have just read a book callled the winner take all, by robert h frank. it discusses this phenomenon in a really interesting way. do look at it on amazon. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/22/2012 2:13:40 PM | Hmmmm...interesting question and premise.
This is a multi-faceted issue, which involves patriotism, pride, personal experience, laziness and our desire to be entertained, rather than entertain ourselves!
The ancilary issues of CEO's and politicians are similar but NOT the same. I guess the issue there is one of politicians being able to vote themselves a raise, despite how corrupt they might be, how little they do of the peoples work, how much dirty money they take(even if its legal, lobbyist money is dirty). This should have been curtailed years ago, before it was "dollars gone wild" for these parasites...
The CEO issue is entirely different. So many do NOTHING to command the money they do. They hire them, pay them a signing bonus, stock options, a HUGE salary...all to turn around the results at a public company...they fail and get a handsome severance package, after achieving NOTHING for the stockholders who have to foot this bill.
Gone are the days of Lee Iacocca, who took $1 a year as a salary to turn around Chrysler...yeah he made a boatload of bucks AFTER he achieved success. So what? He did what he was hired and charged to do. Why shouldn't he be paid for success? It's the idiots who simply hire a good lawyer, negoiate a great contract, and do squat for the shareholders I have a problem with. Also the ones who break the law or bend the rules to suit themselves. Like the mortgage crisis or the new Libor scandal...
As for private businesses, well those were developed by the individual themselves. If they can make 50 billion a year, based on the ownership of their company and it's success, more power to them.
As for movie stars and sports stars...I assume when you measure it, against the earnings of private individuals..it would seem out of proportion. Then again, national pride or patriotism makes people want to show their country as the BEST, in any sport. Not content with Olympic games every 4 years, we have developed international competitions annually to fill the need. In our own country, we have local contests, in baseball, football, basketball to pit one city against another...anytime the masses want to see the income of these athletes decline all that has to happen is a decline in attendance and TV ratings, and the team will NOT be able to afford them.
Of course this would have to happen on a national level, with all sports fans across the country participating at the same time...HIGHLY unlikely..
Another factor here is that we play organized sports in neighborhoods and schools. We grow up idolizing those who played at a professional level. Then never lose that hero worship for something we couldn't do as well as them.
As for movie stars, yes some are paid bupkis...but many hit lotto multiple times a year...Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie to name a couple make a fabulous living...then again, why are so many fascinated with them? We sell millions of magazines a week, devoted to pictures of them on the streets, what they eat, where they go...to me, I see a movie, if I like it, I "may" watch to see if their in something I think maybe interesting..but that's where it ends. I could care less about anything personal about them.
We have become a nation obsessed with fame, or becoming famous..hence reality TV...my life is interesting to me, I doubt it would have the same cache to someone else. As this self absorbed, selfish, and myopic view of our ow importance rises...we have lost sight of the rest of humanity. We now broadcast on our on little window on the world on FB, or tweeter about what we think, as though it were the sermon on the mount...
But such is the deluded life of most people fascinated with their own faces, thoughts and lives...sorry to be harsh..but it's just how I see it IMO.. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/22/2012 2:33:04 PM | It becomes possible when one person can serve a large number of people, usually through replicative medai.
A musician working chamber music outside a swain's window gets paid for a tiny audience. A doctor working on one patient may charge a lot, but can only squeeze through so many people with his time.
But a lecturer or performer in a large hall an get a piece of MANY admissions all at once.
A writer or musician whose work is published - however crappy it is - can collect from a HUGE number of people.
The personal trainer looks in awe at the class leader or video peddler.
Again, it's the banking executive who seems to be making wayyy too much without doing much of significance save firing people and raising fes.
ED BEAR | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/22/2012 3:17:20 PM | | We are a nation of consumers. It has been this way since the early 20th century. Everything is marketed to us now. Even politics. And we pay dearly for what we think we want. They are making a killing off the suckers they have hooked on their product. Paying these athletes and actors big money is part of the marketing. It takes money to make money. They need the most desirable people they can afford to keep interest in their product. Now people smile and regularly pay hundreds of dollars to watch a game, or see a concert. So they are doing something right. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/23/2012 8:23:47 AM | It is not sad, it is reality.
Capitalism, baby. Anyone can do it.
It makes me sad that people think we should take others hard earned money and redistribute it. That's downright depressing actually. I'm off to eat a gallon of ice cream....
@ rushluv
The whole watching tv cuts years off your life. Do you want to live forever? To tell you the truth, if there's ever a time when I have to rely on people to get everyday stuff done, like take a shower, nope, take me out back and do me a favor.
So you guys have fun being old, losing your minds and having to rely on others for things you've been doing your whole life by yourself. Me, I recognize when the fight is over and it's time to move on. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/23/2012 9:12:00 AM | As long as someone meets the criteria for their expected level of performance, they're not overpaid.
All jobs have performance metrics that must be met to determine success or failure.
Corporate CEOs must increase company profits and stock prices.
Even mundane jobs like engineers, teachers, lawyers, doctors, etc have performance metrics.
The salaries of actors, musical performers, and athletes are tied to ticket sales. As long they sell enough tickets to justify their salaries, then they're not overpaid. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/23/2012 8:15:43 PM | Because they generate much more then they are paid. Peyton Mannings, Kobe Bryants,
Brad Pitts all those peeps bring in people who spend big money. And many of them get the job done. It is the ones who get paid for doing nothing that can be frustrating..
We are willing to pay $100 for sneakers, $10 for a movie ticket, $200 to go football game and so on.
They make ridiculous money. cuz we pay ridiculous $ for them.
and yes I am one of those people too. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/23/2012 9:37:41 PM | | People have always treasured talent. Before capitalism, America, Hollywood, Jackson Pollock, etc, people still paid big bucks for the best of that which is created by other humans. It's what we do. Art is meaningful and that is valuable. I'm interested in how some of the things we create become meaningful. Some of it just doesn't seem that good but here we are chucking millions at a splattery canvas. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 7/24/2012 8:55:48 PM | | An example of overpaid - Jennifer Lopez was paid $15m for being a judge on American Idol last year. Nielsen Ratings dropped 25% last year compared to the previous year. JLo asks for a raise to return for a 3rd season and was turned down. If the ratings had stayed flat or gone up, she probably would've gotten the raise. Now they're going to pay close to $18m for Mariah Carey. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 1:54:19 AM | ...why do ... we overpay our athletes, movie stars and music stars. Most entertainers in general. I assume this is the case throughout the world. I know it is here in America. It is pretty sad when they make more in one year for one movie or one tour then some of makes in a lifetime It is simple capitalism; it is in relationship to the money their services generate for those they work for. A film star will earn an amount in proportion to what he/she generates for the producers of the film. When people go to concerts and pay exorbitant amounts of money for the tickets, imo, they are just being dumb, but they are willing to pay for the privilege of seeing and hearing the artist in person. Again, it is pure capitalism: the performer will charge what he/she knows people will pay.
If you don’t want to support this type of thing, don’t pay such high prices for tickets, CDs, DVDs, etc. Don’t support the companies advertising on television. But, the bottom line, it is pure capitalism. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 8:04:43 AM | I don't know why?
Amazing amount of money been thrown around if you ask me.
Yes, people taking their cut, so he/she doesn't get all of it, but pretty sure he/she has enough left.
I sort of understand athletes, and actors, entertainers.
But judges? I can't wrap my head around that. They get so much for what? Meh, it is the way it is.
Wish more stars would do good things with their money. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 8:37:14 AM | Money= importance. The more money they make, they more important they are and we're supposed to tune in while Congress has closed door last minute deals. Priorities. The media is a distraction, and to make people think they're watching something "important" the players on these stages are well compensated.
Wage gap between CEO's and the average worker? Now you're talking!! Celebs? Who cares. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 8:56:16 AM | | Flick that monetary light switch, their just as poor as you and I. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 9:02:50 AM | | Stop suporting them by seeing their movies, going to their games. Behind the rich athelete, singer, movie star is someone who promotes them and makes tons of money off of them. Until our values in society change were stuck with it. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 9:11:50 AM | This is something that really bothers me. The crazy adulation of people who are often low lifes in
real life, making pots of money for doing very little. Reality "stars" are the worst offenders.
You have to realize that the media machine is designed to keep people preoccupied so they don't/won't
ask any serious questions about what's going on in the world at large. Most people are far more worried about their favorite sports team than the state of the currency.
In answer to your question, yes of course these people are paid way more than they are worth. The out of proportion
millions they get seems to cause many of them to believe in their own hype, that they don't have to follow the rules,etc.,
so they wind up being role models for how not to live. | |
|
| In your opinion why do
Posted: 12/31/2012 9:19:24 AM | You need to understand most of these celebrities are just in debt as normal Joe, we just don't realise how much their lifestyle costs. I'd bet most of them live cheque to cheque, it's the illusion of a mansion, ferrari etc etc that keep you wanting what they have.
Not to mention the contracts they signed without reading, that 20mill may end up 500tho once finialised. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
