Judge strikes down NYC law on drink sizes.

Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Judge strikes down NYC law on drink sizes.

Jennifer Peltz, The Associated Press
Published Monday, Mar. 11, 2013 3:54PM EDT
NEW YORK -- New York City's groundbreaking limit on the size of sugar-laden drinks has been struck down by a judge shortly before it was set to take effect.
The restriction was supposed to start Tuesday.
The rule prohibits selling non-diet soda and some other sugary beverages in containers bigger than 16 ounces. It applies at places ranging from pizzerias to sports stadiums, though not at supermarkets or convenience stores.
City officials say the limit will curb obesity by making it easy for people to stop at 16 ounces of high-calorie drinks.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/judge-strikes-down-nyc-s-sugary-drinks-size-rule-1.1191206


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 Yeah, I was just reading

 Yeah, I was just reading that. Apparently the drink ban wasn't even passed by the city council. Mayor Bloomberg simply had the ban passed as a regulation by the Board of Health (which is 100% appointed by the governor), a detail that I had missed in early stories about the regulation. The judge overturned it mostly on the grounds that the Board of Health didn't have the legislative authority to create the ban. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15768
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
The law seems a bit full of

The law seems a bit full of loopholes regardless of "authority" issues. But, I do see the same lack of corporate responsibility . Just like Nader had to drag the car companies kicking and screaming to make safer cars and mandate seatbelts. Funny thing is, once they did, the car companies learned they could market these new standards and make even more money.

But to think the marketers of food don't manipulate their formulas to maximize appeal to the taste buds is a flat out lie. They know what they are doing. And the amount of salt and sugar and artificial chemicals in our foods are causing sever health issues.

Now before anyone goes off on the bullshit nanny state crap, this isn't just about America, this is about a a global climate which the primary goal is the buck, not planning ahead, and not health or safety issues. Fisheries for example are finding more and more human produced garbage such as plastics in the guts of the fish we eat, at a very alarming and growing rate.

We as a species think falsely that we are above nature and can always master it. We live in the moment failing to consider the long term damage we do to the planet and eventually, and it seems the trend is continuing, it will make things worse for us, not better.

And when the libertarians and republicans take the "fuck you I got mine" attitude, and when they don't mind Coke or Pepsi, then complain that the people they sell it to end up obese or with diabetes end up driving their insurance premiums up, and driving emergency room costs up if they don't have private health care.

Instead of having to bring it to a court, why not, on your own as business, retool, like the car companies did but without force of government, that way, you can actually provide something useful and less damaging and long term, reduce the cost to all tax payers.

There was a time when the majority of business mom and pop to big, were about providing and building. But that is not what we have today. Today it is simply short term and all about profits. It is great for the companies but it is the same "don't think about the long term problems it might cause", that caused the dust bowl. In a very literal sense if all we do is extract, and all we do is sell something without thinking what it might do to society, it is the same as over tilling a field, the field will eventually become infertile.

Business is needed. It is what built our highways and electric grid and meccas like New York city.  But our short term thinking is turning more of our country into a third world country and globally we are polluting the planet way too much and producing less economic stability and more slave wages.

Coke and Pepsi and other soda companies, along with the food industry itself, should WANT to do the right thing on it's own. Less sugar, more products that are healthy. Someone started those companies, and through the years they have managed to create new products constantly, so why not work on making and promoting something that is better for all of us?

A more stable society and a more healthy society is better for business as well.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It is irrelevant what

It is irrelevant what companies do with their food. We aren't all 2 year olds who need mommies supervision. More to the point, the law is pointless. What stops me from buying a second?

Strike it down and kick the people behind it out of politics forever.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:It is

Vastet wrote:
It is irrelevant what companies do with their food. We aren't all 2 year olds who need mommies supervision. More to the point, the law is pointless. What stops me from buying a second? Strike it down and kick the people behind it out of politics forever.

Yep, we aren't 2 year olds, and I believe we should bring back subliminal messaging on television and radio.

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Incomparable. If soft drinks

Incomparable. If soft drinks had been banned outright, maybe.

Not that it worked anyway. All research on subliminal messaging suggests that if you aren't aware of the practice it doesn't last long or have any strong measurable change. And if you are aware of it then the best you get is a placebo effect.

At best you can change someone's mood, if they are receptive to a mood change.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:The law seems

Brian37 wrote:

The law seems a bit full of loopholes regardless of "authority" issues. But, I do see the same lack of corporate responsibility . Just like Nader had to drag the car companies kicking and screaming to make safer cars and mandate seatbelts. Funny thing is, once they did, the car companies learned they could market these new standards and make even more money.

It isn't a law, it was a dictate from the governor that never passed through the city council because it was unpopular. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

But to think the marketers of food don't manipulate their formulas to maximize appeal to the taste buds is a flat out lie. They know what they are doing. And the amount of salt and sugar and artificial chemicals in our foods are causing sever health issues.

Oh my. You mean to tell me that food companies try to make their food taste good!?!?!? What an OUTRAGE. They should be forced to make their food taste like shit.  

 

Brian37 wrote:

Now before anyone goes off on the bullshit nanny state crap, this isn't just about America, this is about a a global climate which the primary goal is the buck, not planning ahead, and not health or safety issues. Fisheries for example are finding more and more human produced garbage such as plastics in the guts of the fish we eat, at a very alarming and growing rate.

Do you eat fish guts?

 

Brian37 wrote:

We as a species think falsely that we are above nature and can always master it. We live in the moment failing to consider the long term damage we do to the planet and eventually, and it seems the trend is continuing, it will make things worse for us, not better.

The drink ban causes more damage to the planet. Instead of using one cup for your 24oz you have to purchase two and therefore create twice as much garbage. If you want to save the planet, wouldn't it be smarter to produce fewer larger cups?

 

Brian37 wrote:

And when the libertarians and republicans take the "fuck you I got mine" attitude, and when they don't mind Coke or Pepsi, then complain that the people they sell it to end up obese or with diabetes end up driving their insurance premiums up, and driving emergency room costs up if they don't have private health care.

I have no problem with people being obese, that is their choice, nor do I know any libertarian who complains about obese people. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Instead of having to bring it to a court, why not, on your own as business, retool, like the car companies did but without force of government, that way, you can actually provide something useful and less damaging and long term, reduce the cost to all tax payers.

People like to drink more than 16ozs (which when you include ice is actually far less than 16 oz). How does forcing them to buy two drinks reduce cost for the tax payers at all?

 

Brian37 wrote:

There was a time when the majority of business mom and pop to big, were about providing and building. But that is not what we have today. Today it is simply short term and all about profits. It is great for the companies but it is the same "don't think about the long term problems it might cause", that caused the dust bowl. In a very literal sense if all we do is extract, and all we do is sell something without thinking what it might do to society, it is the same as over tilling a field, the field will eventually become infertile.

It is the mom and pop businesses who suffer the worst under these kinds of BS regulations. It is no big deal for McDonalds to purchase smaller cups. In fact, their profit line would probably go up because they charge more for two small drinks than they do for one large one- way more than the additional cost for the extra cup. The mom & pop restaurant that has to purchase all new glasses because their glasses are 20 oz (pretty standard) suddenly has a large bill that they have to meet. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Business is needed. It is what built our highways and electric grid and meccas like New York city.  But our short term thinking is turning more of our country into a third world country and globally we are polluting the planet way too much and producing less economic stability and more slave wages.

You wouldn't know third world living conditions if they slapped you in the face. Your ignorance is staggering. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Coke and Pepsi and other soda companies, along with the food industry itself, should WANT to do the right thing on it's own. Less sugar, more products that are healthy. Someone started those companies, and through the years they have managed to create new products constantly, so why not work on making and promoting something that is better for all of us?

In case you haven't noticed both Coke and Pepsi have made products that are very low calorie and have been having huge advertising campaigns pushing them. The bottom line is that people like corn syrup and they like to drink a lot of it. Who are you to tell people what they should or should not drink? If you don't want to drink sugary soda's don't drink them. Personally, I don't drunk sugar unless it includes a lot of alcohol, can't even remember the last time I had a coke and no one has tried to force me to drink one. What a novel concept, allowing people to choose what they want to drink all by themselves *gasp* can't have that.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I completely agree with

I completely agree with everything you said on the subject. Too many freedoms have already been stolen.

The only logical manoeuvre would be a tax that is completely earmarked for healthcare. But that wouldn't work in the US, seeing as how healthcare isn't funded by taxes, but by private industry (not to mention how fucked up taxes already are).

The best thing to do is therefore nothing. There are already far too many victimless crimes putting people in prison. This screams Demolision Man and 1984 to me.

Mmm. Rat burgers.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1477
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
 New Yorkers just couldn't

 New Yorkers just couldn't handle the freedom. Got to regulate that shit.