What do you think of a ban on larger size drinks?

[SlaveNumber23]

I honestly do not give any shits at all, why is this even an issue? If someone wants to drink a lot of sugary drinks its their choice, as poor a choice as it may be its still their choice, they should be free to do it as long as they aren't hurting anyone else in the process. Also how is a ban going to stop people from drinking more sugary drinks? If someone wants to drink it they will do it, restrict buying of larger drinks and people will just buy multiple smaller drinks, ending in the same result, regardless of the ban. This is a complete waste of time and merely makes this Bloomberg guy look like a moron. Whats next? Slapping an overweight person on the nose and sternly telling them "NO!" every time they eat a cookie? They should put all this wasted time into properly educating these people on the effects of poor eating choices and them leaving it for them to decide if its worth it or not.

 

[Deathmageddon]

This ban is silly. People who drink out of those soda buckets will just get a bunch of refills when given a smaller cup. Maybe go the other way and have a mandatory, 12-16 oz (12 being equal to a standard soda can), small size.

 

[viranimus]

Really just smacks of Soda manufacturers utilizing government to force you to pay more for the same thing.

But then Ive been accused of being paranoid, but Ive also been right many times too.

 

[Laser Priest]

Okay, Laws exist to keep society in order. Generally to protect the order and to protect the citizens from each other.

We don't need to protect them from themselves. Gods, if these people can't recognize a proper limit, that's their fault. They can face the consequences. This is the government babying it's citizens.

Yes, it is for their health, but the idea behind it is just so fundamentally ridiculous that I don't know whether to laugh or cry about such a law even being proposed.

 

[burningdragoon]

Now I put myself in the "this is stupid" side of things. Not that I think places should sell huge cups like that, but they should be allowed to if they really want to.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but remember when Morgan Spurlock made a documentary about McDonald's food being deliciously awful for you and McDonald's started to phase out offering Super Size portions shortly after (not officially because of that, but really who's that fooling). I'm pretty sure it wasn't the government who ordered that.

So basically, my feelings are this: Ban = stupid, campaign for awareness = good.

 

[Yan007]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but remember when Morgan Spurlock made a documentary about McDonald's food being deliciously awful for you and McDonald's started to phase out offering Super Size portions shortly after (not officially because of that, but really who's that fooling). I'm pretty sure it wasn't the government who ordered that.

Unfortunately Spurlock lied in his movie. To get the fat gains he claims he needed to eat over 5000 calories per day. He claims he only supersized when asked and did so only 9 times during his month. It is absolutely impossible to eat regular meals at McD and get over 5k calories per day if you only supersize 9 times a month. Even if you supersize evrything you will fall short of 1000 calories per day unless you add in 2-3 desserts.

 

[The Goat Tsar]

Personally, I think the ban is silly, people should be free to make their own decisions and their own mistakes.

I'm surprised by the stupidity of Bloomberg. He thinks soda is the problem. I know he's the mayor, but I wonder if he's ever looked at New York City. There's a shrine to M&M's in Times Square. There's a pizza joint nearly every block. Most people spend their time working behind a desk and don't have the time or energy to exercise.

Banning large sodas is stupid and won't solve New York's obesity problem.

 

[Asita]

No problem then! Inn practice, though, most people won't bother. They'll finish their food, finish their drink and go. Of course, some people will stoically suck down more than before just to (somehow) show those fat cats in city hall that they're grown-ups, but they won't last long.

Methinks you never walk in to fast food joints. It's not exactly an uncommon practice to get a refill as you're walking out, you know.

And, as John Stewart aptly pointed out, it's positively counterintuitive to single out soda as being responsible for obesity given what else is out there that is so much worse for you and perfectly legal. It's like if prohibition targeted Budweiser but left Vodka and Moonshine alone. And to top it all off, let's be honest with ourselves. Let's assume for a minute that this went through without a hitch and people ordered smaller drinks and were stupid enough not to get their free refills[footnote]which so many sit-down restaurants supply before you can even ask for them[/footnote]...do we really think that's going to accomplish its intended goal? That this is some magical key to vanquishing obesity? Or do you think that maybe the increasingly sedintary lifestyle adopted by americans plays a larger role in our flabbiness than whether or not we bought a Big Gulp?

Oh, it's 'if it doesn't solve everything by itself, I'm going to pretend it doesn't make any difference' again. I've seen that before. Why cut your calories if you can't cut all of them? With one easy pill? Also, you should learn maths from taking the pill because school is a drag

Really, it bugs me a little. I'm not in favour of Government intervention on decisions that only harm the decider. It's more that I'm baffled at the reaction to a ruling which, in any other country in the world, would provoke the response: 'Uh, okay. Did people drink those?' Honestly, the reaction makes Americans as a whole seem bloody-minded and childish.

How much can we raise to get New York City Council to outlaw biting one's own ear? I would love to see the response.

...I do so hate it when people misrepresent me like that. No, I was not invoking the Nirvana fallacy, I was pointing to the utter stupidity of saying "we need to improve health, but instead of tackling major offenders, we're taking on the comparative small fry with legislation that can easily be circumvented even using current practices". To translate: from my perspective the only way the bill could be considered to have ANY utility first requires that one assume stupidity on the part of the people, making it pointless legislature as far as I'm concerned. In addition, I consider it overkill to put the maximum permitted sell size at 16 ounces.

I don't object because it's not a perfect solution, I object because it's an idiotic piece of legislature, the restrictions of which are already circumvented daily through means that would still be perfectly legal and similarly easy after the ban. I object because it displays a rather odd form of tunnel vision that ignores more significant offenders in the same front[footnote]Hence the bit about targeting Budweiser but allowing Vodka and Moonshine[/footnote] which I thought any competent legislator would target first or at least encompass with smarter legislature instead of making a scapegoat of one specific form of product. I thought I'd made that much clear.

 

[GartarkMusik]

Yay, more government regulation. Just what I need! *le sigh* -_-

 

[thethird0611]

So, interesting question to pose. I work in a sandwhich shop that delivers. We sell 22 and 32 ounce sodas. The thing is, when we fill up a cup, 3/4 of it is ice. You probably are only getting 10-15 ounces of soda if your lucky. How will that be regulated?

 

[theriddlen]

You know, back in the ol' days, US was known as the land of freedom, where citizens could live free of opression or government telling them what to do and what's "best" for them. Buuut it's not like the ban on giantic drinks affected my view of US. It was the police brutality during the Occupy prostest that did the trick. It was like watching Polish militia beating workers back when the country was still occupied by the USSR. Blimey, things have changed. If Polish govt. pulled something like this off these days, they'd be stopped by everyone in the country before you could say "we the people".

 

[burningdragoon]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but remember when Morgan Spurlock made a documentary about McDonald's food being deliciously awful for you and McDonald's started to phase out offering Super Size portions shortly after (not officially because of that, but really who's that fooling). I'm pretty sure it wasn't the government who ordered that.

Unfortunately Spurlock lied in his movie. To get the fat gains he claims he needed to eat over 5000 calories per day. He claims he only supersized when asked and did so only 9 times during his month. It is absolutely impossible to eat regular meals at McD and get over 5k calories per day if you only supersize 9 times a month. Even if you supersize evrything you will fall short of 1000 calories per day unless you add in 2-3 desserts.

Really? Well that sucks. Lying aside, that type of thing is still the (more) right approach than outright banning something.

 

[RatRace123]

I say no!

YOU MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT YOU'LL NEVER TAKE OUR BIG GUUUUUUUUUUUUULPS!

In seriousness: I don't care. I don't drink much soda anymore anyway. It seems like a stupid thing to want to regulate, but considering our country is one collective lard ball, it makes sense. Though I doubt regulating soda sizes will make much of a dent in that.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Of course you could argue with that your choice of a drink does't do squat to anyone else directly like a massive firestorm and you're correct. However indirectly you are with higher tax rates (or insurance premiums) needed for medical services struggling to cope with peoples 'choice' of being morbidly obese.

So we should place the bottom line of a private corporation over the interests of free will? That will work marvelously!

Not my fault that your Health Services are designed to make a profit above all else (At least that's my personal view).

@testEcul
Something about they way you worded your posts really struck home on this issue for me. This literally is a "keep your laws off my body" issue, but I don't think anyone will bother to put it that way.

True, he could have dialled down the ranting a little although.