https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp2vZR1esng
Videos like this piss me off. Of course Dave Ramsey's advice is not going to "get you rich." The people he is working with are those who are so far in a financial hole that they need a simple, foolproof plan to get them out. Dave Ramsey has that plan.
You should not be worried about trying out for the Major Leagues in baseball when you cannot even hit the ball off a tee. So stop huffing about his advice not making you rich, it is not supposed to do that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu1lKvzDtNU
Another example of the same thing. "Not all debt is bad debt!" Yes, that is true. But the people that need Dave Ramsey are clearly incapable to dealing with ANY debt. You should not be trying to get into making money on rental properties if you cannot handle your credit card debt. Getting into rental properties comes with many risks, which the people who need Dave Ramsey cannot afford, as they already are in a hole.
And airline miles being a positive example for "credit card debt is not always bad" is retarded. Hey Joshua, if you are spending money with your credit card so that you can get "free airline miles," you are an idiot. Don't give me this "you are spending the money anyways." Usually, you are spending more than you normally would under the justification of getting something for "free." When you have a lot of debt, you need to cut spending. Which means credit card spending is going to be bad always.
Another analogy I can think of is complaining about someone who is giving general fitness and diet advice to fat people because "They will never become a professional athlete with that advice!"
If you are a fatass who just needs to learn how to eat less and exercise, the least of your worries is being one of the greatest athletes in the world.
"Look how much Michael Phelps eats in a day! Clearly eating a lot is not always bad!"
Again, you are talking to fatasses, not people on Phelp's level.
250 Calories per donut
100 Calories per mile walked ( it might be more if obese )
If walking at 3 miles per hour burns 300 Calories
Then if you eat a donut you have to walk an extra 50 minutes
It is easier to not eat the donut
Since running or any high calories exercise if you are obese hurts the joints you are very limited in how much weight you can lose by exercising per week if you are obese
Obese people will use exercise as an excuse to eat junk food
you'll never work off hours of eating junk food even if you're hitting the gym every other day for a couple hours, the calorie burns are never going to add up
also doing low intensity shit like walking is never going to get someone thin, that's just shoe sales bullshit
that's not to say you can't eat dirty, but you have to be at a fitness level that already allows for that, starting fat you're already super far behind and eating dirty will not work
like i can eat a couple donuts before i ice climb, because i'm in ice climbing shape
@dictatordave @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy
I would not advise obese people to lose weight by exercising because they will use exercise as an excuse to continue eating junk food & they can never lose significant weight while eating the amount of junk food that made them obese in the 1st place even if they add on as much low intensity exercise as their time & joint health permits
I am talking only about people so heavy that anything more metabolically intense than walking will injure them
you have to treat them like what they are, junkies, they're no different than someone living on the street shooting dope, tough shit if someone doesn't want to hear it
you want to know what fucks up hospitals and over runs them? fatties, and usually fatties on drugs, and they treat the staff like its a hotel that's meant to pander to them, not following orders to not eat food or drink soda, they have grub hub bring it in
100 year moratorium on all diabetes drugs and other shit keeping fatties alive, the herd needs to be thinned
do it for the planet, right?
@shortstories @dictatordave @basedbagel Good point. Most weight loss is a matter of diet. Exercise can help accelerate weight loss, but not nearly as much a eating properly.
There is a saying I like in reference to this: You can't outrun your fork.
Just looking at the rough estimates when I run on a treadmill, 10 minutes of running is about 100 calories. It takes far less time to eat 100 calories.
you'd be better off doing clean and jerks for low weight high reps
but again if you're working from a severe deficit of several hundred pounds over weight, you gotta treat it like a drug addiction and remove the dope to even begin to get better
@dictatordave @basedbagel @shortstories I am not saying 10 minutes worth of running makes a huge difference, but rather just placing that as a general unit for how hard you have to work to burn calories versus how easy it is to eat a lot of calories.
I lift weights regularly, and agree it is great for your health. Though I also cannot lift enough to make up for a poor diet either.
@houseoftolstoy @dictatordave @basedbagel
World record is about
3 minutes and 40 seconds for 1 mile
8 minutes for 2 miles
a little better than 5 minutes per mile for a marathon
Might not remember figures exactly
So let's say someone can run 2 miles in 10 minutes every day with no injury
Will provide great fitness benefits compared to no exercise
But it is less calories than eating a single donot even though it is faster than 90% of the population that is not not morbidly obese can run
CrossFit og.
@markcuban @basedbagel @shortstories @dictatordave I find that it is more accurate to say that fat people miscount the number of calories they take in (e.g. not counting a Starbucks coffee chock full of sugar). And they often claim that calories is bogus because they insist that they eat well (but don't).
Yes, your body will not be able to use every single calorie in the food you eat. But if you eat under the amount of food your body needs to maintain the current weight, you will lose weight.
@markcuban @basedbagel @shortstories @dictatordave The food has potential energy. Which can be measured in calories. I don't care if it can "use" all the calories or not or if other things technically have calories, it still is a close enough of a measure to tell you if you are going to get more energy from one food versus another food. You get fat when you eat too many calories, you lose weight when you eat a lower amount of calories than homeostasis.
@markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy @dictatordave
Calories on nutrition labels do not measure how much heat you get from food when you put it in a flame
Fiber often has 0 Calories on nutrition labels but if you burn it in a flame it would produce or remove some amount of heat other than 0 in a exothermic or endothermic reaction
Calories measure how much mechanical energy + heat the body can get at the most by chemically transforming food in a chemical path that sometimes is not fire
@markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy @dictatordave
In the case of carbohydrate other than fiber the amount of energy would be the same as for the chemical path if it is perfectly burned to produce H2O and CO2 but in the case of protein I doubt that it is broken down in the same chemical pathway as if you stick it in a fire
And in the case of 0 Calorie fiber it is not broken down at all chemically in the human body but if you stick it in fire it undergoes a chemical change
@markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy @dictatordave
Fiber is listed as Carbohydrate
Non Fiber Carbohydrate produces 4 Calories per gram for humans
In the case of some fibers they might produce 2 Calories per gram for instead of the typical 4 Calories per gram for other Carbohydrates or 0 per gram like other fiber because although the human body does not break them down other micro organisms break them down and excrete material the human body uses for nutritional Calories
@markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy @dictatordave
The 4 Calories per gram for Carbohydrate assumes a specific metabolic path of Aerobic Metabolism
In some cases if there is not enough oxygen after converting sugar to pyruvate it gets less calories by converting that pyruvate to lactic acid instead of the normal pathway once the body gets enough oxygen it converts the lactic acid back to pyruvate and completes the aerobic metabolism process and in the end makes the same amount of Calories
most people can't figure out calories to save their lives
but if you shoot for a 500 calorie deficit you'll see results, and you dont need to count, you just need to not eat like a pig
@dictatordave @markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy
1 Calorie = 1 Kcal = 1000 calories
1 calorie = amount of heat to increase 1 gram of water 1 degree C
1 Joule = Amount of work to move 1 Newton of weight 1 meter against gravity
1 Kilogram weighs about 9.8 Newtons
Since Calories go partly to mechanical work & partly to heat calculations for how many Calories it takes to do mechanical work are not perfect
Vertical against gravity Calories can be calculated
Horizontal travel problematic
@dictatordave @markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy
Horizontal travel should be 0 Calories or Joules because you are not moving against gravity but perpendicular to hit
But people found about 100 Calories per mile
For vertical travel you can take body weight * height to calculate Joules than convert Joules to Calories than multiply or divide by some constant based on how much food chemical energy is metabolized to heat vs used for mechanical work
@dictatordave @markcuban @basedbagel @houseoftolstoy @shortstories
I've never been convinced that it's possible to count calories. There is no meter, no gauge, no visible units going in and out, and no two persons have the same metabolism. It's always a very wild guess at best.
