CFP wrote:So I guess Scott Walker is working on his own version of Watergate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/2 ... 53962.html

I'm not really seeing the Watergate parallels

jerseyhoya wrote:

CFP wrote:So I guess Scott Walker is working on his own version of Watergate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/2 ... 53962.html

I'm not really seeing the Watergate parallels

I'm not either, I'm just making jokes for the hell of it. Sounds okay. Scummy? Maybe, if he was even involved.

New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks

Amazing

I'm not going to say that soda doesn't play a role in obesity, but do they realize you get more calories out of a bagel than you do out of a soda? Generally, people are fat because they eat a lot.

Chavez has terminal cancer and is gonna die in the next few months, per Dan Rather

Hope this isn't another Texas Air National Guard event

The Nightman Cometh wrote:I'm not going to say that soda doesn't play a role in obesity, but do they realize you get more calories out of a bagel than you do out of a soda? Generally, people are fat because they eat a lot.

seriously? bagels have nutritional value and actually fill you up. soda doesn't meet either of those parameters. people are fat because they ingest lots of unnecessary products, the most popular of which happens to be soda, not bagels.

The bagel caloric comparison isn't all that pertinent, but the idea of banning soft drinks larger than 16 ozs is still absurd

Gonna ban double cheeseburgers next or double shots of whiskey at bars? How about cases of beer or handles of vodka? People eat and drink things that aren't ideal for their health all the time. When you start banning items that aren't addictive and don't inhibit your ability to function, jeez, what can't you make illegal 'for the good of society'?

should of banned fat people instead

jerseyhoya wrote:Gonna ban double cheeseburgers next or double shots of whiskey at bars?

Michelle Obama already got Mars (Snickers, et al) to voluntarily discontinue its king-size candy bars

I don't really agree with it, I just thought that analogy was dumb. I liked Nutter's idea of taxing beverages with sugar added, which of course didn't work because Philly is full of union-bullied cowards

jerseyhoya wrote:New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks

Amazing

What a stupid fucking idea. Is the next big plan to ban the sale of steaks over 5 oz and potato chips in excess of the 3.25 oz "snack" size bags? So the guy who wants a 32 oz Coke can't just buy two 16 oz-ers? Or is that the actual plan? Put together this dumb plan so it looks like they are doing something and, at the same time, funnel more money into state coffers? It is a backdoor tax and consumers are most assuredly the ones taking it in the backdoor.

Obesity is a problem because Americans are L-A-Z-Y. Turn off Jersey Shore and/or American Idol, put down the iPad or iPhone 13, get up off the fucking couch and take a walk once in a while. I love how politicians continually rail against the size of government yet every time we turn around they are coming up with ideas that expand it even more.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going over to 7-11 to get myself a 22 oz Coke before Christie gets any bright ideas.

jerseyhoya wrote:Gonna ban double cheeseburgers next or double shots of whiskey at bars? How about cases of beer or handles of vodka? People eat and drink things that aren't ideal for their health all the time. When you start banning items that aren't addictive and don't inhibit your ability to function, jeez, what can't you make illegal 'for the good of society'?

There's a growing body of evidence that people process refined sugar much like they do addictive substances. I'm not saying you don't know what you're talking about when you blandly assert something about "items that aren't addictive and don't inhibit your ability to function", but yeah, I do have my doubts.

But look around you. The stuff you had for breakfast and the whiskey you drink in the evening must satisfy arcane processing and packaging standards. You probably wear a seat belt when you drive, you rode in a child seat when you were a toddler. The things your physician, or pharmacist, or nurse can & can't do for you are hemmed in by rules & strictures you may not understand. Practically all your behaviors & my behaviors and others behaviors are mediated by 'artificial' constraints, many of them emanating from government; many that frankly aren't very effective and more than a few that are positively counterproductive. You may hate it, you may like it, but you shouldn't be surprised by it.

I have many, many reservations about the potential for initiatives like Bloomberg's. At the same time I have zero doubt that if we don't in some fashion diminish behaviors that cost us all a galling and fast-growing share of our social capital for rescue-oriented health treatment, we'll have much bigger problems to quarrel about than whether I can score an extra few ounces of sugar syrup in a single cup.

why are so many smart people here all of a sudden pretending that our diets aren't now, and haven't long been, shaped significantly by public policy at the federal and state level - that the food we currently have access to, its content and form factors, aren't and haven't been subject to the whims of law & regulation for generations?

don't make me go all Philly the Kid on your ass

if you're gonna ban heroin you might as well ban soda. both end up killing you eventually, right?

diets have gotten so out of control over the past 20 or so years that i have no problem with the government trying to reign it in. i don't want to have rising healthcare because some fat slob wants to drink 64oz double gulps everyday.

edit: just my gut reaction without much thinking. i know, i know, OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE BEING INVADED. whatever.

jerseyhoya wrote:New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks

Amazing

Much of NYC doesn't have a real grocery store in their neighborhood. They only have bodegas which specialize in cheap, horrible food. Limiting the availability of one of the worst causes of obesity, which is giant, sugary beverages is a good thing. Also, you can't really get bagels in these places.

drsmooth wrote:why are so many smart people here all of a sudden pretending that our diets aren't now, and have long been, shaped significantly by public policy at the federal and state level - that the food we currently have access to, its content and form factors, aren't and haven't been subject to the whims of law & regulation for generations?

don't make me go all Philly the Kid on your ass

seriously. it's like The Jungle wasn't a thing for these people.

jamiethekiller wrote:if you're gonna ban heroin you might as well ban soda. both end up killing you eventually, right?

diets have gotten so out of control over the past 20 or so years that i have no problem with the government trying to reign it in. i don't want to have rising healthcare because some fat slob wants to drink 64oz double gulps everyday.

edit: just my gut reaction without much thinking. i know, i know, OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE BEING INVADED. whatever.

alternatives to banning purchase of big gulps:

require addition of a minimum of 2 lbs of ice to the cup

require soda be sold only in containers of 3" circumference or smaller

empty cup must be worn as a hat for minimum 60 minutes following consumption

passersby legally authorized to slap the things out of purchasers' hands without penalty

Youseff wrote:Much of NYC doesn't have a real grocery store in their neighborhood. They only have bodegas which specialize in cheap, horrible food. Limiting the availability of one of the worst causes of obesity, which is giant, sugary beverages is a good thing. Also, you can't really get bagels in these places.

Yup. Same in North Philly.

Ah yes, the many parallels between soda and mind altering drugs. How could I have forgotten?

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Ah yes, the many parallels between soda and mind altering drugs. How could I have forgotten?

probably drank too much soda