Government testing the waters?
 

they have no right to tell you what to buy. :disgust assholes :2 cents:


NEW YORK (AP) ? About half of New Yorkers say Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban of sugary drinks over 16 ounces from the city's eateries is an example of government going too far, while 42 percent say it would be good health policy, according to a poll released Monday.

Of the 500 adults surveyed Sunday for the NY1-Marist poll, 53 percent said the proposal is a bad idea, while 42 percent praised the concept ? which would make New York the first American city to so directly attempt to limit portion sizes in an attempt to fight obesity.

Forty-five percent of those polled said they think the ban would help people lose weight, while 52 percent said it wouldn't make a difference. More than half the people surveyed said they never order a sugary drink large enough to be banned.

The pollsters contacted people at random on cell phones and land lines on Sunday. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. Last week, Bloomberg proposed limiting portion sizes of sugary drinks to 16 ounces at the city's restaurants, delis, food trucks, movie theaters and sporting arenas. Regular soda and sports drinks would be affected, while diet sodas wouldn't. Any drink that's more than half milk or more than 70 percent juice would be exempt.

Grocery stores and many convenience stores are regulated by the state and wouldn't be impacted. Marc La Vorgna, a spokesman for Bloomberg, said the poll showed New Yorkers weren't overwhelmingly set against the proposal.

"We didn't propose it because we thought it would be popular, but it should come as no surprise that the numbers are so close since New Yorkers always have had an openness to bold ideas when taking on intractable problems," he said in a statement.

The ban has been denounced by the soft-drink industry and critics who accuse the mayor of trying to institute a "nanny state" rather than allowing individuals to make their own choices. It's expected to win the approval of the Bloomberg-appointed Board of Health and take effect as early as March.

Now that people are working out how to reverse Diabetes Type 2 naturally, they want you to have Aspartame instead of sugar; as Chemo is more profitable.

red meat is bad for you. ban burgers! sliders only :1orglaugh and you can only buy 2 per day

Not sure where I stand on this. I dont like being told what I can buy or not, but I can see the other side of this as well.

Racists !

Won't people just buy 2 drinks if they really want that much? Or go get a refill...

They gonna ban purple stuff too?
not cool
ds

what purple stuff? your meds?

but cigarettes is okay to sale
the land of freedom
:error

In the US they have to put a disclaimer on a commercial so people watching it will know a pickup truck can't actually snowboard. Not the brightest country in the world so I guess the theory is most people will hurt themselves accidentally unless told which way to walk.

You do not want to know Jamal! It will break your heart if its true.

http://getdangoodman.com/wp-content/...0/06/fanta.jpg

sippin on some syzurp https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/im...mZ9x3CrSHoS7EI

Big money in bootleg big gulps.

if it passes you can start a large soda biz :pimp

http://thehoodup.com/board/images/smilies/dance.gif

R.I.P. Pimp C

thunderbird and grape kool aid

42% of people are fucking morons

Car manufactures were against seat belts
Cigarette companies were against public smoking bans

This is a good idea. Just buy 2 drinks if you want to be a fat pig.

Keep telling yourself that.

lol I be notz on any medz cept foe whens I cants gets me sleeps!!
ds

the disclaimer is not because america is not dumb it is however, very litigious.
ds

Paaaaaahhhh! Awesome
ds

:thumbsup

Maybe the Government should also say "If you obese and get medical problems, it's your fault. So if you can't pay. Die."

Ultimately it's the rest of the US who pick up the tab for poor people's poor health. So all those screaming freedom, best not complain when their taxes go up.

There is a long history with the USA and the sugar industry. The USA fucked a lot of international sugar cane farmers back in the day and that was what caused the boom in them growing marijuana, and you know the rest of that story.

Some fascinating sugar history to read if you have some time to get your google on. Here is a cliff notes basic timeline, but if you want the gritty stuff you need to dig a little deeper: http://sugarreform.org/why-reform/hi...sugar-program/

I'd love to see more non-soda options at restaurants, but I'm against legislating that opinion.

Litigious, yeah, though Animal Planet did just run a fake documentary about Mermaids that half their viewers didn't realize was fake and got very mad when they found out from the internet that mermaids don't exist :)

Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States

i don't agree with this but think its pretty stupid of people that they can't stop killling themselves with "food".

Food, smokes, plastics... we consume what is drilled into our heads by the media.

True. I run 3 to 6 miles every other day, and work out in between. People should be forced to exercise so that we won't have to pay the cost of their health care. It will be easy. Just have everyone wear a monitor so that we can see that they are doing the government mandated exorcise properly, and we won't have to put them in jail or fine them!



.

instead of banning gigantic servings of soda, just tax the shit out of them in the same way NY city taxes cigarettes.

That kind of government makes you Canadian I think ;)

Time to leave the us

theirs more dangerous things. cigs,alcohol,red meat what about triple cheese burgers and big macs? and taco bell loco taco :helpme

I can see the reasoning behind the ban, but not sure I like it though. Wouldn't it be better just to put some kind of a tax on it?

NY city banned eating in the subway a while back too. Big deal. They banned smoking in many places and there was huge outcry from smokers. Now it's a yawn. This is no different. It's a good idea and if I lived there I'd have supported it too. There never should have been approval in the 80's for drink cups the size of childrens beach pails.

There is no attempt to tell you not to drink your weight in soda every day. Just on the size of container a food establishment can serve it in. You can get unlimited refills. The premise that the gov. is trying to tell you what you can eat or drink is false. Everyone will get over it if it passes, which it might not.

wow so you want the government to baby sit you. :2 cents: reminds me of a calif town trying to ban fast food

Sorry, but that is EXACTLY what they are trying to do. If I, as a private business owner, cannot sell people my product in the sizes that I choose to, then that is the government telling you what you can and cannot eat or drink. I don't understand how you can't see that? Since when is it the governments business to "approve" the size of a drink container??? It's between the business and the customer.

As to your other examples of how the government taking away freedoms one by one, and people becoming used to it, so that it's "no big deal", I agree. This is how freedom disappears... a little bit at a time, until it doesn't exist at all anymore.

It's the same way you boil a live frog. If you drop it in hot water, it will jump out, so you put it in cold water, and slowly heat it up until the frog boils. Smart governments work the same way. Each little step will be "no big deal", a "yawn", and after a few decades they control everything.


People who think like you do are exactly the kind of people that governments love....




.