Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

NYC Soda Ban... banned!


  • Please log in to reply
251 replies to this topic

#1 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 12 March 2013 - 01:56 PM

So, the Great Soda Ban of New York City was struck down in court.

Was it really an overstep in government authority?
Was it just because the law was poorly written?

Bloomy says he plans to appeal... will he win?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#2 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 02:21 PM

It was a poor idea to begin with since a tax bring in a lot of revenue and would cause people to think twice about buying soda. They should've met half way and started taxing larger sizes, since that seems to be a better idea than going all out.

Batsugunner.png


#3 DurbanBrown

DurbanBrown

    to the MOON

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 02:24 PM

Very happy to hear this. That shit was ridiculous.

Zombies-Sig.jpg

last.fm: shroomer1999                                                                  Designed By Lilchiji


#4 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 12 March 2013 - 02:55 PM

Think of the FATTIES with no self control. The court just made them FAT for life by not regulating what they could drink.

Posted Image
(ty to gawker for the pic)

There are no shortcuts. No do-overs. What happened, happened. Trust me. I know. All of this matters.

Madden 13 SB Champ in the CAG gentleman's league.


#5 mrsilkunderwear

mrsilkunderwear

    Just Do It.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 05:55 PM

Completely Unconstitutional. People have the right to their bodies. I highly doubt it even had a real effect. Many people do not realize that today it might be a large soda and tomorrow it will be books which puts the government in the negative light.

#6 granturismo

granturismo

Posted 12 March 2013 - 06:23 PM

Think it was a good idea. The soda companies make a lot of money giving out unhealthy crap.

#7 Cantatus

Cantatus

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 06:40 PM

The law was pretty ridiculous with the way it was enforced (largely due to what the city can regulate versus the state). I can't get anything larger than a 16oz drink at McDonald's, but I can get a 50oz Double Gulp from the 7/11 next store. Or, hell, I could just sit in McDonald's and get my free refills, or if I was feeling really ingenious, just order two 16oz drinks and pour them into a water bottle I brought.

I do think obesity is a problem in this country, particularly among children, but I don't really think this was going to do much to contribute to a solution. It wasn't going to make people realize that they shouldn't gorge on sugary drinks, just piss them off that they were being inconvenienced. The focus should be on improving nutritional education. Don't force people to eat healthier, provide them with the information so they can make informed decisions about their eating habits.

#8 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 07:33 PM

Obesity is indeed a problem in this country, and on the flip side over 50 million Americans go hungry each and every day. It is a solvable problem, but with attitudes like people did this to themselves, and letting people starve is a deservable entitlement, it's going to take a lot of work.

Nutritional education would help a lot, but too bad the funding for such a thing will be killed on the floor.

Batsugunner.png


#9 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 08:22 PM

If people knew how much their tax money is subsidizing and funding the fatties health issue brought upon by their decision, people would be happier with the ban..

I think it was the way it was presented... If healthy people knew how much their tax monies was being wasted cause someone decided to turn themselves into fat asses, I think most people would be supportive of the issue.

You know its funny cause all the same repukes and some dems who call this ban stupid and unconstitutional and scream FREEDOM of choice with their bodies are the ones more then happy to throw a pot smoker in prison and ruin their lives with legal nonsense.. Go figure
Also the same repukes who are more then happy to tell a woman you can't choose to have a abortion..

WTH !!! is that

#10 Dr Mario Kart

Dr Mario Kart

    SD/2D Defense Force

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 09:11 PM

The people most upset about the ban? People who want things decided at the state and local level.

#11 IRHari

IRHari

Posted 12 March 2013 - 09:22 PM

Arbitrary and capricious.
"People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." -Bill Clinton

#12 Calipso

Calipso

    Der Metzgermeister

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 09:25 PM

Think it was a good idea. The soda companies make a lot of money giving out unhealthy crap.


Freedom and free will must be terrible ideas in your opinion then.

People are accountable for their own decisions. Bloomberg can FOAD.

The people most upset about the ban? People who want things decided at the state and local level.


Point being? If Bloomberg felt so confident about it he should have gotten it on the next ballot to be voted on. Bloomberg's actions are no different from Obama or Feinstein. They clearly think the people are too stupid to make their own choices.
Currently playing:
:pc: - Red Orchestra 2
:pc: - Killing Floor
:pc: - SimCity 4
:360: - Uno
:360: - Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare

#13 usickenme

usickenme

    I'm the a-hole

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 March 2013 - 09:55 PM


People are accountable for their own decisions. .


Perhaps if people lived each on their own island and never interacted with anyone....

meanwhile in the real world.


provide them with the information so they can make informed decisions about their eating habits.



hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

#14 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:23 AM

The people most upset about the ban? People who want things decided at the state and local level.


True - but look how easy it was to challenge the law and get it overturned.

Meanwhile, the PATRIOT Act...
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#15 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:29 AM

I'm reading through Michael Moss' "Salt Sugar Fat" right now.

The notion of the "informed consumer" is, due to the food industry, as real as the Loch Ness Monster.

You think you're informed? Tell me about the contents of a bottle of "Simply Orange" orange juice, and correctly identify its parent company.

Try to answer the above (to yourself, of course, I already know the answer) by only looking at the bottle. Then use google to see if you're correct.
Posted Image

#16 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:36 AM

Oddly enough, I knew who Simply Orange's parent company was - but that was due to an article I read on them some time ago. I'm sure most consumers don't know that.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#17 granturismo

granturismo

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:47 AM

Freedom and free will must be terrible ideas in your opinion then.

People are accountable for their own decisions. Bloomberg can FOAD.


If something is branded in a certain way, advertised a lot and tastes relatively good it is of course going to be snapped up. But if it's really large unhealthy, not advertised correctly, lots of information not given then these companies are technically taken advantage of it's consumer.

Drugs and gambling are banned in many places. So how can you say freedom and free would be terrible in my opinion. Not what im saying at all.

You drink soda it is bad for you it makes you want to eat more you're not always aware what you're actually drinking. If you don't regulate certain industry's you allow people to be manipulated. I think banning unhealthy junk that does nothing much for anyone isn't a bad thing......

#18 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:00 AM

Gambling laws are bull****. If it's so horrible, then why does virtually every state have a state-ran gambling program?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#19 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:59 AM

Freedom and free will must be terrible ideas in your opinion then.

People are accountable for their own decisions. Bloomberg can FOAD.



Point being? If Bloomberg felt so confident about it he should have gotten it on the next ballot to be voted on. Bloomberg's actions are no different from Obama or Feinstein. They clearly think the people are too stupid to make their own choices.



We have made it so people DON"T have to be accountable anymore. Have kids while your broke? No problem, here's some tax payer money. Drink yourself to near death and have no savings? No problem, here's 911 and hospitable services that will work basically for free for you. Is it more heartless to perpetuate these behaviors by subsidizing them, or to just say "lie in the bed you made, fatso." There's an interesting theory that some of the extremists Muslim groups are using the generous entitlement programs of Europe and the US to not only weaken the economy, but to bolster their numbers thru multiple births in a household subsidized by tax money. It's really an ingenious way to over take a gov't. Pay for your own subjugation.

#20 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:18 AM

We have made it so people DON"T have to be accountable anymore. Have kids while your broke? No problem, here's some tax payer money. Drink yourself to near death and have no savings? No problem, here's 911 and hospitable services that will work basically for free for you. Is it more heartless to perpetuate these behaviors by subsidizing them, or to just say "lie in the bed you made, fatso." There's an interesting theory that some of the extremists Muslim groups are using the generous entitlement programs of Europe and the US to not only weaken the economy, but to bolster their numbers thru multiple births in a household subsidized by tax money. It's really an ingenious way to over take a gov't. Pay for your own subjugation.


go home, you're drunk.
Posted Image

#21 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:50 AM

"You should step up and help your family." = tactless.
"Everyone else should be forced by law to help random strangers." = Liberal.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#22 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:21 AM

Welcome to Vs. :D
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#23 guinaevere

guinaevere

    plays well with others

  • Super Moderators

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:29 AM

Two users have earned temporary silences for not knowing the difference between making a point and being hateful and disruptive to the CAG Community. Posts have been deleted.

VS players -
Keep it on track and in some way civil. Adding "F-you" comments doesn't earn you a lot of happy points with the mods.
gwensigol8.png

#24 skiizim

skiizim

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:48 AM

lol.... It was getting good too.

When I read about the ban I thought it was ludicrous, it's all about personal choice. If the government was so worried about our health they could start with the whole food industry. Smoking and drinking are by far more concerning than the regulations of soda pop. Somebody mentioned taxing, don't people in that city get taxed too much to begin with?

#25 mkultra

mkultra

    CAG in Training

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:09 AM

Two users have earned temporary silences for not knowing the difference between making a point and being hateful and disruptive to the CAG Community. Posts have been deleted.

VS players -
Keep it on track and in some way civil. Adding "F-you" comments doesn't earn you a lot of happy points with the mods.


I don't think reversing someone's disrespectful comment back to them in a way they could understand is hateful or disruptive. I saw what they said to someone and thought it was beyond disrespectful so I said something to them about it. I'm new here but I don't comment very often because I notice there are a lot of rude members here. But that comment someone said about someone's drunk uncle who is deceased was beyond out of line. I think the person had a right to say Fuck you to them.

There was only one person that I think was obviously being hateful and disruptive to the community. If saying something against them doesn't earn happy points with the mods, I guess I feel bad for the mods.

#26 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:38 AM

bobbeh strikes again!

At least the temp bans were more "even-handed" this time, but it's still lop-sided.

I missed all the action cause I'm busy with FF13-2. Fun game!
dohdough.png


"Speaking of which, there's another elitist prick that argues constantly on the Politics forums by the name of dohdough. He's a complete douche, but at least he keeps his posts in that cesspool of useless opinions. He gets my runner-up nomination."


Thanks for the nomination for the Most Memorable CAG Villan 2012, Blade!

#27 mkultra

mkultra

    CAG in Training

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:02 AM

"You should step up and help your family." = tactless.
"Everyone else should be forced by law to help random strangers." = Liberal.


:applause: Wow, you're such a showstopper too, you know that? What a lovely and inaccurate rendition of what happened.

Let me correct that for you.
"FUCK YOUR DEAD UNCLE" = tactless
"FUCK YOU FOR BEING AN ASSHOLE" = honest
"I AM GOING TO RUN & GET A MOD BECAUSE I AM AN ATTENTION WHORE." = Bob.

Real smooth, Uncle Bob. I guess today was a good day for you, you weren't the uncle being cursed out and you're not dead either.

#28 highoffcoffee496

highoffcoffee496

    I gotta believe!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:57 AM

Two users have earned temporary silences for not knowing the difference between making a point and being hateful and disruptive to the CAG Community. Posts have been deleted.


Thanks for this; it's good to see the mods take it seriously. Hopefully they learn from this..
(\__/)
(='.'=)
This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.

Posted Image

#29 granturismo

granturismo

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM

Gambling laws are bull****. If it's so horrible, then why does virtually every state have a state-ran gambling program?


They are not bull anything. They're pretty much extremely strict and regulated or banned all over America. There are still casino's around and of course Las Vegas is huge but overall it is difficult to gamble in the US, where as in some other countries it is widely encouraged.

I think banning gambling is also a good idea. By definition of odds and how they work, people are prone to addiction and always more likely to lose, it's just a cash cow that milks people. Poker is acceptable as it's usually people vs peope and skill is involved, and lottery is not usually going to make someone go bankrupt, but slots, casino type, and sports betting isn't good at all.

By your logic why not legalize cocaine if it's all about choice?

#30 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:41 AM

They are not bull anything. They're pretty much extremely strict and regulated or banned all over America. There are still casino's around and of course Las Vegas is huge but overall it is difficult to gamble in the US, where as in some other countries it is widely encouraged.

I think banning gambling is also a good idea. By definition of odds and how they work, people are prone to addiction and always more likely to lose, it's just a cash cow that milks people. Poker is acceptable as it's usually people vs peope and skill is involved, and lottery is not usually going to make someone go bankrupt, but slots, casino type, and sports betting isn't good at all.

By your logic why not legalize cocaine if it's all about choice?


I know a few people that spend $100 of a near minimum wage paycheck a week on scratch tickets and lottery tickets.

You can't protect people from themselves.