Stymie said:

PurpleJedi said:

This being a nation of free enterprise, we can't expect a company to want to sell LESS.

How about we start by trying to get Americans to think once again that they are accountable for their actions?

This is beyond soft drinks and smoking, this goes deeper. Americans have come to believe that we can do whatever we want and if shit hits the fan, then you blame everyone (society, parents, the Man, Pepsi, etc.) for your troubles.

Educate the public is one step. Stop pandering to people's delicate natures and reinforce the fact that overeating is not only bad for your health, but bad for the nation and the environment.

I would rather SHAME people into doing what they should be doing, then legislate it.

That's my 2¢ anyway.

But haven't we been doing this, Ren? Do we really not know? Do you know? Do I know?

We both know and I knew before I got diabetes and yet I still didn't take care of myself enough to prevent it. Luckily, my costs for treatment for that is out of pocket and not at cost to taxpayers.

Ivy...at some point in our lives we hopefully learn our lesson. My own health began deteriorating a number of years ago due to my sedentary lifestyle...to the point where the 7 steps leading up to the bedrooms at home made me winded.

When I had had enough, I began to take better care. I lost some weight. I joined a gym. Then when my marriage collapsed, I took it one step further and actually stepped foot INTO the gym.

But like I said, I don't want the prospect of fines or jail to be the factor that gets me into working out.

Spinlight said:

PurpleJedi said:

It's crazy because I don't need the government to FORCE me to eat a certain way.

As an adult living in a "free" society, I am aware that eating a greasy cheeseburger is not exactly in my best interest, or that I should limit my sugary drinks intake...but I don't need a LAW to force me. I know it's extreme, but do you want some lawmaker to next decide that sushi is too dangerous and outlaw that? Or that creamy cheese sauces mixed with pasta could draw a fine for the high cholesterol levels?

I would argue for the opposite actually. I would like for the government to allow us to eat, drink, smoke, snort, shoot whatever we want...but with that freedom we'd need to deal with the consequences of those actions as adults.

Actually, you do need the government to force you not to.

Stop bringing up irrelevant shit like pasta sauces. There is a very clear and valid and reasonable answer as to why gigantic vats of diabetes water should be banned and you're well aware of it. You, like many folks, just don't like being told 'no'...

When it comes to something like the food I put in my mouth, I certainly DON'T.

Efan said:

Stymie said:

Smoking laws definitely. I have nothing against smokers but I am very happy to not have to breathe in secondhand smoke in my office all day.

It's not a big deal for those who want to have all the soda they want but I think it's a good step to looking at the problem of obesity in this country.

I believe we cannot continue to sustain a society where healthcare costs continue to skyrocket and the burden falls on the taxpayers. That just is not fair.

Agreed.

I agree as well.

So why don't we rate healthcare premiums based on lifestyle, same as they do life insurance???

Stymie said:

Genesia said:

You mean like banning smoking in bars and forcing motorcyclists to wear helmets? I don't approve of that shit, either.

Trust me, I like coming home after an evening out and having my clothes not wreak of smoke as much as anyone. But I don't think making laws to ensure that is an appropriate use of government.

Those too but I meant more like smoking in office buildings. I probably could come up with more but that's off the top of my head and relevant to my situation. I am glad I don't have to breathe someone else's smoke all day. People can do what they want as long as it doesn't affect me.

Well, see...I think businesses are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want to be smoke-free or not. If you work for an employer that permits smoking in the office (and I can't think of many of those, anymore), that's on them - and on you for working there. It's not up to the government to fix that.

This is how the federal government has put the American people $16 trillion in debt - because it's doing a whole crapload of things that are none of its damn business.

PurpleJedi said:

Stymie said:

But haven't we been doing this, Ren? Do we really not know? Do you know? Do I know?

We both know and I knew before I got diabetes and yet I still didn't take care of myself enough to prevent it. Luckily, my costs for treatment for that is out of pocket and not at cost to taxpayers.

Ivy...at some point in our lives we hopefully learn our lesson. My own health began deteriorating a number of years ago due to my sedentary lifestyle...to the point where the 7 steps leading up to the bedrooms at home made me winded.

When I had had enough, I began to take better care. I lost some weight. I joined a gym. Then when my marriage collapsed, I took it one step further and actually stepped foot INTO the gym.

But like I said, I don't want the prospect of fines or jail to be the factor that gets me into working out.

Ren, you know most folks don't learn a lesson.

XxAxX said:

i dislike this legislation. it's too parental, imo. what next? no potato chips? no pizza?

i also object to the smoking bans, and think the situation could be handled through dedicated smoking rooms. but that's just me.

I am an avid NON-smoker. The smell of cigarette smoke makes me nauseous.

BUT if a restaurant/bar has a separate room with adequate ventilation for smokers, then why not?

Stymie said:

PurpleJedi said:

Ivy...at some point in our lives we hopefully learn our lesson. My own health began deteriorating a number of years ago due to my sedentary lifestyle...to the point where the 7 steps leading up to the bedrooms at home made me winded.

When I had had enough, I began to take better care. I lost some weight. I joined a gym. Then when my marriage collapsed, I took it one step further and actually stepped foot INTO the gym.

But like I said, I don't want the prospect of fines or jail to be the factor that gets me into working out.

Ren, you know most folks don't learn a lesson.

You ain't kidding (says Mr. Haven't-been-to-gym-in-over-2-weeks).

Genesia said:

Stymie said:

Those too but I meant more like smoking in office buildings. I probably could come up with more but that's off the top of my head and relevant to my situation. I am glad I don't have to breathe someone else's smoke all day. People can do what they want as long as it doesn't affect me.

Well, see...I think businesses are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want to be smoke-free or not. If you work for an employer that permits smoking in the office (and I can't think of many of those, anymore), that's on them - and on you for working there. It's not up to the government to fix that.

This is how the federal government has put the American people $16 trillion in debt - because it's doing a whole crapload of things that are none of its damn business.

I agree that it does a ton of shit that is not its business, however, when it's trying to prevent shit from being its business, like paying healthcare for people with no self-control, I'm all for legislating it. It is stupid that we have to tell grown folks what to do but there are a lot of stupid grown folks out there.

Genesia said:

It is not the job of government to save people from their own stupidity.

New Yorkers...enjoy the fascism you voted for.

How is the government saving people from their own stupidity here?

This isn't fascism. Soda is not banned.

PurpleJedi said:

Stymie said:

Ren, you know most folks don't learn a lesson.

You ain't kidding (says Mr. Haven't-been-to-gym-in-over-2-weeks).

I'm Ms. haven't-been-to-a-gym-in-20-years-then-sold-the-elliptical-and-treadmill-in-the-livingroom.

I do dumb shit and I know better.

Stymie said:

Genesia said:

Well, see...I think businesses are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want to be smoke-free or not. If you work for an employer that permits smoking in the office (and I can't think of many of those, anymore), that's on them - and on you for working there. It's not up to the government to fix that.

This is how the federal government has put the American people $16 trillion in debt - because it's doing a whole crapload of things that are none of its damn business.

I agree that it does a ton of shit that is not its business, however, when it's trying to prevent shit from being its business, like paying healthcare for people with no self-control, I'm all for legislating it. It is stupid that we have to tell grown folks what to do but there are a lot of stupid grown folks out there.

Well, if the government weren't trying to provide health care (which, again, is not its job), it wouldn't have to worry about Big Gulps, would it?

The government is supposed to be the Peoples' bitch - not the other way around.

XxAxX said:

i dislike this legislation. it's too parental, imo. what next? no potato chips? no pizza?

There is no law against drinking soda so comparing this to "no potato chips" and "no pizza" is incorrect.

Stymie said:

PurpleJedi said:

You ain't kidding (says Mr. Haven't-been-to-gym-in-over-2-weeks).

I'm Ms. haven't-been-to-a-gym-in-20-years-then-sold-the-elliptical-and-treadmill-in-the-livingroom.

I do dumb shit and I know better.

I'll toast to that with a Super Big Gulp in a few minutes.

sexton said:

XxAxX said:

i dislike this legislation. it's too parental, imo. what next? no potato chips? no pizza?

There is no law against drinking soda so comparing this to "no potato chips" and "no pizza" is incorrect.

How about then a law prohibiting sale of large bags of chips or slices of pizza with extra cheese?

Genesia said:

Stymie said:

I agree that it does a ton of shit that is not its business, however, when it's trying to prevent shit from being its business, like paying healthcare for people with no self-control, I'm all for legislating it. It is stupid that we have to tell grown folks what to do but there are a lot of stupid grown folks out there.

Well, if the government weren't trying to provide health care (which, again, is not its job), it wouldn't have to worry about Big Gulps, would it?

The government is supposed to be the Peoples' bitch - not the other way around.

First point is true, however, the government does provide healthcare.

In being the people's bitch, there are people who do want the governement to provide them with healthcare.

As a whole I think the country's fucked up and there are many accounts of no personal accountability in it. Unfortunately, it's been the government's job to protect people from themselves.

Stymie said:

Genesia said:

Well, if the government weren't trying to provide health care (which, again, is not its job), it wouldn't have to worry about Big Gulps, would it?

The government is supposed to be the Peoples' bitch - not the other way around.

First point is true, however, the government does provide healthcare.

In being the people's bitch, there are people who do want the governement to provide them with healthcare.

As a whole I think the country's fucked up and there are many accounts of no personal accountability in it. Unfortunately, it's been the government's job to protect people from themselves.

Yes, yes, & YES!

But at what point do we draw the line?

PurpleJedi said:

sexton said:

There is no law against drinking soda so comparing this to "no potato chips" and "no pizza" is incorrect.

How about then a law prohibiting sale of large bags of chips or slices of pizza with extra cheese?

Extra cheese on pizza isn't a good comparison either. Buy two bags of chips.

sexton said:

PurpleJedi said:

How about then a law prohibiting sale of large bags of chips or slices of pizza with extra cheese?

Extra cheese on pizza isn't a good comparison either. Buy two bags of chips.

Exactly.

You can't compare it to pizza as at least you're fueling your body with that.

They're not banning anything but a cup size. You can buy 2 (or 10) cups. It just makes it a little less convenient for someone to consume large amounts of sugary soft drinks. Something that holds little (if any) nutritional value.

Stymie said:

Genesia said:

Well, if the government weren't trying to provide health care (which, again, is not its job), it wouldn't have to worry about Big Gulps, would it?

The government is supposed to be the Peoples' bitch - not the other way around.

First point is true, however, the government does provide healthcare.

In being the people's bitch, there are people who do want the governement to provide them with healthcare.

As a whole I think the country's fucked up and there are many accounts of no personal accountability in it. Unfortunately, it's been the government's job to protect people from themselves.

To quote Pork in Gone With the Wind, "Askin' ain't gettin'."

It is the responsibility of elected representatives to explain to people why that is not feasible - and come up with a better system - rather than pandering to them and saying they're going to provide it, while having absolutely no clue how they're going to pay for it.

$16 trillion in debt. $16 trillion in debt. It has to stop.

Genesia said:

Stymie said:

First point is true, however, the government does provide healthcare.

In being the people's bitch, there are people who do want the governement to provide them with healthcare.

As a whole I think the country's fucked up and there are many accounts of no personal accountability in it. Unfortunately, it's been the government's job to protect people from themselves.

To quote Pork in Gone With the Wind, "Askin' ain't gettin'."

It is the responsibility of elected representatives to explain to people why that is not feasible - and come up with a better system - rather than pandering to them and saying they're going to provide it, while having absolutely no clue how they're going to pay for it.

$16 trillion in debt. $16 trillion in debt. It has to stop.

I agree! But isn't trying to stem the problem with a measure like this at least doing SOMETHING?

Stymie said:

Genesia said:

To quote Pork in Gone With the Wind, "Askin' ain't gettin'."

It is the responsibility of elected representatives to explain to people why that is not feasible - and come up with a better system - rather than pandering to them and saying they're going to provide it, while having absolutely no clue how they're going to pay for it.

$16 trillion in debt. $16 trillion in debt. It has to stop.

I agree! But isn't trying to stem the problem with a measure like this at least doing SOMETHING?

No! It costs more to enact this kind of legislation because it has to be enforced!

And it creates a whole bunch of other problems. I mean...I can't believe the environmentalists haven't gone nuts over the fact that people will now be buying two 12-oz. containers of soda rather than one 20-oz. container. How many extra resources is that going to burn up?

And there is absolutely no proof that this is going to make for fewer fat and/or unhealthy people. So it's been done for nothing. It might be good for certain peoples' egos, thinking they've done something. But, in truth, nothing will have changed or been accomplished. And when that becomes apparent, they'll find something else to regulate and/or ban.

They actually think that banning large sodas is gonna curb obesity. Screw the multiple big macs and in n out burgers. It's them sugary soft drinks.

Nvm

[Edited 9/14/12 10:27am]

Genesia said:

Stymie said:

I agree! But isn't trying to stem the problem with a measure like this at least doing SOMETHING?

No! It costs more to enact this kind of legislation because it has to be enforced!

And it creates a whole bunch of other problems. I mean...I can't believe the environmentalists haven't gone nuts over the fact that people will now be buying two 12-oz. containers of soda rather than one 20-oz. container. How many extra resources is that going to burn up?

And there is absolutely no proof that this is going to make for fewer fat and/or unhealthy people. So it's been done for nothing. It might be good for certain peoples' egos, thinking they've done something. But, in truth, nothing will have changed or been accomplished. And when that becomes apparent, they'll find something else to regulate and/or ban.

Ah! I get your point.

AsherFierce said:

They actually think that banning large sodas is gonna curb obesity. Screw the multiple big macs and in n out burgers. It's them sugary soft drinks.

I know that me giving up soda caused me to drop at least 20 pounds. I was drinking at least three 20 ounce Pepsis a day.

Stymie said:

AsherFierce said:

They actually think that banning large sodas is gonna curb obesity. Screw the multiple big macs and in n out burgers. It's them sugary soft drinks.

I know that me giving up soda caused me to drop at least 20 pounds. I was drinking at least three 20 ounce Pepsis a day.

Not to mention, no one thinks this is the end-all, be-all solution. It's one small thing. It's something. It's a start. And it's a start that will likely being to make a difference.

CarrieMpls said:

Stymie said:

I know that me giving up soda caused me to drop at least 20 pounds. I was drinking at least three 20 ounce Pepsis a day.

Not to mention, no one thinks this is the end-all, be-all solution. It's one small thing. It's something. It's a start. And it's a start that will likely being to make a difference.

Well, at least you can still get your heroin in Times Square. Just saying.

And the title you can't get your big gulp in NYC anymore is wrong because the ban does not ban convenience stores-7/11 is a convenience store.

Besides, even if you get a smaller cup at McDonalds you can get free refills.

kewlschool said:

Well, at least you can still get your heroin in Times Square. Just saying.

No, you totally can't anymore. It's depressing.

PurpleJedi said:

Shanti0608 said:

Proud to say that I have never in my life had a Big Gulp. I don't know why they were an option in the first place.

Ack! We wonder why there's so much diabetes here.

http://www.fatsecret.com/...ain-drinks

When I was a teenager, one of the best parts of summertime was heading to 7-ELeven on a hot day and buying a SUPER Big Gulp, mixing 3 or 4 different sodas in one.

As of turning 40, I can honestly say that I've had maybe 2 Big Gulps in the past 2 years, and I'm sure I didn't even finish drinking the whole thing. This even though I have a 7-Eleven across the street from my office (which I visit daily).

Gluttony is an evil that our society has to deal with, but not through legislation IMO.

That's when you all actually rode your bikes or possibly walked to the 7-11. Nowadays, even the little kids got little motorized cars. (Granted I have yet to see one riding up gettin' a slurp) They get their parent to drive them when their thirsty.