221
Post by: Frazzled
In other news Berkeley and Austin just friended NY on facebook.
Wow NY what the hell happened to you people?
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/18774940/health-panel-talks-about-wider-food-ban
Health panel talks about wider food ban
Email
More Sharing ServicesShare|Share on facebookShare on twitterPrintText Size
Posted: Jun 13, 2012 6:06 AM CDT
Updated: Jun 13, 2012 6:21 AM CDT
By LUKE FUNK, Senior Web Producer -
MYFOXNY.COM - The board hand-picked by Mayor Michael Bloomberg that must approve his ban of selling large sugar-filled drinks at restaurants might be looking at other targets.
The New York City Board of Health showed support for limiting sizes of sugary drinks at a Tuesday meeting in Queens. They agreed to start the process to formalize the large-drink ban by agreeing to start a six-week public comment period.
At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.
One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.
"The popcorn isn't a whole lot better than the soda," Vladeck said.
Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.
"There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories," said board member Dr. Joel Forman.
Mayor Bloomberg says the drink rules are an attempt to fight obesity in the city. It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.
The New York City Restaurant Association is fighting the proposal and is considering legal action of it goes into effect.
New York City voters oppose 51 - 46 percent Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on the sale of over-sized sugary soft drinks, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday.
Read more: http://www.myfoxny.com/story/18774940/health-panel-talks-about-wider-food-ban#ixzz1xgTr5bcI
649
Post by: Thanatos_elNyx
Perhaps people should be fitted with odometers and you don't get to eat fatty foods until you can show that you have worked off the required calories.
29110
Post by: AustonT
The moral of the story is you get the government you deserve.
9217
Post by: KingCracker
Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now?  Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Thanatos_elNyx wrote:Perhaps people should be fitted with odometers and you don't get to eat fatty foods until you can show that you have worked off the required calories.
Just put a scale in every restaurant, and you get charged more tax based on how far over your ideal weight you are. Then after we put micro-chips in everyone with their medical/everything information on it, if your over your cholesterol we'll add more tax for that to.
5534
Post by: dogma
KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now?
NOW!?!
Been doing it for years, what with the FDA and Prohibition.
9217
Post by: KingCracker
Really? Ive honestly never heard of them saying we cant eat certain things just cause (Granted I dont live in NY so maybe thats why)
5534
Post by: dogma
Cheese, man. Our cheese sucks because of the FDA.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
I look forward to movies about gangsters smuggling in large popcorn and Cokes over the border from Canada. 
11653
Post by: Huffy
KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
People complain because they have no self-control that the government needs to do things about it....so I choose to blame the fattie...I mean big-boned who complain that they can't control their intake
9644
Post by: Clthomps
This is only NY city..... So it can not be a nanny state. Please change your title.
NY is a large state and as a whole most new yorkers would love to make those filthy islands their own state....
27151
Post by: streamdragon
He can take my large popcorn from my cold dead hands. (not that I live in NY...)
221
Post by: Frazzled
Huffy wrote:KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
People complain because they have no self-control that the government needs to do things about it....so I choose to blame the fattie...I mean big-boned who complain that they can't control their intake
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do. Automatically Appended Next Post: Am I the only person who remembers when popcorn was actually cooked in high fat coconut oil and animal fat?
33891
Post by: Grakmar
I don't disagree with the principle of government monitoring what can and can't be sold as food. (If you disagree, I'll just point out that they're the ones keeping salmonella, mad cow disease, and outright toxic substances out of food.)
But, this does go too far. Adults should be allowed to decide for themselves what they can or can't eat (as long as it won't immediately harm them).
53595
Post by: Palindrome
Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
Indeed, it's good of him!
91
Post by: Hordini
dogma wrote:Cheese, man. Our cheese sucks because of the FDA.
I don't know, you can still get pretty good cheese if you go to the right stores. I mean yeah, the so-called "American cheese" sucks, but that's not even real cheese. There's good stuff out there.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
When have I ever given an indication I didn't? If Cheech and Chogn have taught us nothing its that aliens (flying saucer aliens), have the best herbage.
Grakmar wrote:I don't disagree with the principle of government monitoring what can and can't be sold as food. (If you disagree, I'll just point out that they're the ones keeping salmonella, mad cow disease, and outright toxic substances out of food.)
But, this does go too far. Adults should be allowed to decide for themselves what they can or can't eat (as long as it won't immediately harm them).
note your examples are for diseases and toxins. I'm kinda ok with that.
Last I saw what "size" you get is not a disease or toxin.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
Who doesn't?
53595
Post by: Palindrome
Frazzled wrote:Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
When have I ever given an indication I didn't? If Cheech and Chogn have taught us nothing its that aliens (flying saucer aliens), have the best herbage.
It seems completely unlike you. Its like Hitler attending a bar mitzvah (Godwin's law!).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AustonT wrote:
Who doesn't?
Lots of people who seem to have been bewildered and blinded by decades of baseless propaganda.
Every state will always be a 'nanny' state, the entire point of a government is to regulate society and to be honest this needs to be the case. Unless of course people think that a utopian society is possible (human psychology rather goes against this though) or they want to live in tiny little autocracies (quite possibly in a mud hut).
In this particular case I support heavily taxing unhealthy foods, the current situation is basically untenable and the majority of western society will soon resemble the crew of that ship in WALL-E and that is largely due to the sheer cheapness of high calorie foods. Ramp up the price and the problem will correct itself as education on goes so far.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
When have I ever given an indication I didn't? If Cheech and Chogn have taught us nothing its that aliens (flying saucer aliens), have the best herbage.
It seems completely unlike you. Its like Hitler attending a bar mitzvah (Godwin's law!).
Why? I've said repeatedly I'm a libertarian. Do what you want just: 1) don't tell me what to do; and 2) your activities end at my nose.
Its simple, its clear, its equal, its just.
25703
Post by: juraigamer
Well now I can feel naughty for putting two bags of popcorn in one bowl and then heartily applying salt while drinking from my half gallon sized mug filled with sprite, all while watching terrible movies.
Yup.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
The only thing naughty there is terrible movies.
However I share that shame, I -love- terrible movies. Terrible horror movies are just brilliant.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Who would have thought that Frazzled would support the legalisation of cannabis.
When have I ever given an indication I didn't? If Cheech and Chogn have taught us nothing its that aliens (flying saucer aliens), have the best herbage.
It seems completely unlike you. Its like Hitler attending a bar mitzvah (Godwin's law!).
...or did he?
http://hitlersbarmitzvah.ytmnd.com/
37231
Post by: d-usa
Sad thing is that a lot of folks that usually are the loudest to complain about "nanny states" are also the same folks that want the government to tell people what drugs they can take, what video games they can play, what shows should be on television and what couples should be able to form a family.
221
Post by: Frazzled
d-usa wrote:Sad thing is that a lot of folks that usually are the loudest to complain about "nanny states" are also the same folks that want the government to tell people what drugs they can take, what video games they can play, what shows should be on television and what couples should be able to form a family.
Not I said the spy. Let er rip. PLus I'm even more mellow. Frazzled is of the firm belief we only need to bow at the waist to our Wiener Dog overlords, not the full on kowtow like some people. Way to go overboard guys....
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled has a strong libertarian streak, that is why I said "most folks".
I find the Tea Party claim of "we want less government" pretty entertaining, mostly because I love to talk to them and point out to them all the ways in which they wish to expand government influence over peoples private lives.
7150
Post by: helgrenze
Just remember that according to the same type of people that want to ban 32oz sodas and popcorn buckets, a Steak should be the size of a deck of standard playing cards.
37231
Post by: d-usa
helgrenze wrote:Just remember that according to the same type of people that want to ban 32oz sodas and popcorn buckets, a Steak should be the size of a deck of standard playing cards.
Oprah should let them know that nobody survives messing with the beef folks.
7150
Post by: helgrenze
I suppose that these same people missed the fact that popcorn is probably the only "whole grain" food that most people willingly eat.
37231
Post by: d-usa
helgrenze wrote:I suppose that these same people missed the fact that popcorn is probably the only "whole grain" food that most people willingly eat.
Popcorn is also not exactly unhealthy. It's the metric-ton of butter and the bucket-load of salt that gives it the bad rep. (aka, the stuff that makes it delicious )
221
Post by: Frazzled
Every state will always be a 'nanny' state, the entire point of a government is to regulate society
Thats certainly one view and one espoused by the Nannites.
and to be honest this needs to be the case.
No, it doesn't. Regulation of certain items to promote clarity, uniformity, equality of knowledge, and to a certain extent the public health (and the public defense which is the biggie) yes. But overarching regulation of society ? NO  ing WAY.
Unless of course people think that a utopian society is possible (human psychology rather goes against this though) or they want to live in tiny little autocracies (quite possibly in a mud hut).
Vs. larger autocracies where people who think they know best tell me what to do.
In this particular case I support heavily taxing unhealthy foods,
Define unhealthy. Note oxygen and H20 can be unhealthy. Of course you die without them.
the current situation is basically untenable
Why?
and the majority of western society will soon resemble the crew of that ship in WALL-E
And?
and that is largely due to the sheer cheapness of high calorie foods. Ramp up the price and the problem will correct itself as education on goes so far.
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:
and that is largely due to the sheer cheapness of high calorie foods. Ramp up the price and the problem will correct itself as education on goes so far.
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
Yeah, ramping up the price of high calorie foods will not really do anything. Part of the problem is that if you are poor, high calorie foods are often the few foods that you can afford because they are so cheap. So if people don't eat healthy because they cannot afford it, then how does pricing them out of food altogether help?
29408
Post by: Melissia
helgrenze wrote:I suppose that these same people missed the fact that popcorn is probably the only "whole grain" food that most people willingly eat.
which is sad, because frankly, whole grain bread tastes better anyway. Automatically Appended Next Post: Frazzled wrote:Thats certainly one view and one espoused by the Nannites.
I'm fairly certain that nano machines don't espouse any particular views at this time.
Jokes aside, conservatives push for nanny governments just as much as liberals. Just in different ways.
53595
Post by: Palindrome
Frazzled wrote:
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food. As it stands this type of food is cheaper than more nutritionally balanced foods; inverse that and then the problem of obesity will solve itself, its capitalism in action! As to why the current obesity time bomb is bad well I would have thought that having an average life expectency in the 50s would generally be considered a bad thing?
29110
Post by: AustonT
Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food. As it stands this type of food is cheaper than more nutritionally balanced foods; inverse that and then the problem of obesity will solve itself, its capitalism in action! As to why the current obesity time bomb is bad well I would have thought that having an average life expectency in the 50s would generally be considered a bad thing?
Yeah we should totally solve the poor's obesity problem by giving them *back* their hunger problem. Hey you know what subsidized housing is a magnet for crime. Let's send them back to tar paper shanties under the overpass.
37231
Post by: d-usa
AustonT wrote:Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food. As it stands this type of food is cheaper than more nutritionally balanced foods; inverse that and then the problem of obesity will solve itself, its capitalism in action! As to why the current obesity time bomb is bad well I would have thought that having an average life expectency in the 50s would generally be considered a bad thing?
Yeah we should totally solve the poor's obesity problem by giving them *back* their hunger problem. Hey you know what subsidized housing is a magnet for crime. Let's send them back to tar paper shanties under the overpass.
Well, if you take away property then property crime should go down.
29110
Post by: AustonT
d-usa wrote:AustonT wrote:Palindrome wrote:Frazzled wrote:
Thats the ticket. lets make food cost more. But what about the poor?
In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food. As it stands this type of food is cheaper than more nutritionally balanced foods; inverse that and then the problem of obesity will solve itself, its capitalism in action! As to why the current obesity time bomb is bad well I would have thought that having an average life expectency in the 50s would generally be considered a bad thing?
Yeah we should totally solve the poor's obesity problem by giving them *back* their hunger problem. Hey you know what subsidized housing is a magnet for crime. Let's send them back to tar paper shanties under the overpass.
Well, if you take away property then property crime should go down.
See problem solved. If they are starving they can't be fat, if they don't have property there can't be any property crime, and if they die of say starvation or exposure that lowers the homeless numbers. Bravo.
221
Post by: Frazzled
In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food.
Milk is high calorie. Apples are high calorie. Any fruits have lots of calories. Bread has lots of calories.
Popcorn has very few calories.
As it stands this type of food is cheaper than more nutritionally balanced foods;
Translation I would rather poor people starve.
As to why the current obesity time bomb is bad well I would have thought that having an average life expectency in the 50s would generally be considered a bad thing?
Why? Its their problem, not yours. Who appointed you grand poobah?
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food.
Milk is high calorie. Apples are high calorie. Any fruits have lots of calories. Bread has lots of calories.
Popcorn has very few calories.
Put Popcorn is salty, so that makes it a gateway drug to soda!
29110
Post by: AustonT
d-usa wrote:Frazzled wrote:In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food.
Milk is high calorie. Apples are high calorie. Any fruits have lots of calories. Bread has lots of calories.
Popcorn has very few calories.
Put Popcorn is salty, so that makes it a gateway drug to soda!
And beer!
53595
Post by: Palindrome
Frazzled wrote:
Translation I would rather poor people starve.
Are you being deliberately obtuse or does it just come naturally?
221
Post by: Frazzled
d-usa wrote:Frazzled wrote:In a post rammed full of strawmen that one really stands out. Notice I said high calaorie foods, i.e. junk food.
Milk is high calorie. Apples are high calorie. Any fruits have lots of calories. Bread has lots of calories.
Popcorn has very few calories.
Put Popcorn is salty, so that makes it a gateway drug to soda!
And sweet and sour pork!
29110
Post by: AustonT
God that looks delicious. Bacon and chocolate is a highly underrated combination, especially as a ice cream topping.
37231
Post by: d-usa
There is a cup-cake shop in town that does French Toast cup cakes with maple syrup icing topped of with bacon.
I have never been as happy while my arteries are closing off as I am when I eat one of those.
29408
Post by: Melissia
I think I just threw up a little looking at that barftastic cupcake ... thing.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Melissia wrote:I think I just threw up a little looking at that barftastic cupcake ... thing.
You don't eat a lot of cupcakes do you?
29408
Post by: Melissia
It's the bacon.
I like bacon mind you, but bacon and ice cream don't go well together...
Maybe if it was hot maple syrup...
37231
Post by: d-usa
Melissia wrote:It's the bacon.
I like bacon mind you, but bacon and ice cream don't go well together...
Maybe if it was hot maple syrup...
Have you had bacon and Ice cream, or chocolate? The sweet/salty thing really works.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Yes I have, and no it doesn't >.<
Mind you I'm one of those people who can't stand having nuts in my chocolate, but is okay with eating each thing separately.
45599
Post by: RatBot
As a slovenly liberal and former New Yorker (Upstate, not NYC), all I can say is this is stupid. WTF, New York?
37231
Post by: d-usa
Melissia wrote:Yes I have, and no it doesn't >.<
Mind you I'm one of those people who can't stand having nuts in my chocolate, but is okay with eating each thing separately.
Are you as bad as my sister-in-law?
She hates having any of her food touch. If the vegetables touch the meat the meal is ruined.
One year for Christmas we got her some cafeteria trays (with the different compartments on them), she thought it was the best present ever.
29408
Post by: Melissia
d-usa wrote:She hates having any of her food touch
Oh heavens no. I'm not tha bad about things. My youngest nephew is though.
5534
Post by: dogma
Frazzled wrote:
Popcorn has very few calories.
The weird, butter-like substance you put on it does not. Automatically Appended Next Post: d-usa wrote:If the vegetables touch the meat the meal is ruined.
I wasn't quite that bad, but as a kid I would only eat raw veggies, and even to this day won't eat but a select few cooked.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
Jelepeno's work better in icecream then bacon.
But in all honesty, i like this idea. The governments if finaly cracking down for health. Now if only they will ban pesticides.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Frazzled wrote:Huffy wrote:KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
People complain because they have no self-control that the government needs to do things about it....so I choose to blame the fattie...I mean big-boned who complain that they can't control their intake
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Don't mess with extinct sloths bro  Size of an elephant on four legs, double that height on two legs with skin that was effectively bulletproof.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Corpsesarefun wrote:Frazzled wrote:Huffy wrote:KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
People complain because they have no self-control that the government needs to do things about it....so I choose to blame the fattie...I mean big-boned who complain that they can't control their intake
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Don't mess with extinct sloths bro
Size of an elephant on four legs, double that height on two legs with skin that was effectively bulletproof.
Is that...like a real thing?
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
It was until we murdered the hell out of it, it's one of my favourite skeletons in the Natural History Museum of London.
5534
Post by: dogma
Corpsesarefun wrote:
Size of an elephant on four legs, double that height on two legs with skin that was effectively bulletproof.
And yet most think we killed it off.
Man, the most dangerous game.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Makes you proud to be human 
To be fair we also killed off a bunch of other crazy ass monsters from the paleolithic, it was kinda our thing back then.
5534
Post by: dogma
Corpsesarefun wrote:Makes you proud to be human
To be fair we also killed off a bunch of other crazy ass monsters from the paleolithic, it was kinda our thing back then.
We figured out how to put rocks on sticks.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
I'm going with "pushing gak off cliffs" and "setting fire to gak while it's sleeping" as being our best two weapons against said monstrous megafauna rather than pointed sticks.
The pointed sticks probably helped though.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
hotsauceman1 wrote:Now if only they will ban pesticides.
Why would we want to do that?
221
Post by: Frazzled
AustonT wrote:Corpsesarefun wrote:Frazzled wrote:Huffy wrote:KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
People complain because they have no self-control that the government needs to do things about it....so I choose to blame the fattie...I mean big-boned who complain that they can't control their intake
I blame people who want to tell me what to do and not let me live my life, like they know more than me. I usually find they are educated to the level of the ancient extinct sloths, yet want to tell me what to do.
Don't mess with extinct sloths bro
Size of an elephant on four legs, double that height on two legs with skin that was effectively bulletproof.
Is that...like a real thing?
Oh yea, they have a skelton at the Houston Museum of natural history. With its claws it would have given a Trex pause. Its a big sombitch that looks like a giant bear, except meaner. Automatically Appended Next Post: Corpsesarefun wrote:Makes you proud to be human
To be fair we also killed off a bunch of other crazy ass monsters from the paleolithic, it was kinda our thing back then.
Ah sweet memories of youth...
29408
Post by: Melissia
dogma wrote:Corpsesarefun wrote:
Size of an elephant on four legs, double that height on two legs with skin that was effectively bulletproof.
And yet most think we killed it off. Man, the most dangerous game.
Personally I think "the most dangerous game" is either mounted tennis while using a live grenade as the ball and riding enraged bears, or SCP-682, depending on what definition of game you want to use. 
29110
Post by: AustonT
OK...so back on topic. Here's a fun fact 32oz of Pepsi has 400 calories. 32oz of Sam Adams has 427 Calories. Mayor Bloomberg is after our Quarts!
30287
Post by: Bromsy
Meh. All you weirdos on the coasts do what you want. I'm gonna bury my head in the sand and assume it will never happen here.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
So, New York is a nanny state for telling people to order the same quantity of soda in a different sized glass but the state refusing to acknowledge the right of gay people to marry, either in a civic building or in a consenting church, is.... what is that now? It's not nanny is it, it's outright prejudicial and anyone crying about soda and backing that denial of personal freedom is a hypocrite.
5534
Post by: dogma
Frazzled wrote:
Oh yea, they have a skelton at the Houston Museum of natural history.
Science!?! In Texas!?! 
AustonT wrote:Mayor Bloomberg is after our Quartz!
That bastard, my crystals will be touched by no other man!
25220
Post by: WarOne
NYC can do what it wants.
The people on the other hand merely have to travel 10-20 miles out of the way to escape NYC's "oppressive" restrictions by going to Long Island.
Long Island- home of freedom and the Warstore, which I live 20 minutes away from.
51375
Post by: Inquisitor Ehrenstein
KingCracker wrote:Holy fething hell really? REALLY?!?! We need the state governments to tell us what to eat and drink now? Im about to go postal and go off the damn grid. Everyone these days seems to be a bunch of friggin pussies
This reminds me of the government that tried to restrict smoking because of the negative effects it had, and how that would negatively affect the state....
29408
Post by: Melissia
You can't get second hand fat.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Krellnus wrote:hotsauceman1 wrote:Now if only they will ban pesticides.
Why would we want to do that?
Because it kills innocent insects like Flick?
Which clearly is damaging everyone's childhood and leading to an increase in violent media?
Or so people don't eat it I guess...
46059
Post by: rockerbikie
Wow. This is terrible.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Won't people just buy two bottles instead of one or something?
I mean I get the principle behind trying to modify people's eating habits for the better.
It just seems it would be more effective to put a "sin tax" on sugary drinks.
17349
Post by: SilverMK2
Well, fat people generally have more health problems than normal sized people, so if they don't clamp down on the sale of unhealthy foods (as people seem not to be able to do it for themselves) people will keep getting fatter and iller. I know you americanos hate looking after anyone who is not yourself, so just think of your insurance premiums going through the roof to help pay for all the dying fat people to get medical help because the government didn't do anything to try and stop them from consuming massive quantities of unhealthy food 
Personally I think that all food sold should have to meet certain nutritional targets for each portion.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Kilkrazy wrote:It just seems it would be more effective to put a "sin tax" on sugary drinks.
When you think about it, it actually sort of is.
This though.
It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.
Feels counter productive unless there is a limit to the refills.
221
Post by: Frazzled
WarOne wrote:NYC can do what it wants.
The people on the other hand merely have to travel 10-20 miles out of the way to escape NYC's "oppressive" restrictions by going to Long Island.
Long Island- home of freedom and the Warstore, which I live 20 minutes away from.
You shame us with your bounty. Automatically Appended Next Post: SilverMK2 wrote:Well, fat people generally have more health problems than normal sized people, so if they don't clamp down on the sale of unhealthy foods (as people seem not to be able to do it for themselves) people will keep getting fatter and iller.
so? Thats their business.
I know you americanos hate looking after anyone who is not yourself, so just think of your insurance premiums going through the roof to help pay for all the dying fat people to get medical help because the government didn't do anything to try and stop them from consuming massive quantities of unhealthy food
Get better insurance.
Personally I think that all food sold should have to meet certain nutritional targets for each portion.
Please find for me the non nutritional aspects of popcorn and milk vs. well most everything else.
Moderation you bahstahds! 
17349
Post by: SilverMK2
Frazzled wrote:so? Thats their business.
Sure, it is. However, you still end up paying for it...
Get better insurance.
No matter how awesome someone's insurance is, your premiums (assuming you are moderately healthy) still go towards paying for others... thus if there are more sick people, premiums go up for everyone, not just those who are sick. Because fat people are in general less healthy, they get sick more, so will have more healthcare costs, which means that they draw a bigger slice of the insurance money pie (maybe they think they can eat it?), which means that if there are more fat people, there is a bigger drain on the money the insurance companies have, and as they like money, they charge everyone more (not just the fat people).
Welcome to crappy social health care which you somehow think is private because you pay more for it from your own money rather than with taxes but with the added drain of insurance companies skimming a large amount of money off the top!
221
Post by: Frazzled
Only if you have insurance. once the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare, I will again be free to do what I want.
The government mandating I have to have insurance is a nice sequeway into the govenment telling me what I can and cannot do, as you propose.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
n0t_u wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:It just seems it would be more effective to put a "sin tax" on sugary drinks.
When you think about it, it actually sort of is.
This though.
It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.
Feels counter productive unless there is a limit to the refills.
What I had in mind was two different kinds of taxes.
1. The petrol tax. Not sure how much it is, but you pay 50p or something per litre of petrol. The more petrol you use, the more you pay. There is a similar tax on cigarettes and alcohol.
2. The proposed minimum price of alcohol tax. This isn't really a tax as such, as it simply forces shops to charge no less than a minimum price per unit of alcohol. In other words it prevents supermarkets from subsidizing booze as a loss leader.
Despite the moaning in the UK about pricing the middle classes out of their fine wines, this would only really affect stuff like Tennents Extra.
Neither of these types of taxes would need shops to sell drinks in maximum 15.oz containers, but they would both lead tor educed consumption if priced at the correct level.
5534
Post by: dogma
Melissia wrote:You can't get second hand fat.
Kids can, if their parents do bad things with food.
Frazzled wrote:
so? Thats their business.
Costs me money in premiums.
Gotta offset those health-risks if I'm a provider.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Then don't buy insurance. You're subsidizing everyone else anyway.
5534
Post by: dogma
Frazzled wrote:Then don't buy insurance. You're subsidizing everyone else anyway.
Which is the point.
I pay for their defense, may as well bu them healthcare.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Frazzled wrote:Only if you have insurance. once the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare, I will again be free to do what I want.
The government mandating I have to have insurance is a nice sequeway into the govenment telling me what I can and cannot do, as you propose.
I gotta ask, without state funded healthcare, do you really think not having any health insurance is wise? And why?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Kaldor wrote:Frazzled wrote:Only if you have insurance. once the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare, I will again be free to do what I want.
The government mandating I have to have insurance is a nice sequeway into the govenment telling me what I can and cannot do, as you propose.
I gotta ask, without state funded healthcare, do you really think not having any health insurance is wise? And why?
Nope, but i'm not bitching about Captain Fatso on the plan either. The whole concept of "health insurance" is really just a shared pool of cost for a group of employees or persons covered. If you start saying the drones have to do such and such for cost reasons, hell mandating Logan's Run at 30 reduces costs off the charts.
29408
Post by: Melissia
dogma wrote:Melissia wrote:You can't get second hand fat.
Kids can, if their parents do bad things with food.
I didn't think fat was an STD?
29110
Post by: AustonT
Melissia wrote:dogma wrote:Melissia wrote:You can't get second hand fat.
Kids can, if their parents do bad things with food.
I didn't think fat was an STD?
Meh maybe not an STD, but in the bad old days when I was a personal trainer I had a client ask me how to get to be my size. He was 5'9 and wieghed a solid 145 @6% bodyfat and I was 195 @10. I told him to keep a workout routine that challenges both his fast twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, eat healthy, and Vitamin G. What's vitamin G you ask: Genetics. You can blame genetics for at least some of your body type issues.
7150
Post by: helgrenze
So, sugar loaded soda in large cups is why people, and especially children, in NYC are fat.
NYC follows much of the country when it comes to it's school lunch program.... Which require a set amount of vegetables be provided.
The veggie of choice on nearly all lunch menus....... French Fries. Most lunch programs require 1.5-2 cups of veggies, and offer overcooked broccoli or cauliflower and fries. Which do you think kids will go for?
These guidelines were set by the same type of people that want to ban 20oz+ fountain drinks.
50355
Post by: KhornePysker
MOD EDIT - If you can respond without resorting to personal attacks, don't respond at all.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
That is a completely innocent post, not provoking a flame war or anything.
50355
Post by: KhornePysker
KhornePysker wrote:MOD EDIT - If you can respond without resorting to personal attacks, don't respond at all.
well he wanted to go postal and kill innocent people
I was just trying to protect public interest
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Frazzled wrote:Kaldor wrote:Frazzled wrote:Only if you have insurance. once the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare, I will again be free to do what I want.
The government mandating I have to have insurance is a nice sequeway into the govenment telling me what I can and cannot do, as you propose.
I gotta ask, without state funded healthcare, do you really think not having any health insurance is wise? And why?
Nope, but i'm not bitching about Captain Fatso on the plan either. The whole concept of "health insurance" is really just a shared pool of cost for a group of employees or persons covered. If you start saying the drones have to do such and such for cost reasons, hell mandating Logan's Run at 30 reduces costs off the charts.
True enough, but the 'natural' cost of providing healthcare is too high for people. We need some kind of shared pool of cost, or else none of the 'drones' will get any healthcare. I mean, I'm sure you're aware of the problem.
So then isn't it important to try and minimise the impact of poor lifestyle choices on the system? Isn't it just a question of where we draw the line?
Or we could try for a complete overhaul of the medical industry to make it affordable for people, I guess.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Can we get back to sloths now?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Corpsesarefun wrote:Can we get back to sloths now?
If Sloths had affordable medical coverage would they still be hanging out, playing with children in public parks?
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Of course they would, they're too lazy to do anything beyond that anyway.
|
|
