Consuming too much sugar can lead to obesity; few people would argue to the contrary. Yet not everyone agrees, as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has repeatedly affirmed, that solving nutrition issues is the right and responsibility of the government. Unfortunately his latest proposal, approved Thursday by the New York Board of Health, will do nothing to solve obesity in New York. Worse, it will further entrench the idea that New York is bad for business.
According to a New York Times poll, the majority of New Yorkers surveyed said they did not want the proposed big-soda ban. Perhaps they recognize that the ban is a complete waste of money. There’s nothing to prevent customers from purchasing multiple bottles of 16 ounce drinks at restaurants or movie theaters. Sweetened drinks in bottles greater than 16 ounces will still be available in grocery and convenience stores. What the proposal will do is inconvenience consumers by micromanaging their drinks’ sizes.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/14/sugary-drinks-ban-begs-qu...
I think we already had a thread on this. I'm not a fan of this action.
Good nutrition good. Legal bans on legal substances? not good.
I'm going out and buying the biggest gdamned coke that is sold in a Texas convenience store and if it is too big to fit in my car, I'll just buy two of the f'ers and drink them there
I at least think that it's a good example of liberal pettiness. Maybe it should not be called micromanagement--management, after all, is serious stuff.
I read this book & some soldiers said that in the American Army they call this attitude chickenshit. It described officers who were sticklers for pointless details, but cowards in face of serious matters. Quick to punish defenseless subordinates, unable to decide anything in face of danger.
Does this guy just surround himself with and endless sea of yes-men? I know politicians love to keep their heads in either the sand or their asses, but it's like this guy is striving for a new record with this soda ban. Seriously, Bloomberg is making Fox News sound completely reasonable, and there's no way anything good can come from that.
Surround himself? He'd have to swim a long mile to get away from these silly liberals. I don't think you realize how silly they are. Have you ever heard of San Francisco?
I've heard hushed whispers in the night about it, yes. But that's a pretty long way from New York. I don't know what New York is like, but you should take comfort in the fact that even I'm not that liberal.
They ain't "silly liberals" in The City. They're "Progressives". Actually, the political power structure in San Francisco seems to be Progressives who seem to have lost most of their sense of proportion. While some odd-ball seeming proposals, i.e., the ban on plastic grocery bags has actually had positive environmental effects and generated municipal cost savings (through reduced street litter and less non-biodegradable plastic showing up in the municipal trash and storm sewer systems). OTOH, nobody seems to have fully though out what the general upside is to banning the inclusion of toys in children's meals at fast food joints.
Yeah, I remember the thing about happy meals--there were two discussions on the matter here on TGD, about a year apart, one when it was proposed, the other after enactment. In neither case did the liberals concede the point, if memory serves, although it was foiled upon enactment. I remember reading somewhere that some councilman or some such creature was talking about how annoying it was that their kids wanted these happy meals. Apparently, the liberal thought it was the toys that got kids hooked on fast-food & inability to say no meant the gov't should do it for them. I know they were progressives before they were liberals--they were racists before they became the saviors of races in need of saving--they were for abortion before, well, they're still for abortion, but they do not talk eugenics anymore, because that's not cool--but they're still silly.
The scariest part is that, by still allowing consumers to choose which drinks they want, and when, that Bloomberg is still representing a more conservative approach than I would expect, from New York.
Now, if he mandated we each purchase Starbuck's coffee in the morning, whether we wanted it or not, and something absurd like a kiwi-spirulina-yogurt smoothie at lunchtime (regardless of allergies or feelings towards animal products), and that only bottled water be available after 3pm, and only specifically branded bottled-water unless you have a government waiver...that would be the New york LIBERAL approach.
I heard an "on the street" radio interview with a number of New Yorkers, and they were all for this, confirming that they view government's job to be, in fact, to control what, when, and how much they are allowed to eat. ALLOWED was the word they actually used. ALL of them!
I almost ran off the road, when I heard it on the radio. It was like listening to someone interview a bunch of Stepford wives.
Strictly implausible--liberals are creative creatures, each & every one carries Thoreau's book in his backpack--every damned one, dancing to the beat of his own drum, soon as he gets off his rocker.