The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > SHH Community > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2013, 03:38 PM   #101
Thought Crime
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 299
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

The impression I get from that snip is ignore the unhealthy.

Thought Crime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 03:57 PM   #102
justinlancaster
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fresno, Ca
Posts: 262
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV Fan View Post
lol never thought of it that way

All that being said sin tax or not, I don't think the Government should subsidize the Sugar Industrial Complex
100% agree with you there. I think the best thing the Government could do when it comes to obesity is start an awareness campaign and let people know why they are getting fat. There has been a a lot of information that has came out in the last 10 years or so on why we are getting fat. A good place to start is with Gary Taubes ( http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat.../dp/0307474259 )

I think that would be more effective than a ban on soda sizes or more sin taxes which are going to do relatively nothing to reduce the obesity rate.

justinlancaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 03:59 PM   #103
Thought Crime
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 299
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Government is just ban-happy. What you're saying is the better alternative.

Thought Crime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 04:56 PM   #104
hippie_hunter
The King is Back!
 
hippie_hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Titanium Groceries
Posts: 53,331
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by justinlancaster View Post
100% agree with you there. I think the best thing the Government could do when it comes to obesity is start an awareness campaign and let people know why they are getting fat. There has been a a lot of information that has came out in the last 10 years or so on why we are getting fat. A good place to start is with Gary Taubes ( http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat.../dp/0307474259 )

I think that would be more effective than a ban on soda sizes or more sin taxes which are going to do relatively nothing to reduce the obesity rate.
It's common freaking sense on what makes people fat.

__________________
Titanium Groceries!!!
hippie_hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 05:19 PM   #105
justinlancaster
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fresno, Ca
Posts: 262
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by hippie_hunter View Post
It's common freaking sense on what makes people fat.
What makes people fat? Why do you think there is so many people that are obese still if they know what makes them fat?

justinlancaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 05:43 AM   #106
childeroland
Side-Kick
 
childeroland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,982
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

And it's the government's job to decide what our lifestyle should be, is it?

__________________
That which is not Body, is no part of the Universe, and because the Universe is All, that which is not Body is Nothing and consequently Nowhere. Thomas Hobbes

You are the world you have created. And when you cease to exist, this world that you have created will also cease to exist. Cormac Mccarthy


Nothing isn't better or worse than anything. Nothing is just nothing. Arya Stark

Spellcaster now available at Amazon and Barnes & Noble
childeroland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 10:19 AM   #107
redhawk23
Wrestlin'
 
redhawk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New Kemet
Posts: 16,881
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by childeroland View Post
And it's the government's job to decide what our lifestyle should be, is it?
I don't know is it the government's job to pay your healthcare bills when you turn 64?

Is it the government's job to try and raise an army from an obese population?

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
On my planet, the S stands for Sears.
redhawk23 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 01:39 PM   #108
childeroland
Side-Kick
 
childeroland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,982
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

With my money that I put in for decades. And the armed forces seem to be doing fine. Unless China's looking at us and thinking, they're fat, let's get them.


Last edited by childeroland; 04-02-2013 at 07:15 PM.
childeroland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 01:49 PM   #109
Destructus86
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,684
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Personally...I think harmful chemicals should be banned from all food and drink.

__________________
Beliefs - Christian. Anti-Republican. Anti-Gun. Complete separation of church and state. Freedom of speech. Freedom to practice any religion in public. Less focus on foreign lands and more focus on our own problems.
Destructus86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 03:27 PM   #110
enterthemadness
The Triumvirate
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mortalville!
Posts: 28,533
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Destructus86 View Post
Personally...I think harmful chemicals should be banned from all food and drink.

What's next? Gov't in the bedroom? Reality Tv gets banned for being--gasp--scripted at times?

Banning stuff, no matter how well it seems, is bad and makes people resort to getting their fix or wants somewhere else.

We don't need the Gov't, who can't even balance their checkbook, telling us what to do with our freedom of choice.

__________________

enterthemadness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 03:36 PM   #111
Thundercrack85
Side-Kick
 
Thundercrack85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 21,670
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Well within reason. There's a need for balance.

Thundercrack85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 05:15 PM   #112
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 69,867
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by enterthemadness View Post
What's next? Gov't in the bedroom? Reality Tv gets banned for being--gasp--scripted at times?

Banning stuff, no matter how well it seems, is bad and makes people resort to getting their fix or wants somewhere else.

We don't need the Gov't, who can't even balance their checkbook, telling us what to do with our freedom of choice.
Reality TV should be banned for being "stupid", who cares if its scripted....it should be banned for making us dumber.

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 10:19 PM   #113
Doctor Evo
Banned User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,245
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Destructus86 View Post
Personally...I think harmful chemicals should be banned from all food and drink.
Define "harmful chemicals."

Doctor Evo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2013, 10:53 PM   #114
Victarion
Iron Captain
 
Victarion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,513
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Maybe I'm being a simplistic fool, but wouldn't it be fair to just put this on a ballot and let the people of NY vote if its something Bloomberg wants?

@Doc: I'd define harmful chemicals as the stuff restaurants et al use because they're cheap to use. HFCS and all that.

__________________
Goku Lands on Namek CEO
...no king but the King in the North whose name is BRADY...
Victarion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2013, 01:55 AM   #115
Doctor Evo
Banned User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,245
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wooden Alligator View Post
@Doc: I'd define harmful chemicals as the stuff restaurants et al use because they're cheap to use. HFCS and all that.
That seems to be a rather inadequate and imprecise definition, to be honest.

Doctor Evo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2013, 02:42 AM   #116
Leenie
Side-Kick
 
Leenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,219
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wooden Alligator View Post
Maybe I'm being a simplistic fool, but wouldn't it be fair to just put this on a ballot and let the people of NY vote if its something Bloomberg wants?
That's my stance on the issue: Put it on the ballot, and go with what the people vote for. Make the representatives be actual representatives as to what the people want?! Gasp! What a novel idea.

All in all, I can't decide whether Bloomberg is a power-hungry imbecile, a power-hungry psycho, or both. I can't stand the guy, personally.

Leenie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2013, 08:11 AM   #117
Destructus86
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,684
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Evo View Post
Define "harmful chemicals."
Chemicals which have been proven from studies to show consistant harmful effects on the body.

Which is actually quite a few of the chemicals we eat everyday that the corrupt FDA approves...yet most other countries do not.

__________________
Beliefs - Christian. Anti-Republican. Anti-Gun. Complete separation of church and state. Freedom of speech. Freedom to practice any religion in public. Less focus on foreign lands and more focus on our own problems.
Destructus86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 01:39 AM   #118
Doctor Evo
Banned User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,245
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Destructus86 View Post
Chemicals which have been proven from studies to show consistant harmful effects on the body.

Which is actually quite a few of the chemicals we eat everyday that the corrupt FDA approves...yet most other countries do not.
That definition could apply to sucrose or salt, though. What do you mean by consistent?

Doctor Evo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 11:58 AM   #119
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 69,867
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wooden Alligator View Post
Maybe I'm being a simplistic fool, but wouldn't it be fair to just put this on a ballot and let the people of NY vote if its something Bloomberg wants?

@Doc: I'd define harmful chemicals as the stuff restaurants et al use because they're cheap to use. HFCS and all that.
A referendum is the proper way to do it....but Bloomberg knows that that would not pass. NYC may be (D) for the most part, but food and their choice of how they want to eat....is a whole different subject. lol

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 05:44 PM   #120
Handsome Rob
Prepare for Razzle-Dazzle
 
Handsome Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The good old days
Posts: 2,123
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Nanny State Bloomberg just got his little hand slapped again . . .

Appeals Court Strikes Down NYC Soda Ban

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/appeal...155155388.html

And the city's law department is going to appeal it, again. Great use of taxpayer money, there. And yet another reason I'm glad I'm not a New Yorker! That fem-man Ted Mosby doesn't know what he's talking about!

__________________
May the wings of liberty never lose a feather. -- Jack Burton
I'm a Believer.

Want to join the Revolution? Support the FairTax.

Handsome Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 08:05 AM   #121
MessiahDecoy123
Noble Savage
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,460
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Too bad public policy is rarely based on actual science (see Cannabis Prohibition).

They would ban soda, see people are still fat, then unban soda.

The end.

__________________
Tessa Thompson, I'm also a huge fan of cultural anthropology. If you're reading this, PM me. We can discuss Westworld and cognitive science. PLEASE!!!
MessiahDecoy123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 10:20 AM   #122
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 69,867
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Raises my Big Gulp Coke Zero, good job.

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 05:42 PM   #123
Handsome Rob
Prepare for Razzle-Dazzle
 
Handsome Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The good old days
Posts: 2,123
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
Too bad public policy is rarely based on actual science (see Cannabis Prohibition).

They would ban soda, see people are still fat, then unban soda.

The end.
While I agree with your first sentence, I imagine control-freak progressives like Bloomberg would instead look for more food/drink types to ban.

If a control-freak progressive puts something into law and it doesn't get the results he wants, he doesn't see that it may be because the law is bad. Instead, the law just doesn't go far enough, thus justifying the need for laws that are more expansive in nature . . . and thus more restrictive on the citizenry.

__________________
May the wings of liberty never lose a feather. -- Jack Burton
I'm a Believer.

Want to join the Revolution? Support the FairTax.

Handsome Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 06:09 PM   #124
MessiahDecoy123
Noble Savage
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,460
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

It's not just progressives.

How many ”small government” conservatives support the Drug War or War on Terror despite evidence that decriminalization lowers hard drug use (see Portugal) or that the chances of someone getting killed by a terrorist are minuscule.

Also the trickle down effect does not boost economies.

__________________
Tessa Thompson, I'm also a huge fan of cultural anthropology. If you're reading this, PM me. We can discuss Westworld and cognitive science. PLEASE!!!
MessiahDecoy123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 06:47 PM   #125
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 69,867
Default Re: Discussion: Bloomberg's Ban On Large Sugary Drinks

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
It's not just progressives.

How many ”small government” conservatives support the Drug War or War on Terror despite evidence that decriminalization lowers hard drug use (see Portugal) or that the chances of someone getting killed by a terrorist are minuscule.

Also the trickle down effect does not boost economies.
Not this one....

Now, mind you....I do believe that we need be aware that there are terrorists still out there, just because we killed Bin Laden doesn't mean that has changed, or even decreased all that much. BUT, I believe using our military, special ops, etc resources is a better use of our $$$$ in the war on terror. Listening to my phone calls aren't going to really get you anywhere....

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of Mandatory Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2018 All Rights Reserved.