Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

NY Soda ProhibitionFollow

#77 Sep 14 2012 at 3:48 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,821 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Missed opportunity indeed.
Yeah, we missed the opportunity to listen to people complain about how greedy the government is by making people pay more and create a complete failure of a policy. "LOL they want to combat obesity and think five extra cents on soda is going to do that!"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#78 Sep 14 2012 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
******
21,720 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
Missed opportunity indeed.
Yeah, we missed the opportunity to listen to people complain about how greedy the government is by making people pay more and create a complete failure of a policy. "LOL they want to combat obesity and think five extra cents on soda is going to do that!"

At least the city would have made money while hearing about it. Smiley: schooled
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#79 Sep 14 2012 at 5:53 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,821 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
At least the city would have made money while hearing about it. Smiley: schooled
Meh, let Alabama and Mississippi tax their own fat people. They're worse off both for revenue and lardasses, so two fried chickens with one stone. This policy is stupid here, with a lot of loopholes, but at least it actually addresses an issue. Taxing sodas would be no different than just raising taxes all together and being done with it. City didn't end when we started banning smoking in bars and restaurants, or forcing places to put calories on their menus. I'm sure we'll be okay with being slightly inconvenienced over sodas.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#80 Sep 14 2012 at 6:25 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Couple points on this. And no, I'm not picking on you Elinda. This is just an easy quote of an idea that lots of people have expressed.

Elinda wrote:
Brownduck claims that it's setting precedent for the government to be able to limit personal choice.

I countered that this isn't setting a precedent because the government has limited choice previously (the precedent has already been set).


It's not so much that it's setting a precedent as extending one. My issue with this is that when conservatives warn about how doing X will lead to Y (set, or extend a precedent), we're often shouted down by liberals insisting that it wont happen, or there's no connection, or that said future thing will be decided on its own merits. Yet, when we're faced with Y happening, it seems like those same liberals forget what they said earlier and insist that it doesn't matter because we already did X.

It's just jarring to me that this seems to happen so frequently. How can someone argue that doing X doesn't set a precedent for Y, when they're constantly arguing exactly the opposite when Y is being considered? It should not be acceptable to do Y because we did X, doubly so when X was justified in the first place because of an assumption that it wouldn't lead to Y. I just don't see how people can do this and not be aware that they're doing it.


Smasharoo wrote:
Overreaching implies that government should be able to pass no laws with the intent of improving public health.


Huh? No. There's a massive excluded middle there. The word "overreach" implies that there some degree of reach that the government can have, and some degree that is more than it should (hence, the "over" part of the word). You seem to be arguing that since we allow government to regulate *anything* related to public health, that there should be no restrictions at all on what it can regulate. Is that actually what you're saying?

So why not make red meat illegal? ****. Why not just create a government agency that creates a diet plan for every citizen and forces them to eat it. Let's make all recreational activities which might result in harm illegal as well. ****. Let's make it illegal to leave your government provided health cocoon. We'll just plug you all into a virtual reality system instead. Much safer, right?

Clearly we can and should place limits on government regulations. So your argument is completely incorrect.


Quote:
If this law overreach then laws against selling cigarettes to minors overreach. Seat belt laws overreach. Limiting Sudafed sales overreaches. You get the idea, all the way down the slippery slope to "Why do you want to give heroin to infants?" You can't buy 2500mg Ibuprofen in single pills over the counter, either. Why is there a maximum OTC dosage? Because people will invariably take more if each dose is larger. The same applies here. Is that bad law? Should I be able to buy any dosage of any OTC medication I want? I mean I can just take 10, right?



Ok. So tell me what you think would be a government overreach with regard to public health regulations? Doesn't your argument basically say that government has infinite power to regulate in this area? I suspect that most people will disagree with you.

Edited, Sep 14th 2012 5:28pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#81gbaji, Posted: Sep 14 2012 at 6:35 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Oh. And I'll also point out that these sorts of silly "for your own good" regulations are exactly what conservatives predicted would happen as a result of increasing government provided health care. As a larger percentage of our population becomes dependent on the government for their health care, the responsibility for their health shifts from the people to the government. Thus, the government needs to exercise more authority with regard to people's health, since it's paying for the outcomes.
#82 Sep 14 2012 at 6:41 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,821 posts
gbaji wrote:
It's the same argument used for seat belt and helmet laws.
ITT: Conservatives don't give a fuck about you.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#83gbaji, Posted: Sep 14 2012 at 7:07 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Conservatives care about individual freedom. If you want to risk your own life and your own health, that's your choice to make.
#84 Sep 14 2012 at 7:09 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,821 posts
gbaji wrote:
You get that the sole justification for these sorts of laws is that since those people's poor health choices cost the rest of us money, we can justify the government stepping in an restricting those choices.
ITT: Conservatives say we should all suffer for other people's poor health choices because fuck you, that's why.
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives care about individual freedom.
As long as the individual doesn't have a womb.

Edited, Sep 14th 2012 9:12pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#85 Sep 14 2012 at 7:15 PM Rating: Excellent
******
21,720 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You get that the sole justification for these sorts of laws is that since those people's poor health choices cost the rest of us money, we can justify the government stepping in an restricting those choices.
ITT: Conservatives say we should all suffer for other people's poor health choices because fuck you, that's why.
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives care about individual freedom.
As long as the individual doesn't have a womb.


Or really dark skin. Or collect welfare. Or come from another country. Etc.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#86 Sep 14 2012 at 7:19 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Huh. You know, the things you say are starting to make a lot of sense, Gbaji. You know, I always laughed when they said I'd become conservative as I became older, but now it's not so funny. I feel so short-sighted. Short-sighted, and foolish.

Who do you think I should read, to get myself up to speed on Conservativer thought? I'll be honest, I used to dismiss their arguments without really looking into or researching them. I'd like that to change.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#87 Sep 14 2012 at 7:30 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,821 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives care about individual freedom.
As long as the individual doesn't have a womb.
Or really dark skin. Or collect welfare. Or come from another country. Etc.
Or religion. Good luck if you're ***, too. Or anyone who isn't lockstep with them. But yeah, besides all them. Totally all about the individual's freedom.

Edited, Sep 14th 2012 9:30pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#88 Sep 15 2012 at 3:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,379 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
Missed opportunity indeed.
Yeah, we missed the opportunity to listen to people complain about how greedy the government is by making people pay more and create a complete failure of a policy. "LOL they want to combat obesity and think five extra cents on soda is going to do that!"
And that's a whole lot different than people whining about the government overreaching?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#89 Sep 15 2012 at 9:58 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,569 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives care about individual freedom.
As long as the individual doesn't have a womb.
Or really dark skin. Or collect welfare. Or come from another country. Etc.
Or religion. Good luck if you're ***, too. Or anyone who isn't lockstep with them. But yeah, besides all them. Totally all about the individual's freedom.

Edited, Sep 14th 2012 9:30pm by lolgaxe

I know that this is difficult for most of you tree huggers to understand, but conservative =/= Republican.

Edited, Sep 15th 2012 10:59am by Demea
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#90 Sep 15 2012 at 10:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,244 posts
Quote:
I know that this is difficult for most of you tree huggers to understand, but conservative =/= Republican.


Just like tree hugger =/= Democrat. But, you must admit, there is a high correlation.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#91 Sep 15 2012 at 10:18 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,547 posts
We can all agree though that Crazy = Ron Paul.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#92 Sep 15 2012 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
******
49,821 posts
Samira wrote:
Demea wrote:
I know that this is difficult for most of you tree huggers to understand, but conservative =/= Republican.
Just like tree hugger =/= Democrat. But, you must admit, there is a high correlation.
You'd think "disagree with ≠ liberal" would be obvious, but you wouldn't be able to tell in any of these threads with how casually the term is thrown out.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#93 Sep 15 2012 at 11:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Samira wrote:
Quote:
I know that this is difficult for most of you tree huggers to understand, but conservative =/= Republican.


Just like tree hugger =/= Democrat. But, you must admit, there is a high correlation.



Barring Teddy Roosevelt, (Prog, rep) who once punched out a bear because it got between him and his trees.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#94 Sep 15 2012 at 11:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,569 posts
Quote:
You'd think "disagree with ≠ liberal" would be obvious, but you wouldn't be able to tell in any of these threads with how casually the term is thrown out.

You liberals and your special characters. Think you're better than the rest of us! Smiley: mad

Edited, Sep 15th 2012 12:31pm by Demea
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#95 Sep 15 2012 at 11:32 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives care about individual freedom.
As long as the individual doesn't have a womb.
Or really dark skin. Or collect welfare. Or come from another country. Etc.
Or religion. Good luck if you're ***, too. Or anyone who isn't lockstep with them. But yeah, besides all them. Totally all about the individual's freedom.

Edited, Sep 14th 2012 9:30pm by lolgaxe

I know that this is difficult for most of you tree huggers to understand, but conservative =/= Republican.

Edited, Sep 15th 2012 10:59am by Demea


Unfortunately, due to our zany electoral mechanics, nuance doesn't matter much.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#96 Sep 17 2012 at 6:51 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Demea wrote:
Quote:
You'd think "disagree with ≠ liberal" would be obvious, but you wouldn't be able to tell in any of these threads with how casually the term is thrown out.

You liberals and your special characters. Think you're better than the rest of us! Smiley: mad

Edited, Sep 15th 2012 12:31pm by Demea

Quit denying your inner lib...

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#97 Sep 17 2012 at 7:14 AM Rating: Good
******
49,821 posts
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
You'd think "disagree with ≠ liberal" would be obvious, but you wouldn't be able to tell in any of these threads with how casually the term is thrown out.
You liberals and your special characters. Think you're better than the rest of us! Smiley: mad
It was liberalism that taught me how to use the character map. Smiley: mad

Edited, Sep 17th 2012 9:15am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#98 Sep 17 2012 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,387 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
You'd think "disagree with ≠ liberal" would be obvious, but you wouldn't be able to tell in any of these threads with how casually the term is thrown out.
You liberals and your special characters. Think you're better than the rest of us! Smiley: mad
It was liberalism that taught me how to use the character map. Smiley: mad
With all that free time once the government started doing all your thinking for you, I'd imagine you had room on your schedule to figure it out. Smiley: tongue
#99 Mar 11 2013 at 5:19 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,720 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not arguing it can't be made law, I'm arguing it shouldn't be.

Judge Milton Tingling agrees.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
#100 Mar 11 2013 at 10:05 PM Rating: Decent
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,139 posts
Whenever an eleventh hour ruling such as this takes place, I can't help but think that their only thought while issuing the ruling is "Zing!"
#101 Mar 12 2013 at 6:27 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Quote:
New York City's soft drink sellers celebrated a sweet victory Monday
There's a Blues Travelers Song rolling around in my head.

gbaji will tell you, the right to purchase a 20oz soda in NYC is not enumerated in the constitution.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)