Nanny/Police State: NYC Ban On Large Sugared Drinks...

[Care4all]

In addition to this CC,

My husband and I will order one extra large drink, for the "better value" and then share the drink....he's 6'3 and I am 5'4 so he in general drinks about 2/3's of it and I drink about a 3rd.

Plus, how is a 16 oz limited cup really gonna help the person that is 5 foot drinking it compared to someone 6'3 drinking it?

Obviously the person over 6 foot can take in more sugar and calories than the 5 footer person....

This law DOES NOTHING. Educating us and finding a way to get us out from behind the computer would do more good imho.

 

[BlindBoo]

Excellent point. Well said.

He is of course a liar. But you knew that.

No, i didn't know that. I really did think that was your position on guns. My bad, if i'm wrong.

That I want to take away guns from everyone who is not of my party? Really?

My official position on gun control is: If you can't control your gun you probable shouldn't own one.

 

[paulitician]

In addition to this CC,

My husband and I will order one extra large drink, for the "better value" and then share the drink....he's 6'3 and I am 5'4 so he in general drinks about 2/3's of it and I drink about a 3rd.

Plus, how is a 16 oz limited cup really gonna help the person that is 5 foot drinking it compared to someone 6'3 drinking it?

Obviously the person over 6 foot can take in more sugar and calories than the 5 footer person....

This law DOES NOTHING. Educating us and finding a way to get us out from behind the computer would do more good imho.

You obviously need 're-educating.' The NDAA should take care of your kind.

 

[paulitician]

He is of course a liar. But you knew that.

No, i didn't know that. I really did think that was your position on guns. My bad, if i'm wrong.

That I want to take away guns from everyone who is not of my party? Really?

My official position on gun control is: If you can't control your gun you probable shouldn't own one.

Well, that's a bit too vague for me. But i'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Meister]

merged

 

[Bigfoot]

He is of course a liar. But you knew that.

No, i didn't know that. I really did think that was your position on guns. My bad, if i'm wrong.

That I want to take away guns from everyone who is not of my party? Really?

My official position on gun control is: If you can't control your gun you probable shouldn't own one.

..and that's from a blind dog

 

[Dr.Drock]

Taking away peoples constitutional right to bear arms?

I understand the reasoning behind the mandate.

Well both require the removal of a liberty.

Forcing someone to own insurance is probably even worse than forcing someone to give away their guns. At least there's a black market for guns, there isn't one for insurance (yet).

Should we turn children away from emergency rooms whose parents can't pay or do you force the responsible citizens to continue to pay for their care (not to mention cost of care for the illegals and their children)?

Well that already happens. Children and adults get care who can't pay and others pay for it. Also in Massachusetts Obamacare has done nothing to help citizens with the costs, it's just as bad if not worse.

It's the same in both instances, liberty removal. You're either pro-liberty or you aren't. I want people to be able to own a gun, not own insurance or own weed, even though I own neither weed or guns and I do own insurance.

 

[paulitician]

Look, we can't just let Citizens run around buying whatever size sugary drinks they want. It will lead to all-out Anarchy and the destruction of our American way of life. I don't understand what's wrong with some of you people. Don't you get it? Big Brother says it's all for your own good. Why would he lie? Maybe a little NDAA 'detention' will bring some of you around?

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's just not right to do Closed Caption....we are suppose to live in the land of the free, and be able to make our own choices in life, legal and even illegal if we are willing to face the consequences...and things like having the gvt telling us what we can order to drink is WAYYYYYYYYYY too much gvt over reach and certainly not what our founding fathers had planned.

I agree and I've said time after time that if that happened that would be fucked up, but that is not happening and is not even being proposed. So, yeah someone makign the choice for you is bad, except that's not happening

I agree with that..

They are not banning the drinks, you can buy them on the black market called the Grocery Store.

It is NOT good. Right now, it may seem logical, but that's the problem....no one really spends the time to see things through....to envision all the pros and cons long term before they make knee jerk reactionary legislation with no consideration of long term effects of the future domino type restraints that are written on the wall as we speak, if you try to open your eyes on this....please reconsider.... some of us may be here on this earth another 50 plus years and will have to live with the future laws and restraints put upon us that could have the beginnings with this one simple act of Mayor Bloombergs.

I understand the slippery slope arguement but Americans are the fattest in the world and I dont have a problem with it. It kills me to say it because I believe in the slippery slope arguement but right now the cheapest stuff is the stuff that is bad for you. Guess who likes cheap stuff....Americans

CC,

Americans are fat, NOT because of what they eat or drink, NOT because of their calorie intake, but because of their lack of exercise.

Did you know that the average Pilgrim or person in Early Colonial Times ate 4500 Calories a day! I just learned that yesterday on a History Channel documentary. We humans of today would be the size of Alaska if we ate 4500 calories a day!

And yes, they are not banning these drinks, but Bloomberg is getting in to the nitty gritty of every day citizen's lives by telling them that they can not order a sugary drink larger than 16 oz....at a time. A person in a restaurant could drink his 16 oz drink and order a refill of the sweetened ice tea and be permitted to do such....yet, this guy only wanted a few more ounces of a drink to finish his meal....if he were allowed to order the 20 oz drink from the beginning then that would have sufficed, instead you have the guy with the potential of drinking 32 ounces now, by him having to order a refill.

It's just plain stupid CC, the whole thing is stupid and it is a waste of money on their tax payers cuz the paper it is written on is worthless, and enforcement is ridiculous....

There are so many other things so much more important for Bloomberg to do than to start down this slippery slope.....truly, there is....

Care

There are always things more important. Empty Calories from sodas is part of the reason why Americans are fat. I mean shit, are we seriously denying that Soda is a part of why Americans are fat asses? Seriously?

Sure if we had to catch our own food, build our own shelter and ride horses we could take in 4500 calories with no problem. They didnt excersize to stay healthy their existence depended on them getting out there.

Maybe someone wont get a refill. The only thing I'm hearing is "this is stupid because I can get more than one drink". Sure you can but either you're going to want a hand free to eat with or you will juggle 2 drinks and a sandwich...Or sit down during your lunch break and get unlimited refills. But juggling and sitting down to eat doesnt happen much in America and if they want to they can get their fat asses up and walk to the refill machine.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Look, we can't just let Citizens run around buying whatever size sugary drinks they want. It will lead to all-out Anarchy and the destruction of our American way of life. I don't understand what's wrong with some of you people. Don't you get it? Big Brother says it's all for your own good. Why would he lie? Maybe a little NDAA 'detention' will bring some of you around?

Chicken Little ass

 

[sfcalifornia]

Liar. Bold face liar. Tell you what, you find a post of mine that is pro gun control and I'll say you are no longer a liar. Until then you're nothing but a liar.

Two things;

First off, the phrase is "bald faced liar." It refers to the practice of lawyers to shave, leaving the face bald.

Secondly, that little button hook thingy - it represents interrogative. I asked you a question, moron, I did not make an assertion.

Sorry, it's bald AND bold.

The third version is your boldfaced lie. A story one sometimes hears in support of it falls firmly into the area of folk etymology — that it comes from a lie knowingly told in print because it was printed for emphasis in bold type. But bold-faced goes back to Shakespeare in the sense of a shameless or impudent appearance, so it’s reasonable that a boldfaced lie is one told with a shamelessly bold face. At times it’s regarded as an error, though it’s to be found almost as early as barefaced lie:
The sneer, the sarcasm, the one-sided statement, the perplexing reference, the qualified concession, the bold-faced lie, — all these we could well illustrate by samples of the current crop.
Eclectic Review, Sept. 1832.
World Wide Words: Bald-faced, boldfaced or barefaced?

 

[paulitician]

If Citizens start thinking they can buy any size sugary drink they want, what will they start thinking next? Our Nation's very survival could be at stake here. Some of you people just don't understand this.

 

[paulitician]

Look, we can't just let Citizens run around buying whatever size sugary drinks they want. It will lead to all-out Anarchy and the destruction of our American way of life. I don't understand what's wrong with some of you people. Don't you get it? Big Brother says it's all for your own good. Why would he lie? Maybe a little NDAA 'detention' will bring some of you around?

Chicken Little ass

Heil Big Brother!

 

[Bigfoot]

Ha!

 

[BlindBoo]

Well both require the removal of a liberty.

Forcing someone to own insurance is probably even worse than forcing someone to give away their guns. At least there's a black market for guns, there isn't one for insurance (yet).

Should we turn children away from emergency rooms whose parents can't pay or do you force the responsible citizens to continue to pay for their care (not to mention cost of care for the illegals and their children)?

Well that already happens. Children and adults get care who can't pay and others pay for it. Also in Massachusetts Obamacare has done nothing to help citizens with the costs, it's just as bad if not worse.

It's the same in both instances, liberty removal. You're either pro-liberty or you aren't. I want people to be able to own a gun, not own insurance or own weed, even though I own neither weed or guns and I do own insurance.

Which is why we have sky-rocketing costs.

Regardless of the insinuations of a liar, I am pro liberty.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I agree and I've said time after time that if that happened that would be fucked up, but that is not happening and is not even being proposed. So, yeah someone makign the choice for you is bad, except that's not happening

I agree with that..

They are not banning the drinks, you can buy them on the black market called the Grocery Store.

I understand the slippery slope arguement but Americans are the fattest in the world and I dont have a problem with it. It kills me to say it because I believe in the slippery slope arguement but right now the cheapest stuff is the stuff that is bad for you. Guess who likes cheap stuff....Americans

CC,

Americans are fat, NOT because of what they eat or drink, NOT because of their calorie intake, but because of their lack of exercise.

Did you know that the average Pilgrim or person in Early Colonial Times ate 4500 Calories a day! I just learned that yesterday on a History Channel documentary. We humans of today would be the size of Alaska if we ate 4500 calories a day!

And yes, they are not banning these drinks, but Bloomberg is getting in to the nitty gritty of every day citizen's lives by telling them that they can not order a sugary drink larger than 16 oz....at a time. A person in a restaurant could drink his 16 oz drink and order a refill of the sweetened ice tea and be permitted to do such....yet, this guy only wanted a few more ounces of a drink to finish his meal....if he were allowed to order the 20 oz drink from the beginning then that would have sufficed, instead you have the guy with the potential of drinking 32 ounces now, by him having to order a refill.

It's just plain stupid CC, the whole thing is stupid and it is a waste of money on their tax payers cuz the paper it is written on is worthless, and enforcement is ridiculous....

There are so many other things so much more important for Bloomberg to do than to start down this slippery slope.....truly, there is....

Care

There are always things more important. Empty Calories from sodas is part of the reason why Americans are fat. I mean shit, are we seriously denying that Soda is a part of why Americans are fat asses? Seriously?

Sure if we had to catch our own food, build our own shelter and ride horses we could take in 4500 calories with no problem. They didnt excersize to stay healthy their existence depended on them getting out there.

Maybe someone wont get a refill. The only thing I'm hearing is "this is stupid because I can get more than one drink". Sure you can but either you're going to want a hand free to eat with or you will juggle 2 drinks and a sandwich...Or sit down during your lunch break and get unlimited refills. But juggling and sitting down to eat doesnt happen much in America and if they want to they can get their fat asses up and walk to the refill machine.

How far would you like this to go?

Gov't regulated calories in food?

Gov't forced exercise?

What would be the difference, aren't those good ideas too?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Should we turn children away from emergency rooms whose parents can't pay or do you force the responsible citizens to continue to pay for their care (not to mention cost of care for the illegals and their children)?

Well that already happens. Children and adults get care who can't pay and others pay for it. Also in Massachusetts Obamacare has done nothing to help citizens with the costs, it's just as bad if not worse.

It's the same in both instances, liberty removal. You're either pro-liberty or you aren't. I want people to be able to own a gun, not own insurance or own weed, even though I own neither weed or guns and I do own insurance.

Which is why we have sky-rocketing costs.

Regardless of the insinuations of a liar, I am pro liberty.

We have skyrocketing costs because gov't controls somewhere between 50% and 66% of dollars spent in healthcare.

The free market is far better at controlling costs via competition than gov't. Especially when gov't is putting regulations on companies who pay them big bribes.

 

[BlindBoo]

I agree and I've said time after time that if that happened that would be fucked up, but that is not happening and is not even being proposed. So, yeah someone makign the choice for you is bad, except that's not happening

I agree with that..

They are not banning the drinks, you can buy them on the black market called the Grocery Store.

I understand the slippery slope arguement but Americans are the fattest in the world and I dont have a problem with it. It kills me to say it because I believe in the slippery slope arguement but right now the cheapest stuff is the stuff that is bad for you. Guess who likes cheap stuff....Americans

CC,

Americans are fat, NOT because of what they eat or drink, NOT because of their calorie intake, but because of their lack of exercise.

Did you know that the average Pilgrim or person in Early Colonial Times ate 4500 Calories a day! I just learned that yesterday on a History Channel documentary. We humans of today would be the size of Alaska if we ate 4500 calories a day!

And yes, they are not banning these drinks, but Bloomberg is getting in to the nitty gritty of every day citizen's lives by telling them that they can not order a sugary drink larger than 16 oz....at a time. A person in a restaurant could drink his 16 oz drink and order a refill of the sweetened ice tea and be permitted to do such....yet, this guy only wanted a few more ounces of a drink to finish his meal....if he were allowed to order the 20 oz drink from the beginning then that would have sufficed, instead you have the guy with the potential of drinking 32 ounces now, by him having to order a refill.

It's just plain stupid CC, the whole thing is stupid and it is a waste of money on their tax payers cuz the paper it is written on is worthless, and enforcement is ridiculous....

There are so many other things so much more important for Bloomberg to do than to start down this slippery slope.....truly, there is....

Care

There are always things more important. Empty Calories from sodas is part of the reason why Americans are fat. I mean shit, are we seriously denying that Soda is a part of why Americans are fat asses? Seriously?

Sure if we had to catch our own food, build our own shelter and ride horses we could take in 4500 calories with no problem. They didnt excersize to stay healthy their existence depended on them getting out there.

Maybe someone wont get a refill. The only thing I'm hearing is "this is stupid because I can get more than one drink". Sure you can but either you're going to want a hand free to eat with or you will juggle 2 drinks and a sandwich...Or sit down during your lunch break and get unlimited refills. But juggling and sitting down to eat doesnt happen much in America and if they want to they can get their fat asses up and walk to the refill machine.

I don't think it stupid because someone can't get more than a certain amount of soda at a ttime. It's stupid because in lieu of buying and eating an appetizer, an entre, and a desert with unteen number of calories, the mayor want to restrict their drink size? The money spent would be better spent on a campaign to get people to exersise more.

 

[sfcalifornia]

CC,

Americans are fat, NOT because of what they eat or drink, NOT because of their calorie intake, but because of their lack of exercise.

Did you know that the average Pilgrim or person in Early Colonial Times ate 4500 Calories a day! I just learned that yesterday on a History Channel documentary. We humans of today would be the size of Alaska if we ate 4500 calories a day!

And yes, they are not banning these drinks, but Bloomberg is getting in to the nitty gritty of every day citizen's lives by telling them that they can not order a sugary drink larger than 16 oz....at a time. A person in a restaurant could drink his 16 oz drink and order a refill of the sweetened ice tea and be permitted to do such....yet, this guy only wanted a few more ounces of a drink to finish his meal....if he were allowed to order the 20 oz drink from the beginning then that would have sufficed, instead you have the guy with the potential of drinking 32 ounces now, by him having to order a refill.

It's just plain stupid CC, the whole thing is stupid and it is a waste of money on their tax payers cuz the paper it is written on is worthless, and enforcement is ridiculous....

There are so many other things so much more important for Bloomberg to do than to start down this slippery slope.....truly, there is....

Care

There are always things more important. Empty Calories from sodas is part of the reason why Americans are fat. I mean shit, are we seriously denying that Soda is a part of why Americans are fat asses? Seriously?

Sure if we had to catch our own food, build our own shelter and ride horses we could take in 4500 calories with no problem. They didnt excersize to stay healthy their existence depended on them getting out there.

Maybe someone wont get a refill. The only thing I'm hearing is "this is stupid because I can get more than one drink". Sure you can but either you're going to want a hand free to eat with or you will juggle 2 drinks and a sandwich...Or sit down during your lunch break and get unlimited refills. But juggling and sitting down to eat doesnt happen much in America and if they want to they can get their fat asses up and walk to the refill machine.

How far would you like this to go?

Gov't regulated calories in food?

Gov't forced exercise?

What would be the difference, aren't those good ideas too?

Like Bloomberg's proposal, those suggestions are an overreach as well, although they are the first suggestions I've heard from the conservative side so far.

I'm not sure regulating adult calorie consumption is going to have any effect in America's obesity rate but one thing's for sure, I'm in full support of regulating corporations targeting children with their fattening ways as well as ignorant parents who are seemingly oblivious to it all.

 

[Meister]

There are always things more important. Empty Calories from sodas is part of the reason why Americans are fat. I mean shit, are we seriously denying that Soda is a part of why Americans are fat asses? Seriously?

Sure if we had to catch our own food, build our own shelter and ride horses we could take in 4500 calories with no problem. They didnt excersize to stay healthy their existence depended on them getting out there.

Maybe someone wont get a refill. The only thing I'm hearing is "this is stupid because I can get more than one drink". Sure you can but either you're going to want a hand free to eat with or you will juggle 2 drinks and a sandwich...Or sit down during your lunch break and get unlimited refills. But juggling and sitting down to eat doesnt happen much in America and if they want to they can get their fat asses up and walk to the refill machine.

How far would you like this to go?

Gov't regulated calories in food?

Gov't forced exercise?

What would be the difference, aren't those good ideas too?

Like Bloomberg's proposal, those suggestions are an overreach as well, although they are the first suggestions I've heard from the conservative side so far.

I'm not sure regulating adult calorie consumption is going to have any effect in America's obesity rate but one thing's for sure, I'm in full support of regulating corporations targeting children with their fattening ways as well as ignorant parents who are seemingly oblivious to it all.

The nanny state, huh?