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

As ludicrous as this ban is, I still don't know why so-called freedom-advocating libertarians like Hightop have issues when local governments do things at the local level.

If New Yorkers like to be told what they can/cannot eat at the local level, they should be free to do so. If they don't, they're free to move elsewhere.

 

Because it is still some form of socialistic federal jedi mind trick learned in Kenyan schools by Obama forcing local governments to do these things.

 

I agree with this until NYC starts complaining that they can ban soft drinks IN the city only to have contraband soft drinks make their way from other areas. I mean what is the point of a ban when other nearby cities who are too dumb too ban them

 

Are you saying local governments shouldn't be allowed to enact laws/ordinances as they see fit because they might influence adjacent localities?

If so, I don't buy it. Even cities as large as NYC only have so much influence (if any) on laws/ordinances in surrounding areas. I really doubt Newark or Hoboken will suddenly decide to ban Big Gulps as well just because NYC is complaining.

 

You have totally convinced me. I have changed my mind and also reversed this stance on gun control. NYC has no right to complain about guns coming in from other places without similar bans.

 

How's that reading comprehension working out for you? Did I ever say NYC has no right to complain? They can complain all they want, but I really doubt Newark's elected officials will be rushing to ban large sodas themselves just because NYC's crying.

Did you even get my original point? Local government, local ordinance, local issue. It's libertarianism at its best. Even Ron Paul would say so.

 

I agree unless it contradicts the constitution. As there doesn't seem to be any protection for drinks above 16 oz, let them ban it all they want and we will retain the right to make fun of them.

 

Did Hightop claim the federal government should step in and prevent this? I don't this anyone has claimed that. One can think NYC has the right and still shouldn't. I haven't heard anyone say NYC doesn't have the right.

 

Sure...

If that's the case, I'm sure he'll have no problems clarifying his position a bit. Hightop, despite your disagreement, do you defend NYC's right as a local government to enact such an ordinance?

I'm also sure the various pictures of Michelle Obama were unrelated and posted purely out of personal dislike for the First Lady and her political positions. Am I correct in assuming those pictures are in no way indicative of the fact you think the federal government was involved, and that we're mere steps away from an authoritarian police state?

 

of course. Why wouldn't they? I've haven't anyone on this board or in the blogosphere claim NYC don't have the right. Not sure who you are arguing against.

Michelle Obama is fair game. She has publicly supported the ban. She chose to throw her hat in the political ring. Also I agree with Hightop that she is a ****ing b****.

 

Yes, in the -1.3 times you two have met, I'm sure you had sound ground to form this opinion.

Was it the vegetable-carousing? Is someone feeling a bit out of shape, or something?

 

I'm just waiting for Hightop to say that he has no problems with NYC exercising its right to enact this ban.

Let's see...this thread was created on May 31 with a picture of Michelle Obama, but she didn't publicly 'applaud' the ban until June 5.

Again, I'm just waiting for Hightop clarify his position. I'm sure he doesn't truly believe the Obamas somehow had a role in enacting this ban, and that he just used Michelle's image because he doesn't like her.

 

We ate tons of bad stuff when we were kids, but we're not overweight. Reason? We played outside and were active. Rather than ban foods, we should put a timer on the TV and Xbox.

Food is not the problem. Laziness and sedentary lifestyles are the problem. The human body was designed to move. When you don't, bad things happen.

 

While this is true, the fact is that humans consume a lot more liquid calories than they did in the past, when they normally drank water at dinners. Now it's cola or juice or something. And that is a huge difference.

 

You advocate the government limiting how much TV I watch? Are you insane? Also you don't understand the first thing about getting fat.

 

You might as well put time limits on reading too.

Lazy and sedentary lifestyles...

 

Uh, if getting fat isn't due to sodas or a sedentary lifestyle, then what is it due to?

 

sodas. sugar

 

In addition to your two items, I submit the following to add to the list. In addition to HFCS, none of the following were in the food supply 50 years ago:

Genetically Modified Organisms [Monsanto]

artificial sweetners

RBGH

Rendered ingredients [atleast for pets]--->check the labels animal lovers

 

Nope. It's because of sodas.