Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 125

Thread: NY tries to ban large soda sales- gotta hear from my fellow Grokkers! page 4

  1. #31
    canio6's Avatar
    canio6 Guest
    Primal Fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by fiercehunter View Post
    I'm libertarian and I agree- get those nasty things out away from the public. Ban them, do it!!

    I presume you are speaking of politicians. In which case, I completely agree.

  2. #32
    Grok's Avatar
    Grok is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    LakeRidge Golf Course
    Posts
    3,682
    In this video Bloomberg admits that he is just a busybody who wants to do something.


  3. #33
    amdws1234's Avatar
    amdws1234 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    88
    The entire population could do without large sodas but I don't really need the government (local or state) determining that.

    They've already decided raw milk is essentially illegal in my state and these are the same fools pushing my plate on an unsuspecting population.

    No thank you. Stay the hell out of my kitchen.

  4. #34
    jsa23's Avatar
    jsa23 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldsmith View Post
    Banning anything is bad in my opinion.
    I disagree. Banning things that cause harm to uninvolved parties(see: secondhand smoke) is completely legitimate and justifiable. That doesn't apply in this case, however.

    I don't think banning large sodas makes sense - This is one of those "it's your money, spend it how you want" situations. It'll also just lead to stupid crap like "buy one get one free" deals on smaller sodas.

    Now on the other hand, Bloomberg in the past also had a proposal to limit/prohibit the use of food stamps on soda/sweetened beverages. In my opinion that's a perfectly legitimate proposal, as when someone(or an entity) is providing assistance, it's perfectly reasonable to have the expectation/stipulation that said assistance is not squandered.

    I think public officials taking a proactive interest in public health is a good thing. However I think this particular effort is misguided.
    Last edited by jsa23; 06-01-2012 at 04:47 AM.

  5. #35
    Zanna's Avatar
    Zanna is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    736
    Quote Originally Posted by jsa23 View Post
    I disagree. Banning things that cause harm to uninvolved parties(see: secondhand smoke) is completely legitimate and justifiable. That doesn't apply in this case, however.

    I don't think banning large sodas makes sense - This is one of those "it's your money, spend it how you want" situations. It'll also just lead to stupid crap like "buy one get one free" deals on smaller sodas.

    Now on the other hand, Bloomberg in the past also had a proposal to limit/prohibit the use of food stamps on soda/sweetened beverages. In my opinion that's a perfectly legitimate proposal, as when someone(or an entity) is providing assistance, it's perfectly reasonable to have the expectation/stipulation that said assistance is not squandered.

    I think public officials taking a proactive interest in public health is a good thing. However I think this particular effort is misguided.
    I don't think banning works but this isn't really just a case of being able to spend your own money on the poison of your choice. Healthcare costs associated with these soda-filled crap diets (diabetes, heart disease) are already sky-high and it will only get much worse. That's a bill we do all end up paying.

  6. #36
    Legbiter's Avatar
    Legbiter is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Iceland
    Posts
    469
    Why not just tax it? Tax all soda beverages if the goal is to discourage consumption.

  7. #37
    canio6's Avatar
    canio6 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Zanna View Post
    I don't think banning works but this isn't really just a case of being able to spend your own money on the poison of your choice. Healthcare costs associated with these soda-filled crap diets (diabetes, heart disease) are already sky-high and it will only get much worse. That's a bill we do all end up paying.

    So who decides what is poison and what is acceptable? Today it is soda, tomorrow perhaps it is those horrible saturated fats. Red meat is 'unhealthy' compared to fish and chicken so lets limit the size of steak you can buy to 4 oz. Also, what about other risky behaviors? Do those not incur healthcare costs? Sky diving? Illegal. Cave diving? Illegal. Rock climibing? Illegal. Hell, how many millions of dollars are spent due to car accidents? Better ban driving.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legbiter View Post
    Why not just tax it? Tax all soda beverages if the goal is to discourage consumption.
    Because where does it end? Half the price of a pack of cigarettes is tax and people still smoke. Same with alcohol. Hell, look at the taxes on gasoline and yet people still drive. Also, it may be different in Iceland but in America it is not the government's job to discourage consumption.

  8. #38
    apple's Avatar
    apple is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldsmith View Post
    Banning anything is bad in my opinion.
    I'm all for keeping face-eating LSD banned! Otherwise, government, stay out of my business, k?
    Type 1 Diabetic. Controlling blood sugar through primal life.

    2012 Goals:
    Maintain A1c of 6.0 or lower
    More dietary fat, less carbs, moderate protein
    LHT and sprint as per PB fitness
    Play more!

  9. #39
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,991
    They're not even banning the soda. They're banning the cup! I think the whole thing is really silly. I'm with you all that it's wrong, but I'm not sharpening my pitchfork unless they try to ban staple whole food like butter.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Heaviest squat: 180 x 2. Heaviest Deadlift: 230 x 2

  10. #40
    Legbiter's Avatar
    Legbiter is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Iceland
    Posts
    469
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by canio6 View Post
    Because where does it end? Half the price of a pack of cigarettes is tax and people still smoke. Same with alcohol. Hell, look at the taxes on gasoline and yet people still drive. Also, it may be different in Iceland but in America it is not the government's job to discourage consumption.
    Sin taxes are unAmerican? Since when? Lots of states and cities have them. What surprises me is that if Bloomberg was serious about cutting soda consumption then a ban like this seems horribly ham-fisted. Why wasn't that angle pursued first?

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •