NYC to Ban Big Sodas

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
case in point. I got a milkshake today. Ordered the largest they had. I would normally like a little more, but it is what it is… if they offered a larger version I would have bought that, but I’m not going to get 2 mediums ;)[/quote]

So, if they offered a larger one, you’d be fat?[/quote]

No, I drink them in moderation :smiley: HA

I guess in the end though, it’s not gonna solve the obesity problem, in and of itself

Ban it. What do I care. I never drink soda anyway.

And while they’re at it, ban cigarrettes too. Nothing like a huge burden on the healthcare system like those fucking cancer sticks. Besides, I’m tired of seeing piles of cigarette butts at every intersection while I’m waiting for the green light.

Can you picture the new “legalize it” t-shirts?
Size XXL. :slight_smile:

And then there can be a whole new black market for Big Gulps. Maybe oraganized crime can get involved, just like back in prohibition! Fines, sin taxes, regulations. This will be awesome!

I need a really, really big Dr. Pepper. I wonder if being a criminal will give me street cred? I always wanted to be just a little bit bad, but I wasn’t sure how.

Hey, it worked for pot! I mean no one smokes that because it’s banned!

And, steeeroidzzz!!! No one uses those!

And, heroin-- no one has used that in a long time!!

Billion dollar lawsuits, bans, and over taxing cigarettes-- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone smoke in a decade!

Minors never drink-- it’s illegal!

Hurray for government! Those people are so smart!

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Hey, it worked for pot! I mean no one smokes that because it’s banned!

And, steeeroidzzz!!! No one uses those!

And, heroin-- no one has used that in a long time!!

Billion dollar lawsuits, bans, and over taxing cigarettes-- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone smoke in a decade!

Minors never drink-- it’s illegal!

Hurray for government! Those people are so smart![/quote]

Actually this is even dumber than all that. If pot were legal, this would be like trying to ban large joints in an attempt to stop people from getting high.

Apparently it’s easier to ban and regulate than to repeal all the myriad of rules and regulations stifling the health care industry today. In a true free-market for health care, people would take more care of their bodies because of the out-of-pocket expense of health problems from obesity.

  • Health insurance only for emergencies - back to the true definition of insurance
  • Tax breaks to individuals for health insurance not to corporations - the patient becomes the customer to insurance companies.
  • Pay out of pocket for doctor visits - again the patient becomes the customer to the doctor rather than the insurance company
  • Elimination of the fragmented state-by-state regulations around medical care
  • Elimination of the regulations supporting the interest of the AMA - regulations that keep supply of doctors artificially low.

I do think this is pretty stupid. I think if they want to do something about obesity they will target children and schools. Stop Hostess from selling their products in schools.

I think we can agree that kids can’t make decisions for themselves. So stop them from taking their lunch money and spending it on junk food at school would be a start. Now if parents want to be giant dicks fighting the government they can have their kids take junk food to school, but I think the decision should be taken out of the kid’s hands. Try to stop them from getting addicted to this crap when they are young might help.

Trying to stop adults from eating junk food is stupid and retarded. Unless there is something specific in food that is contributing to obesity, I don’t think you should or will be able to stop adults from eating junk food.

I think it’s a dumb idea unless there’s a chance there will be a normative effect I don’t see the point. I agree soft drinks (that aren’t sugar free) are a large contributor to obesity but the problem I see is that I just ate a big plate of KFC and I would like to continue to when I see fit.

If someone wanted to use gov’t power to address obesity I would prefer advertising be the target. I’m not opposed to gov’t influencing health decisions in theory but the problem I see is that some granola eating vegan jackass can be the one who gets to write the policy and puts a fat tax on my ribeye >:(

[quote]ds1973 wrote:
Apparently it’s easier to ban and regulate than to repeal all the myriad of rules and regulations stifling the health care industry today. In a true free-market for health care, people would take more care of their bodies because of the out-of-pocket expense of health problems from obesity.

  • Health insurance only for emergencies - back to the true definition of insurance
  • Tax breaks to individuals for health insurance not to corporations - the patient becomes the customer to insurance companies.
  • Pay out of pocket for doctor visits - again the patient becomes the customer to the doctor rather than the insurance company
  • Elimination of the fragmented state-by-state regulations around medical care
  • Elimination of the regulations supporting the interest of the AMA - regulations that keep supply of doctors artificially low.[/quote]

Not that I’m for this but just because there are other more effective actions doesn’t mean municipalities shouldn’t attempt to influence within their power. Everything you’ve listed there is out of reach for a municipality to address.

Can we just let Darwinism take place ?

Can we let the species get just a little stronger ?

These are the same people who voted to label pizza as a vegetable, for fuck’s sake.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Hey, it worked for pot! I mean no one smokes that because it’s banned!

And, steeeroidzzz!!! No one uses those!

And, heroin-- no one has used that in a long time!!

Billion dollar lawsuits, bans, and over taxing cigarettes-- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone smoke in a decade!

Minors never drink-- it’s illegal!

Hurray for government! Those people are so smart![/quote]

This is my favorite post in this thread!

don’t need to ban them, just put horrifically disgusting pictures of naked obese people on all the cups, labels and related advertising

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Really? With half of NY’s adults overweight, and half the country set to be obese - not overweight, obese - by 2030, you guys don’t think any steps should be taken to stem that?[/quote]

It won’t work anyway. Fine, they ban that size drink - so people will just buy two smaller ones and get the same amount anyway! Honestly, the idea that the government could possibly control what people eat is a ridiculous notion.

This is just a stupid stunt by the mayor to look like he’s “combating obesity”. It’s an empty gesture that accomplishes nothing.

[quote]debraD wrote:
I think it’s a dumb idea unless there’s a chance there will be a normative effect I don’t see the point. I agree soft drinks (that aren’t sugar free) are a large contributor to obesity but the problem I see is that I just ate a big plate of KFC and I would like to continue to when I see fit.

If someone wanted to use gov’t power to address obesity I would prefer advertising be the target. I’m not opposed to gov’t influencing health decisions in theory but the problem I see is that some granola eating vegan jackass can be the one who gets to write the policy and puts a fat tax on my ribeye >:(

[quote]ds1973 wrote:
Apparently it’s easier to ban and regulate than to repeal all the myriad of rules and regulations stifling the health care industry today. In a true free-market for health care, people would take more care of their bodies because of the out-of-pocket expense of health problems from obesity.

  • Health insurance only for emergencies - back to the true definition of insurance
  • Tax breaks to individuals for health insurance not to corporations - the patient becomes the customer to insurance companies.
  • Pay out of pocket for doctor visits - again the patient becomes the customer to the doctor rather than the insurance company
  • Elimination of the fragmented state-by-state regulations around medical care
  • Elimination of the regulations supporting the interest of the AMA - regulations that keep supply of doctors artificially low.[/quote]

Not that I’m for this but just because there are other more effective actions doesn’t mean municipalities shouldn’t attempt to influence within their power. Everything you’ve listed there is out of reach for a municipality to address.
[/quote]

Your vegan example is exactly why governments (municipalities included) shouldn’t have the right to control what you eat. Outside the proper role of governemt (to protect individual liberty) they should be as limited in their power to restrict individual liberty just as an individual is restricted from doing the same.

[quote]caveman101 wrote:
don’t need to ban them, just put horrifically disgusting pictures of naked obese people on all the cups, labels and related advertising [/quote]

Hey, what if I want a 32 oz diet soda?

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Really? With half of NY’s adults overweight, and half the country set to be obese - not overweight, obese - by 2030, you guys don’t think any steps should be taken to stem that?[/quote]

It won’t work anyway. Fine, they ban that size drink - so people will just buy two smaller ones and get the same amount anyway! Honestly, the idea that the government could possibly control what people eat is a ridiculous notion.

This is just a stupid stunt by the mayor to look like he’s “combating obesity”. It’s an empty gesture that accomplishes nothing. [/quote]

Ban soda.

Eat donuts.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/national_world&id=8685040

June 1, 2012 (NEW YORK) – New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg isn’t against all sugary treats.

He recently issued a proclamation declaring Friday as NYC Donut Day, honoring an annual tradition launched 75 years ago to honor women who served the treats to soldiers. City Hall officials emphasized the proclamation doesn’t represent Health Department policy.

[quote]ds1973 wrote:

[quote]caveman101 wrote:
don’t need to ban them, just put horrifically disgusting pictures of naked obese people on all the cups, labels and related advertising [/quote]

Hey, what if I want a 32 oz diet soda?[/quote]

just go to 7-11 and buy a big gulp. 7-11’s are exempt in the proposed ban.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Really? With half of NY’s adults overweight, and half the country set to be obese - not overweight, obese - by 2030, you guys don’t think any steps should be taken to stem that?[/quote]

Serious steps should be taken. If this is a start then fine, NY already went after transfats, but like I said before this is for maybe diabetes or other stuff. To combat a true obesity problem you have to change a mindset. The biggest people I know sit in bed drinking diet soda all day.

[quote]Airtruth wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Really? With half of NY’s adults overweight, and half the country set to be obese - not overweight, obese - by 2030, you guys don’t think any steps should be taken to stem that?[/quote]

Serious steps should be taken. If this is a start then fine, NY already went after transfats, but like I said before this is for maybe diabetes or other stuff. To combat a true obesity problem you have to change a mindset. The biggest people I know sit in bed drinking diet soda all day.[/quote]

So, why should responsible people be punished?

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Hey, it worked for pot! I mean no one smokes that because it’s banned!

And, steeeroidzzz!!! No one uses those!

And, heroin-- no one has used that in a long time!!

Billion dollar lawsuits, bans, and over taxing cigarettes-- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone smoke in a decade!

Minors never drink-- it’s illegal!

Hurray for government! Those people are so smart![/quote]

This is such a pile of shit for someone who is obviously intelligent. So your contention is that because not every single human being adheres to a ban, it’s ineffective? Do I have to tell you how logically unsound that is? Bans are deterrents. We can argue what constitutes an effective ban, but if it causes a percentage of people to eschew the behavior, it’s doing its job. Smoking is by far the most laughable thing you mentioned, considering it has been halved in the last 50 years. Personally I’d say that’s effective.

You people that lose your shit anytime the government does anything need to let go of this slippery-slope fallacy you cling to. Just because the government limits the size of soda does not mean they will have cameras in your bathroom in five years.