A colleague argued that weight loss is a privilege in society because:
(i) poor people can't afford healthy food.
(ii) even if they could, they don't have the time to cook because of how much they work
(iii) fast food is so cheap and easy to get that it's only logical for them to survive on it
(iv) they don't have the time/money to exercise
What do we think about this?
answer to all three is: eat less you fat shit.
you can loose weight on garbage goyslop. or just fast since it's the cheapest option ever
You want to know what's healthier and cheaper than two cheeseburgers?
One cheeseburger
There's no good excuse.
>(i) poor people can't afford healthy food.
They can afford to eat less.
>(ii) even if they could, they don't have the time to cook because of how much they work
They have time to eat less.
>(iii) fast food is so cheap and easy to get that it's only logical for them to survive on it
It's easy to eat less.
>(iv) they don't have the time/money to exercise
It doesn't cost anything to eat less.
Your colleague is an idiot. You can lose weight eating absolute crap. You can eat McDonald's every day, not exercise and lose weight. A Big Mac is like 550 calories, most people can eat three a day and not exceed their TDEE. Manlets and womanlets will have to naturally eat less.
Not eating is free.
The cost per meal of healthy food < cost per meal of fast food.
I.
They could get bulk rice, veggies, or protein that doesn't look like it's been through 5 blenders for less (by pound) than what junk food provides
II.
Cooking takes 5-15 minutes per meal if you don't mind combining simplest shit in the pantry every day
III.
Fast food is low-effort, but meal prep once a week is lower effort if you factor in travel times. Pic rel.
IV.
Jogging and bodyweight are free and take 30 minutes a day.
OP is a faggot but if you did this you will suffer lack of micro nutrients, not that being a fat piece of shit is any better but still
And yet buddhist monks aren't fat. Must be all that privilege of not being allowed to own stuff and having to go out begging for a handful of rice.
>(i) poor people can't afford healthy food.
they could if they weren't stupid
>(ii) even if they could, they don't have the time to cook because of how much they work
chance is they would make more money cooking for themselves than working that additional hour. also chance is they still find an hour to watch tv or whatever they do. if you're working fulltime there is a way to make do if you're frugal and smart about it.
>(iii) fast food is so cheap and easy to get that it's only logical for them to survive on it
yeah no
>(iv) they don't have the time/money to exercise
exercise doesn't matter for weight loss. also just walk, doesnt cost a dime
I ended up saving money living off frozen vegetables, rice and whatever kind if meat was on sale at the time. The time/labor argument is bullshit too sice you can get a rice cooker and George foreman grill dirt cheap and just nuke the veg. If you don't know how to properly season your food and budget for occasional treats you're a worthless retard.
Fast food is fucking expensive compared to home cooked.
You can't lose weight by eating less or excercising, because obesity usn't from overeating, but malnutrition. Humans don't have subcutaneous fat. It's tissue affected by steatosis from malnutrition.
Proof 1, you can make mice fat by underfeeding them.
Proof 2: cattle got fatter when feeding practices declined.
lmao, what a shit point. I lost 12 kilos as poorfag wagie by eating nothing but a junk food, but only once in a day. There's entire diets that revolving around eating goyslop and still losing weight. It's not optimal, but still very doable.
Stop excusing fatties for their spineless
The bigger question is to think why your colleague is so fucked up in the head. World leftist framework:
>People can't be held responsible for the consequences of their actions
>Bad outcomes aren't their fault, therefore they don't deserve negative consequences for their actions
Therefore:
>Massive state intervention to confiscate wealth from the successful to improve the lives of others, even if those people are fucked because they deserve it
So that's what's at stake here and why you've got this bitch reasoning.
1. Less food costs less. It's not ideal but eating half the shit you eat HAS to be less.
2. Poor people don't work that much! That's why most poor people are poor. Loads are unemployment or underemployed. The image of some poor person laboring 80 hours in a mine and having nothing is a leftist meme from commieville. 34% of American families making less than $9000 a year watch over 5 hours of TV a day. Holy fuck imagine if they cooked while they watched TV.
3. Poor people spend around 10% of their food stamp money on soda. So right there you know they're not optimizing purchases for health. They could stop drinking soda, period and then have more money for better food. Or just not, and then lose weight.
4. Fast food is not truly optimized for calories. Poor people are stupid and so turn to fast food for entertainment because it's affordable enough to be fun and providing immediate gratification
You are wrong and both images you posted provide no relevant data. You are of below average intelligence and in a perfect society you would have been killed at birth and you parents sterilized for making a waste of recourses such as yourself.
99% of poors deserve to suffer because they are bad people and so were their ancestors.
Agreed. Only rich people can lose weight. Pic related.
Hey I live in poverty and lost 70lbs. I'm from a privileged country so I can afford to eat. If anything, being fat is more of a privilege.
>poor people can't afford healthy food.
buying the raw ingredients and preparing yourself is always cheaper.
>(ii) even if they could, they don't have the time to cook because of how much they work
I've cooked rice in the microwave it only takes 5 minutes
>fast food is so cheap and easy to get that it's only logical for them to survive on it
so I'm actually poor and fast food is a super luxury to me its usually a once or twice a month thing where I might splurge and get a pizza.
>they don't have the time/money to exercise
possibly only the excuse they have true if you're fat but homeless you should focus on not being homeless first
fasting
Your friend isnt entirely wrong. Poors also more likely to have their kids eat horrid school lunches. But so what if hes right? Those poor fatties still need to lose weight regardless of its relative difficulty. With an instapot its laughably easy to batch cook for 3+ days at a time. Oops instapot is a privelage cuz its 60-80 usd though
No, you're colleague has a mind virus that makes you see the world through a warped and idiotic lens of ideology and pathological denialism. There is nothing you can do to show her reality. Her mind is poisoned
I lost 30 lbs recovering from surgery. I could barely eat 500 cals a day because the opioids destroyed my apetite
He's right that it's vastly easier to lose weight if you're wealthy, to the point where it can become incredibly hard if you're poor and stressed.
Nobody is replying to your post because it's not worth it since it's so retarded. Just to let you aware of that, it is a shit post.
At least you admit you’re a cow
>dont eat
it was my privilege
>(i) poor people can't afford healthy food.
thats not true. its just cheap food must be cooked and that requires diligence.
>(ii) even if they could, they don't have the time to cook because of how much they work
wrong.there are a gorillion 5 minute cheap recipes out there on youtube. 5 minute youtube search annihilates this argument
>(iii) fast food is so cheap and easy to get that it's only logical for them to survive on it
no. its just lazyness and nihilism
>(iv) they don't have the time/money to exercise
since the pandemic we have been in the biggest calisthenics craze like ever. its even fad. going for a walk dosnt cost a penny neither.
i feel stupid for writing all this because its so obvious.