The "Right" to be Fat

[chance1]

Mayor (of NYC) Bloomberg is looking to pass legislation that bans "big soft drinks" - sugary ones ? 16 oz. It has been the topic of much debate/sarcasm, etc.

One of the "arguments" is that people have a right to be unhealthy/fat, etc.

Like that's a good thing?

I for one, while I embrace personal freedoms, think this is a good thing on many levels

1 - so that kids don't get obese - which is a big problem - for their health and well being and happiness,etc.

2 - health care costs impact can be staggering

wondering what you all think about this

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan...-on-sugary-drinks_b_1563108.html?ref=politics

 

[subsonic]

Well personally I don't see what the problem is.. I really think it is a good idea.
Especially when looking at how big a problem obesity is in the US. I mean, I have friends who've been to America who told me they couldn't buy small packs of many various snack and candy items. I think that's crazy..
It's just the big drinks here, so people are still able to buy soft drinks.
Imho I think it would be a great change. Where I live they've taxed all unhealthy fattening food, in order to encourage people to buy healthier alternatives. But it only works of course if the price on the healthy food is lowered as well, which the government hasn't realized, unfortunately.
Hope the legislation will pass. I'm sure it will make some difference.

 

[Benvolio]

On some level liberals believe that every thing bad should be prohibited by law, and everything good should be required. We can create a perfect society if we just pass enough laws. That is what is so scary about liberal environmentalism and global warming. It will become an ideology for regulating the details of our lives.
Yeah, yeah, Republicans continue traditional sexual laws, changing slowly, but beyond that they are mostly libertarians.
The NY law is not very good science. It should be obvious that the single biggest cause if obesity among the young is pizza. It is full of fat and far more calorie laden than coke. Parents serve it, schools serve it and kids can pick up the phone and have it delivered. The anti-pizza law will be next. Obviously we need a food Czar to decide what we are allowed to eat.

 

[Spiff]

I agree people drink way too much soda, regular and diet. But this law is definitely overreaching. And this only bans it in public places that serve it. People's bad diet habits do just as much damage to themselves at home, likely more, than it does at the occasional restaurant or theater. This is just going to serve as precedence for more absurdly overreaching laws to follow.

There are people who say weed is harmful also. Yet with it outlawed, it's not stopping anyone from enjoying it.

What next? Is Bloomberg going to impose a calorie cap for every meal? Seems like the next logical step in his madness.

 

[Kabluey]

Wow - can people really drink 32oz soda drinks?
How is that even possible? The most I can drink is about 12oz.
Is it possible to choose small drinks, or is the pricing designed to encourage perceived 'value for money' buying?

I probably would end up trying to finish drinks, even if the 'medium' size is way bigger than I'm used to... Maybe they're trying to de-'normalize' really big serves?

 

[Spiff]

well, you take a sip, then stop, take another sip, and repeat until the drink is gone

I get 24 ounce iced coffees pretty regularly. it's a good size to drink over the course of an hour or two as I'm driving to the office or running errands.

And now sipping and nursing a large drink throughout the day is not allowed in NYC.

The mayor assumes that all people only drink large drinks with their meal during a short time span. And he assumes nobody ever shares with someone else.

Oversized drinks are now just as dangerous as guns and illicit drugs. Best to keep them out of the hands of everyone without exception.

 

[Kulindahr]

Idiotic.

It's possible to buy giant mugs that will hold a straw. So if you like having 64 oz. in your drink container, you stop at one drive-through, get the largest allowed, pour it in your giant mug, head for the next drive-through... repeat until satisfied.

While I sympathize with his plaint, passing laws that are essentially unenforceable is just plain moronic.

Instead, maybe he could demand that all New Yorkers jog instead of walk.

 

[chance1]

I think this is more about KIDS than adults - not sure but seems that way

I think the IDEA is really good - the INTENT

and I think the benefits outweigh the slippery slope stuff

are we really gonna fight about our RIGHT to buy a big soda?

it's not like owning a gun or freedom of speech or religion

it's practical with NO REAL downside right?

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

it's practical with NO REAL downside right?

Not really. It's an ineffectual nuisance solution that SOUNDS like we're doing something about obesity and will lull people into a false sense of security. It makes a scapegoat out of non-diet soda and does not begin to address the real reasons, causes and solutions concerning obesity and generally unhealthy lifestyles. It will be nearly unenforceable as well as doing nothing to address what it purports to.

 

[Spiff]

I think the IDEA is really good - the INTENT

. . .

it's practical

Roads paved with good intentions do not always lead to ideal places.

Practical? It will just pave way for additional similar laws. Where will it stop? As I said with the calorie caps on every meal statement, it would be no different. Would you be for that too? The overweight and health problems stem more from food than drink, so that must be our next logical step, right?

 

[subsonic]

Yea that's basically the issue here... and asides from that is diet soda really that healthy?

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...02/20/can-diet-soda-increase-stroke-risk.aspx

^^This!

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...e-most-dangerous-substance-added-to-food.aspx

And this:

Has made me never buy diet soda or anything with aspartame in it.

 

[chance1]

I wish more would chime in here

very different opinions coming that seem to not necessarily be reflective of thoughts on other issues

which i find very interesting

 

[bankside]

Adults have the right to do stupid things. Mostly I am interested in laws that confine the consequences of that stupidity to the individual, and laws ensuring as citizens or consumers we don't subsidize the stupidity.

 

[Stardreamer]

I think this is more about KIDS than adults - not sure but seems that way

I think the IDEA is really good - the INTENT

and I think the benefits outweigh the slippery slope stuff

are we really gonna fight about our RIGHT to buy a big soda?

it's not like owning a gun or freedom of speech or religion

it's practical with NO REAL downside right?

That is what they said about prohibition. I'm waiting for the first 'big-gulp' speakeasies to start opening.

 

[Pangelboy]

I agree with the law. Yes, you have a right to be as fat as you want, but you don't have a right to force others to subsidize your unhealthy habits. That's another argument though, I guess.

America has a rising obesity epidemic in its hands and people want to act as if it doesn't exist.

This is the same as smoking. It's just Americans are ultimately self-destructive and hate having to be saved from themselves because of their disgusting habits.

 

[chance1]

Adults have the right to do stupid things. Mostly I am interested in laws that confine the consequences of that stupidity to the individual, and laws ensuring as citizens or consumers we don't subsidize the stupidity.

so what about the health cost argument?

should healthy citizens have to subsidize the health care costs of those who choose to be obese?

^ sorry look the post above also said that

 

[vidarr]

so what about the health cost argument?

should healthy citizens have to subsidize the health care costs of those who choose to be obese?

What they should do is provide a reward for those citizens who take care of their own health. As long as your personal freedoms don't impinge mine, go ahead, eat pizza every day.

 

[bankside]

Health costs would be a consequence that should apply to the individual. A health cost surtax could be charged without banning consumption outright.

 

[Stardreamer]

I agree with the law. Yes, you have a right to be as fat as you want, but you don't have a right to force others to subsidize your unhealthy habits. That's another argument though, I guess.

America has a rising obesity epidemic in its hands and people want to act as if it doesn't exist.

This is the same as smoking. It's just Americans are ultimately self-destructive and hate having to be saved from themselves because of their disgusting habits.

There is a sizable, but fortunately shrinking, portion of the population that think the exact same thing about homosexuality.

 

[Benvolio]

so what about the health cost argument?

should healthy citizens have to subsidize the health care costs of those who choose to be obese?

There would be no way to limit the effect of that thinking. Fat hardens the arteries. Sugar leads to diabetes. Alcohol bad for the liver. We all need more exercise. The dictator of Romania, Ceaucescu limited every one to 1400 calories as I recall. Let's not go down that road.