Sugary Drinks Banned in San Francisco

[The_Dude 1,142]

Don't worry, things like this are just the start. San Antonio is doing the same thing.

Eventually any public place will be disallowed from selling sodas, then if any private business wants to sell soda, they'll have to charge a $2 SIN TAX!!!! on it.

Remember though, this is 'progressive'

Paul, this is why the Libertarians get very little respect. You come up with a good idea like abolishing the IRS and limiting some of the departments of the government, and then you go batsh!t crazy on something like this, or lowering the salt content on food. Absurd is an understatement.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Is that a bad thing? Things that are harmful should be difficult to buy if not impossible.

'harmful' is all relative really. It's not harmful when the person is smart. Just because a certain percentage of the population wants to use and abuse something, that is their choice... Those of us who do not use/abuse things should not be punished for it however.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I really don't think that most people fully comprehend that anything that comes in a vending machine, or any junk food is bad for you. The concept that varying degrees of bad is lost on some and quite often confused.

The reality is that most people do know that these things are bad for them but choose to enjoy them anyways. Besides having a soda here and there isn't going to hurt anyone and for the city of San Fransisco to waste there time with this proves that this city has some serious issues.

I remember back when it was made legal that city workers could have sex changes through there benefits program. I'm thinking the air over there is thinner and the people are not getting the required oxygen it takes to make the brain work properly.

[IndigoSkies 168]

'harmful' is all relative really. It's not harmful when the person is smart. Just because a certain percentage of the population wants to use and abuse something, that is their choice... Those of us who do not use/abuse things should not be punished for it however.

Oh okay. That makes sense. So does a SIN tax. You can go become a fattie if you want. That's your choice. But since your fatness will likely drain this country down the road, pay up fatty.

[wayno 9]

Give me a break! It's my choice what I want to consume and don't need no "nanny state" government dictator tell me what I can or cannot eat. This is pure B.S. in my and many others opinions. Time to get ALL these clowns out and get our country back. These wackos want europe-----GO THERE. NOT IN MY COUNTRY!!!!!!!!

[_Simpson_ 250]

'harmful' is all relative really. It's not harmful when the person is smart. Just because a certain percentage of the population wants to use and abuse something, that is their choice... Those of us who do not use/abuse things should not be punished for it however.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Oh okay. That makes sense. So does a SIN tax. You can go become a fattie if you want. That's your choice. But since your fatness will likely drain this country down the road, pay up fatty.

I would be all for the fat people paying there dues in society but please leave us skinny well disciplined people out of your sin tax idea.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I would be all for the fat people paying there dues in society but please leave us skinny well disciplined people out of your sin tax idea.

If you are indeed skinny and well disciplined, then why would you actually be against a city banning horrible foods in the vending machine. Furthermore, the conservatives in this thread who have expressed outrage can cut out the self-righteous indignation. Your right to choose isn't being rescinded. The city of San Francisco is trying to set a good example to encourage people to eat healthier foods. You can still go down to the 7/11 and get your ding dongs and coca cola.

[slim 1,525]

This is how the smoking ban started.

[Mags 112]

ding dongs

America has cakes called Ding Dongs.

*smirk*

[The_Dude 1,142]

This is how the smoking ban started.

No it's not. Smoking cigarettes in public buildings poses a distinct medical threat to non-smokers. Sorry slim, you fail on that analogy.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

This is how the smoking ban started.

precisely.

It's how the Government started taking over health care as well.

Socialists of the early 1900's said it best when they said that liberalism would be the perfect vehicle to push a socialist agenda.

No it's not. Smoking cigarettes in public buildings poses a distinct medical threat to non-smokers. Sorry slim, you fail on that analogy.

Actually, if you understand anything about the history of the smoking bans, then it is how it started.

First it was airplanes actually, then certain city/government offices, then progressed from there.

[The_Dude 1,142]

precisely.

It's how the Government started taking over health care as well.

Socialists of the early 1900's said it best when they said that liberalism would be the perfect vehicle to push a socialist agenda.

Actually, if you understand anything about the history of the smoking bans, then it is how it started.

First it was airplanes actually, then certain city/government offices, then progressed from there.

Paul, there is no correlation, despite your insistance. Smoking in public buildings, airplanes, train compartments and other venues poses a direct hazzard to non-smokers. There is no health risk in banning junk food in vending machines. Your hysteria is amusing though.

[slim 1,525]

No it's not. Smoking cigarettes in public buildings poses a distinct medical threat to non-smokers. Sorry slim, you fail on that analogy.

So.... we should limit threats to others..... but also to us? Limit all threats from anywhere at any time?

When the government comes out with that list of what you can and can't do, are you going to sign it?

[The_Dude 1,142]

So.... we should limit threats to others..... but also to us? Limit all threats from anywhere at any time?

When the government comes out with that list of what you can and can't do, are you going to sign it?

You are just being hysterical now. Get back to me when you've got a rational argument, or even close.