Oversized soda to be banned in New York.

Your missing your own point, your original point was......

.....paying for someone else's obesity problems. And now it appears your problem "up sizing". Which is it? Injured skateboarders are sticking their grubby little hands in your wallet for their preventable injury problems. Reason dictates since they are both preventable and both cost you money they should be equally banned. Yet, one is unacceptable to you and the other is not. Please explain this discrepancy and your prejudice for one over the other.

 

Upsizing is one of the major factors in why people think they need 32+oz sodas at a fast food place.

Again, when skateboarder sellers want to upsize the injuries let me know.

 

What a stupid comparison. Skateboarder sellers do not sell injuries, they sell skateboards. The injuries are free, any size you want.

 

Maybe you didn't see/read the question. Injured skateboarders are sticking their grubby little hands in your wallet for their preventable injury problems. Reason dictates since they are both preventable and both cost you money they should be equally banned. Yet, one is unacceptable to you and the other is not. Please explain this discrepancy and your prejudice for one over the other?

 

Hilarious, and a good indicator of what those Happy Meal toys are actually worth

 

Again, one of the major reasons why we (as a nation) think we need 32+oz sodas is when you order a meal, the fast food joint always asks you to upsize the meal. Seeings how its under a buck, people say, yay sure.

The FF industry has also taken a small sized from 12oz to 16oz to 20 oz in my lifetime. A large from 16 to 24 to 32+.

What part of this is so hard to understand? Please tell me before moving forward.

No where in this ban does it say you cannot drink pop. It is just trying to get people to cut back to reasonable portions.

I do not see any other industry up-sizing something to make American less health. Most industries strive for better healthier safer industries. So again, let me know when a skateboarder selling us up-sizing injuries. I'll be waiting.

 

WAAAAAAA!!!! I WANT MY POP!!!!

 

Therein lies the heart of the issue --

What gives Mayor Bloomberg the right to decide what is a "reasonable portion" of anything?

What's next - a limit on how many packs of cigarettes a person can purchase per week? A ban on double quarter-pounders with cheese - you can have a single 1/4lb burger, but two patties is too much? No more three scoops of ice cream at Baskin-Robbins - two is the limit, and one of those has to be fat-free and/or sugar-free?

As I stated earlier - government should educate the people, not decide what is and isn't best for them.

 

Here is the bottom line on your argument:

1 - Cigarettes will never be banned nor will any restrictions be put on them, because of the tax revenues it creates. Cigarettes should be banned all together due to the health risks.

2 - But a restriction on the size of pop the government will because they will not make any less money on 16oz or 32oz pop. In fact it costs the government money to allow unhealthy portions.

So can rah rah all you wish about who can decide what, but this is the reality of it.

There are two types of people. One that wants to live in Utopia, the other lives reality.

 

The company is simply offering people a choice. I don't know why you don't believe in allowing companies to offer people services they want. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything, it is entirely on the individual. You clearly have no respect for humanity nor liberty if you believe that government must stop people from being able to choose something as minor as the amount of soda they will order.

BTW fat people cost less money, same with smokers.

 

In my opinion, a more well informed electorate is more important that merely an electorate that has its privileges and immunities denied and disparaged via forms of central planning.

 

Would you like a heart attack or stroke? Nice choice

This has nothing to do with liberty. This is life and death and the obestiy problem America has

 

No one said "ban" cigarettes, just like they're not "banning" soda - they're just placing limits on how much can be purchased. Instead of 20-count packs of cigarettes, why not 10-packs? Or making the sale of a carton of cigarettes (10 20-count packs) illegal in NYC? That's no more far-fetched than outlawing SuperBigGulps.

If you want to live in a society where government decides what is best for you, be my guest. I personally value my freedom of choice.

 

I have allready sated why there will never be a limit on cigarettes: TAX REVENUE.

There is not tax revenue on Soda, atleast wether it is 16oz or 32oz. If the goverment could get twice the tax off a 32oz that they do on a 16oz, this law would never be.

And there will be alot less freedom of choice under O-bum-ba care. Stupid (*)(*)(*)(*) like allowing the fast food industry to upsize every freakin meal leads a 'need' (In some peoples eyes anyways) for programs like O-bum-ba care, because Americans are lazy fat and unhealthy. Stats prove this the obestiy problem in America.

 

This has everything to do with liberty! If you think the government should be so influential that prevents us from being able to make such trivial decisions as how much soda to buy in one container then you clearly don't believe in freedom. Also not everyone who orders more than 16oz with a meal A) drinks it, B) has a heart attack from it. There is absolutely no reason for this law; it is simply a powergrab meant to garner votes from people who believe government needs to pass law for what they think is best for everyone. It's complete garbage, I have no idea how anyone can support this.

 

The same exact nonsense was said when they banned smoking in restaurants and bars. Wheres my smokers rights I heard over and over and over and over again. We are better off because we didn't listen to people who can't think deeper into a subject and just want to scream “you don’t believe in freedom.”

When they try to put a chip in me, try to take my guns and ammo, or my precious metals, then we'll have problems. Till then, I'll keep chuckling at posts like this.

 

How are we better off? I know here where I live all banning smoking in bars has done is moved the bar outside. I also do not see why the property manager/bar owner should not be allowed to let their customers use a legal product in their bar if they so wish.

As for not caring about liberty until they come for your guns, remember that whole line about not fighting when they came for the Jews, and again when they came for the (insert group here). You can sit and laugh as liberties others enjoy are taken away from all of us, but one day the finger will be pointed at something you enjoy, and you can be the one sitting there as people laugh at you because you protest such non-sense laws.

 

They have already taken my rights away. The religious right in this country (Mormons and the ADF) took my right to marry away in California with prop 8. Funny, I don’t see the liberty brigade righties against theses states constitutions banning gay marriage.

 

If you've ever seen me post, you'd know I oppose such bull(*)(*)(*)(*) as prop 8. People like myself will always vote for peoples liberty whether we use that liberty or not. I wish more people felt that way. I also wish it was possible to do more to secure our rights and liberty, but short of running for a political position there isn't much of (*)(*)(*)(*) one person can do, or even small groups for that matter.

 

Why is it the government's responsibility to decree a certain level of health-promoting activity from the individual, if the individual in question declines to act in a more healthful manner?

It seems to me that this should, rightfully, be a matter of individual choice, in a free society, irrespective of the potential consequences...

 

Why is it law that you have to wear a seat belt?

 

insurance companies bought that law, they promised lower rates if we wore them... course once the law passed, the lower rates never appeared

same with requiring everyone to buy car insurance... promised lower rates that never materialized

anyone think the cigarette tax was for our health benefit, nope, just another tax revenue stream that is now starting to run dry... new taxes will need to replace that soon


...

 

But what about liberty? Isnt it your right to be dumb and not wear one?

 

I would suggest a good managed-care plan (the two basic types of which are HMOs and PPOs).

We have a PPO. And when my wife was in the hospital about a year ago, for 12 days, the total Submitted Charges came to a whopping $51,941.45. But the insurance adjustment came to (are you ready for this?) $47,481.19, leaving a balance of just $4,460.26. Our insurance pays 100 percent of all hospital charges (although doctors' charges are billed separately; here, the plan pays 85 percent of the Plan Allowance), leaving a patient balance of zero...

 

I do not disagree with you, in fact in some instances not wearing one might save your life, so in effect in that instance the government would be forcing you to do something that may kill you, odds are better for you if you wear a seat-belt obviously, but the odds are not always in favor of the seat belt

the reason the law was bought by the insurance companies is because those odds were in their favor


...