filtherton

Like I said, I'm not going to play that game with you. My questions don't require you to understand how I define personal responsibility. They just require a straight answer.

And you're right, you don't have any responsibility to me to explain yourself. It just seems odd to me that someone so confident in his ideological superiority would be so intent on making up a completely bullshit reason to avoid enlightening a blind, cowardly statist such as myself.

aceventura3

Pretty big leap you make. The amount of regulation is subject to what most people find reasonable. There are trade-offs. With every increase in regulation something is lost, usually some freedom. Individual tolerances differ in general and differ based on the subject in question. If I got into things you value and started "regulating" reducing freedoms you hold near and dear to your heart, you can bet your tone on regulation would be completely opposit of what you project here.

The "profit" motives...do you give away your services in the market place for free or are you motivated by "profit" for your services?

You are wrong. They don't market to kids they market to decision makers, the parents. Marketing 101. The basic strategy is to sell the image of "this place is gonna be fun for your kids, save you some time and effort." It is scary when public policy gets formed based on misinformation like what you present above.

I assume you like this forum, would you find it acceptable if people used faulty reasoning and made up crap to regulate TFP out of existence? Feel free not to respond, because there is no reasoned response to the corner you have painted yourself into, continuation of this would only prove to be further embarrassing.

So is your logical argument that more and more regulation will solve all problems? Sorry, don't respond to that either. I just can't help it with these silly questions, suggesting that you don't think things through thoroughly given your chronically condescending tone.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Baraka_Guru

If we move past Marketing 101, and onto the more advanced marketing strategies and theories, we will know more about the leverage that influencers place on decision makers. Marketers know the power of the "nag factor" all too well, which is why they do indeed target children and aggressively. Large corporations that have products and services geared towards children have the marketing to children down to a science. This isn't a figure of speech: they literally have it down to a science, and they often employ psychologists to help them figure out the best ways to influence children.

You'd think parents would be a bit creeped out by a red-haired clown in big red shoes who seems only able to communicate with children. I know I am. Ronald McDonald wasn't created for the parents.

McDonald's has distinct marketing strategies for each segment of their customer base. The convenience/anywhere commercials are for adults; the "this place is really fun!" commercials are for kids.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

The "nag factor" is nothing until the decision maker is "sold" on the product or service. Child like themes does not mean the target is the child. Marketers would not spend million if not billions on creating a brand image if the target audience has no disposable income, no means to get to and purchase the product. The "nag factor" as you call it only has value after the decision maker is comfortable with the brand.

Why don't they share this knowledge? If there was such knowledge wouldn't it be employed in our schools? Are you suggesting that a company like McDonald's has this knowledge but a company wanting to sell "healthy" food can not employ it?

McDonald's is successful (I have worked there, invested in its stock, and studied the growth of the company) because they deliver on what they promise. Marketing is nothing without execution - they excel at both.

An affinity for clowns is a learned behavior. It is cultural. It is learned from adults.

Now you are on to something. Perhaps, we do need to be specific. There are "kids" that are decision makers - perhaps we could segment this demographic between about 10-18. This group is not into the clown or Happy Meals, but they do have some independence, disposable income and often the means to go out and get the product. If this is the group you are talking about, I agree. I can assure you that McDonald's is not marketing to toddlers, 3, 4, 5, or 6 year-old kids. i would guess the marketing they do regarding 7, 8, 9 is more for long-term repetitive brand recognition, while still focusing on the decision maker for short-term sales.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."