Sugary Drinks Banned in San Francisco

[KaiserD 12]

Actually, that totally got converted into beer money -- funny you should mention it!

lol But it was guilt free drinks

[slim 1,525]

Soon the government will make it mandatory for you to weigh a certain weight or face penalties on your taxes. All part of the health care reform.

You're obese and since you're obese, it's going to cost the government more money to take care of you (nevermind the fact that you have private insurance or are relatively healthy) so we're going to charge you more money.

It's coming. Weight and see.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Soon the government will make it mandatory for you to weigh a certain weight or face penalties on your taxes. All part of the health care reform.

You're obese and since you're obese, it's going to cost the government more money to take care of you (nevermind the fact that you have private insurance or are relatively healthy) so we're going to charge you more money.

It's coming. Weight and see.

No it isn't.

[slim 1,525]

I'll bet you a sugary soda that it is.

When we allow things like this to happen, it's like it encourages them to do more. "They want us to regulate their body weight because it's in the interest of national security." (Remember that one? Changing school lunches because kids were too fat to fight? Yeah, they're too fat because of what they eat at school. Yeah, that's it.)

This is the same thing. You don't have to like it, but you can't prove that it's not.

[Peikko 1,575]

I wiegh roughly 260 at 5'10 I am obese.

I look at myself and see I am fat not obese.

Not to insult anyone else but an obese person imo is someone that is unable to function normally in daily activities that an average person would do because of their weight condition; whether they accept the responsibility or not.

A person who chooses to mask the truth and not accept what is really responsible may fall into that category you are speaking of but to lable all fat/obese people to fall into that category is wrong.

I didn't, I quite clearly said obese people as apposed to those who are overweight - I clarified by saying that these are people WHO EAT NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE HUNGRY, but because eating produces feelings of comfort, they lack the ability to control the impulse to eat something that looks appetizing regardless of how full they feel, and those who eat compulsively and despite all evidence to the contrary believe that their weight is healthy. I have no idea if you fit into that category or not, but yes, you are definitely grossly overweight and as there are no grossly overweight people in their late 80's/90's and very few in their 70's and 80's, it strikes me as a mentally challenged belief that being grossly overweight is a 'healthy' condition, that smacks of delusion. it may well be that you plan on shedding the amount of weight that puts you into the grossly overweight category before it kills you - or you might not - that's entirely up to you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And you can't prove that it is. I'm not interested in ideologically motivated opinions.

[Peikko 1,575]

I'll bet you a sugary soda that it is.

When we allow things like this to happen, it's like it encourages them to do more. "They want us to regulate their body weight because it's in the interest of national security." (Remember that one? Changing school lunches because kids were too fat to fight? Yeah, they're too fat because of what they eat at school. Yeah, that's it.)

This is the same thing. You don't have to like it, but you can't prove that it's not.

Allow what kind of things to happen? Are you seriously suggesting that a government agency that decides to replace some of the least healthy choices in a vending machine on government property with arguably healthier choices is an ideological decision? Are you quite mad? What do you think is 'next' on this insidious, devilish 'librul socializing' process? Perhaps the government will demand that only those with disabilities can use the elevators? You'll need a little sticker 'Disabled elevator user' every time enter a government building.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[SuperDuper! 230]

This is America. How dare they take away my choice to poison myself with high calorie, zero nutrient filled drinks and snacks. This is an outrage and an assault to the constitution!!

Yea, how dare they try to make kids healthier and avoid diabetes before puberty.

[slim 1,525]

And you can't prove that it is. I'm not interested in ideologically motivated opinions.

Actually, you proved it for me a few pages ago. When local government is allowed to prohibit McDonald's from selling toys in their Happy Meals, that IS the government controlling aspects of private business in the name of "the greater good." That is exactly the same thing that's beginning to happen here in San Francisco.

Allow what kind of things to happen? Are you seriously suggesting that a government agency that decides to replace some of the least healthy choices in a vending machine on government property with arguably healthier choices is an ideological decision? Are you quite mad? What do you think is 'next' on this insidious, devilish 'librul socializing' process? Perhaps the government will demand that only those with disabilities can use the elevators? You'll need a little sticker 'Disabled elevator user' every time enter a government building.

Yeah, that's actually where I'm going with this. Why wouldn't they make folks take the stairs or participate in mandatory PT to keep them from getting fat? If folks didn't have a problem with them "making healthy choices for them" then why would they have a problem with anything else the government decides to do? I mean, it's for their own good, right? Why would you disagree with a government that has your own best interests in mind?

Yea, how dare they try to make kids healthier and avoid diabetes before puberty.

Did those fat@$$ kids buy their own Happy Meals? Did they work 40+ hours a week, drive themselves to McDonald's (obviously more than once) and choose to make themselves become that grotesquely obese?

Oh wait... it's becaue there were toys in those boxes. Their parents HAD TO take them. Perhaps the government should step in and ban those toys so all kids don't end up looking like those little M&Ms.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Oh good grief, mental issues include a very wide range of conditions, and 'madness' is not one of them. The mental issues involved in obesity, and I mean obesity not just being overweight which is quite different, are such issues as self esteem, impulse control and addiction. Obese people do not eat the amount they do because they are hungry, they eat that way as a way to mask inadequacy, as a form of 'comfort' etc. I am not saying anything that is new, or anything that is insulting. Quite the reverse.

Hey, just wanted to see if I can a rise out of you. And I sure did. Mission accomplished.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Actually, you proved it for me a few pages ago. When local government is allowed to prohibit McDonald's from selling toys in their Happy Meals, that IS the government controlling aspects of private business in the name of "the greater good." That is exactly the same thing that's beginning to happen here in San Francisco.

The government (local and national) has always controlled "aspects of private business". So what?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Did those fat@$$ kids buy their own Happy Meals? Did they work 40+ hours a week, drive themselves to McDonald's (obviously more than once) and choose to make themselves become that grotesquely obese?

Oh wait... it's becaue there were toys in those boxes. Their parents HAD TO take them. Perhaps the government should step in and ban those toys so all kids don't end up looking like those little M&Ms.

The government should ensure that better nutritional education is provided to children in public schools and that more emphasis is placed on healthy eating intiatives and not, say, dodgy commercial ventures by processed food manufacturers to buy $XXX of school sports equipment in return for X number of chocolate wrappers.

[slim 1,525]

The government (local and national) has always controlled "aspects of private business". So what?

So what is it's not the government's place to do that.

It's one thing to say "this place is zoned for food sales." Quite another to say "this place is zoned for food sales without toys attached."

The government should ensure that better nutritional education is provided to children in public schools and that more emphasis is placed on healthy eating intiatives and not, say, dodgy commercial ventures by processed food manufacturers to buy $XXX of school sports equipment in return for X number of chocolate wrappers.

Why would schools need $XXX sports equipment in exchange for chocolate wrappers and dodgy commercial ventures?

[Peikko 1,575]

Hey, just wanted to see if I can a rise out of you. And I sure did. Mission accomplished.

That counts as a 'rise'? I see.

[Peikko 1,575]

Slim, you are nuts - this is not an ideological decision. No one buying soy milk in the vending machine on gov property is going to decide to vote democrat because of it - and this isn't the thin edge of some manic governmental drive to make citizens healthy by force but hey, you go ahead and believe that, clearly it is your choice to do so and despite any evidence to support your mad point of view, you're quite desperate to believe it. Well, have at it.