Disney Movie "Predicts" Future of American Health?

[Christopher.Collins]

Wow, sounds like I should actually see this movie, it sounds rather interesting. Isnt it great now that we are no longer kids they are making childrens movies that we as adults can still enjoy?

BTW LifeSavR, yes this is my real name... I have nothing to hide.

.... or do I? :twisted:

[Eydawn]

Well, what the movie seems to be implying is that the Wal-Mart/McDonald's culture, of mass produced, readily available goods, is a negative form of consumerism. Wal-Mart is the poster child for American capitalism- along with Starbucks, everyone knows where one is and what they offer. So... the society on the ship shows people effectively LIVING inside Wal-Mart, having completely bought into the "easy solution" that allows them to relax in comfort on a 5 year vacation while the tiny Wall-E bots clean up their mess.

Capitalist consumerism? I define it in the context of this movie as the giant corporations purveying product to mass citizenry, with the citizenry eagerly leaping at "low" prices.

As for taking responsibility for what is going on around us, that varies depending on who you are... if you're a blue collar worker with very little education, taking responsibility means learning what your impact on the world is. If you're a more educated person who realizes the impact of your actions, taking action to minimize that impact would constitute taking responsibility... including voting for environmental policies and expending personal effort to minimize trash output, etc.

There is no one answer...

Wendy

CO EMT-B

[Michael]

the Wal-Mart/McDonald's culture, of mass produced, readily available goods, is a negative form of consumerism.

Would it be better for goods to be individually produced and hard to obtain?

Wal-Mart is the poster child for American capitalism- along with Starbucks, everyone knows where one is and what they offer.

Would it be better for consumers to remain ignorant of merchants' location and inventory?

the "easy solution" that allows them to relax in comfort on a 5 year vacation while the tiny Wall-E bots clean up their mess.

Would tension in discomfort without efficient technology be better?

Capitalist consumerism? I define it in the context of this movie as the giant corporations purveying product to mass citizenry, with the citizenry eagerly leaping at "low" prices.

Should businesses be small, or not sell their products, or not offer them to the public? Should customers be indifferent or hostile to affordable commodities?

As for taking responsibility for what is going on around us, that varies depending on who you are... if you're a blue collar worker with very little education, taking responsibility means learning what your impact on the world is.

So this responsibility consists in knowledge?

What would happen to the movie if its producers applied these principles to their own activity?

[Eydawn]

Michael wrote

Would it be better for goods to be individually produced and hard to obtain?

There are those who would have us return to locally produced goods, made by small businesses. I don't completely agree with it; just demonstrating what the movie seemed to be projecting. I think mass production of goods has enabled a higher quality of life for some people... but the interplay of large business in the economic sphere might contradict that thinking, as it allows monopoly on price, to some degree... and there are some people who lose more profitable jobs due to large businesses moving in. More people might be employed, but with significantly lower pay... but economics is not my forte.

Eydawn wrote:

Wal-Mart is the poster child for American capitalism- along with Starbucks, everyone knows where one is and what they offer.

Michael wrote

Would it be better for consumers to remain ignorant of merchants' location and inventory?

Not at all. That comment was supposed to indicate decreasing diversity within the consumer's access range... as small businesses fail to compete with low prices, choice decreases, and then choice becomes set: you can get a Starbucks Latte... only name brand mass produced jeans... etc. NOW.... there will always be small stores supported by loyal clientele... but they become increasingly hard to find. And our society has become one of convenience...

Eydawn wrote:

the "easy solution" that allows them to relax in comfort on a 5 year vacation while the tiny Wall-E bots clean up their mess.

Michael wrote:

Would tension in discomfort without efficient technology be better?

No... but escapism is very rarely a viable solution. Were the occupants of that ship to be headed for a new planet for colonization, I would feel differently... I think concerted effort in developing more technology to help clean up the mess would have been the more ethical solution within the framework of this movie. The citizenry of Earth should not have fled with hopes that the robots, unassisted, would clean up the mess; they should have been proactive in trying to adapt to the Earth and trying to find a solution for its cleanup. As it stands, the B n L company that contributed to the mess was the only force displayed in the movie attempting to fix things... and proved inadequate. Which is unsurprising, since to maintain the customer satisfaction expectations that they helped to create, they had to keep using techniques that were destroying the planet...

As for the other points... were the movie producers to apply what they seem to be insisting, they would have no career. It is always profitable, however, merely to comment on what should be changed rather than attempting to change things. Hence why "think-tank" operations seem to thrive... Should companies not purvey goods? Of course not... should businesses not strive for success? No... and of course the general public will not be hostile towards affordable commodities. The real question is whether or not a price accurately reflects whether a commodity is affordable or not. The sticker price does not always reflect the total cost you are paying for an item... which many people do not pay attention to. But that is another discussion entirely.

Answer your own questions, Michael, I'm interested to see what your reflections on them will be!

Wendy

CO EMT-B

[Michael]

Michael wrote

Who are the people for whom it has not enabled a higher quality of life, and why?

[iMac]

General human/public health has gone down more and more over the years because of the way things in general have evoluted. Techonology, failing health care systems...

It all speaks for itself.

[Michael]

as small businesses fail to compete with low prices, choice decreases, and then choice becomes set: you can get a Starbucks Latte... only name brand mass produced jeans... etc. NOW.... there will always be small stores supported by loyal clientele... but they become increasingly hard to find

Oh?