Big Gulp, Meet Big Brother

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

I'm really just perplexed that more people are not expressing some level of outrage while they still can.

---

Possibly an issue of bigger fish to fry (in transfat)? New york, new york it's a wonderful town .. the Bronx is up but the Battery's down ... The people ride in a hole in the ground .... Where were we? Ah yes, New York:

New York state declares war on anonymous internet postings:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05...ommenters.html

That internet law is completely hilarous, if it wasn't kinda scary.

New York seems to be taking x-ray pictures of people (pornoscans?) in drive by vans:
""U.S. law enforcement agencies are exposing people to radiation in more settings and in increasing doses to screen for explosives, weapons and drugs. In addition to the controversial airport body scanners [2], which are now deployed for routine screening, various X-ray devices have proliferated at the border, in prisons and on the streets of New York."
http://www.propublica.org/article/dr...for-security-s

Now ok that last one is less well documented than I would like (at least exactly WHERE it is happening, are we absolutely sure it is happening in New York?) and I like to source my information well. But the technology DOES seem to have been purchased:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygree...t-roving-vans/
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/09...hit-US-streets

Wait a second is this exposing people to radiation without their knowledge GOOD for people's HEALTH? Isn't the government supposed to care so much about our health? Oh well if people get cancer from the radiation, we can always blame their lifestyle choices right? It was probably the big gulps ...

Meanwhile the big gulp law is a small fish as you can always buy multiple small cups of soda to get the equivalent of a big gulp right? You can of course also stock up on soda from the store (even in new york I'd imagine). The law may be silly but is also easily circumvented in other words.

Outrage? Every day in the news there are hundreds of stories that (should) generate more outrage than Bloomberg's latest anti-obesity posturing. We live in the land of Citizens United, NDAA, Super/Spooky PACs, enormous subsidies to petroleum companies and tax writeoffs for businesses moving jobs offshore.....the planet is going to roast, and one in seven of us here are already starving. We live in an asylum; I don't have the brainspace to worry too much about the slippery constitutional slope of banning gigantic sugary drinks. Of course it's a ridiculous thing to focus on. But to expect that New Yorkers should storm city hall with torches and pitchforks might be expecting a lot. Most of them are probably just thinking, "Well, I've been meaning to cut back on that sh*t anyway." If they care at all.

Yea that was my point, vastly more big brotherish stuff that actually seems to be happening in the vicinity of New York (that I know about, and I live in the other side of the country).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

Yea that was my point, vastly more big brotherish stuff that actually seems to be happening in the vicinity of New York (that I know about, and I live in the other side of the country).

---

It's interesting how many people were cheering when Bloomberg and company descended on OWS, but get upset when they see he's treating everyone that way.

i don't normally go in for slippery slope type arguments but this really is a slippery slope. What a dumb idea. Ban big sodas? Really? And after that what? Big hamburgers? Doughnuts? Come on. You can't fix stupid! If people want to drink gallons of sugar water, let them. Trying to portion out all the things WE won't pay for as tax payers is going to pretty much eliminate everything, won't it? You get a heart attack? Well, i won't pay for smoking and sugary fats. Cancer? Smoking and fats, again. Break your leg? I don't want to pay for your skiing accident. Or your motorcycle accident. Or your incredible bad luck in your choice of parents in the gene game. Really, we can't pick and choose who gets medical coverage on our disdain of their lifestyle. No, maybe we wouldn't do those things, but then when we break our leg or have a heart attack, thank goodness others can't choose to deny US because THEY don't approve of our lifestyle!
The best we can do is keep slogging away at the education as to what is a good and healthy lifestyle. It does make a difference, and some info is getting in there. I'm sure the ad folks here will tell you it does take hearing a message a certain number of times before it gets in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” ~ C.S. Lewis

---

A good quote to remember when the tyranny of the anti-choice folks try to push their own 'conscience' on the rest of society. Thank you Alan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

That's fine, but can I choose not to pay for the healthcare costs of people who develop chronic disease as a result of their choices? As a taxpayer funding Medicare/Medicaid, not really.

---

I guess you could begin with restricting those on public assistance from buying soda and other junk food with food stamps and not covering them for diabetes and other obesity-related conditions (this is to differentiate them from those with Type 1 diabetes).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tradd

I guess you could begin with restricting those on public assistance from buying soda and other junk food with food stamps and not covering them for diabetes and other obesity-related conditions (this is to differentiate them from those with Type 1 diabetes).

---

That just seem like common sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peggy

A good quote to remember when the tyranny of the anti-choice folks try to push their own 'conscience' on the rest of society. Thank you Alan.

---

In that case it's not your "choice" that anyone is concerned about is it? Speaking for the least among us isn't tyranny.

Back to the Big Gulp....as with most things, there is a way around it. If the 'Big' Gulp is banned then buy several 'Little' Gulps, drink individually or pour into a large cup.