REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Soda Wars: New York

POSTED BY: KWICKO
UPDATED: Tuesday, June 5, 2012 12:23
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2215
PAGE 1 of 3

Friday, June 1, 2012 12:02 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


http://www.latimes.com/health/la-ed-soda-ban-bloomberg-20120601,0,3737
836.story


Quote:



New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been on a years-long crusade against obesity, or at least against the cultural and commercial forces that promote it. In his latest step, he's proposing to ban the sale of super-sized sugary drinks by restaurants, cinemas, street vendors and stadium concessionaires. The move exemplifies the tension between individual liberty and societal responsibility that's particularly acute in the field of public health. Americans cherish their freedom to live as they choose, without "nanny state" dictates from the government. But because they're not willing to deny medical care to people who urgently need it, society has to pick up the tab for those who make heedless choices. Striking the right balance between the two will be one of the central challenges for government in the coming decades, as rising healthcare costs put an increasing strain on federal, state and local budgets.

Almost everything government does restricts the freedom of the governed in some way. Spending programs have to be paid for with taxes that leave people less money to use as they see fit. Laws limit what people can do without risking fines, lawsuits or incarceration. People tend to accept these limits without complaint when there's a clear connection to public safety and civil order, or a clear benefit from the spending that's proportionate to the cost.

The support weakens when the connection to public safety isn't so clear or the benefits are more abstract. For example, seat belt laws are widely supported: There's no question that they save lives and reduce the severity of injuries. But when the federal government lowered the speed limit on all interstate highways to 55 miles per hour in 1974, numerous states rebelled, insisting that there was no public safety reason for such a low limit in rural areas.

Similarly, the public accepts some governmental intrusion into what people eat and drink. There is an assortment of restrictions on alcoholic beverages, including a minimum drinking age, drunk-driving laws and regulations governing when and where liquor may be advertised. There are food safety standards and nutritional mandates on school lunch programs. Manufacturers have to list the ingredients, calorie and fat content of packaged foods, and local governments are increasingly demanding the same kinds of disclosures from restaurants.

But telling the average person that he has to eat X or cannot eat Y goes a step further. It intrudes on personal decisions that consumers make with their own dollars that affect just their own bodies. That's what makes even a relatively tame proposal such as Bloomberg's big-cup ban so controversial. Bloomberg's plan, which is pending before the city's Board of Health, would outlaw the sale of sweetened drinks larger than 16 ounces. But somewhat arbitrarily, it wouldn't apply to groceries or convenience stores, to calorie-laden lattes or fruit juices, or even to restaurants that offered two 16-ounce sodas for the price of one.

The mayor's initiative also rests on a shaky scientific foundation. Researchers have found that people who regularly drink soda are more likely to be overweight, and that those who increase their soda intake have a greater chance of becoming obese and diabetic. But there's little data to support the idea that a ban on large cups and bottles of sugary beverages would make a real difference in obesity, especially a ban as porous as the one Bloomberg has proposed.

With no precedents to show the effectiveness of Bloomberg's approach, a better way to balance the competing interests of public health and personal choice would be to require more effective disclosure about the calories in soda and a more aggressive effort to educate the public about the associated risks and costs. There are nearly 400 calories in 32 ounces of Coca-Cola Classic, which is almost as much as aMcDonald's quarter-pound hamburger. Raising awareness about calorie counts may also encourage restaurants to compete to offer the healthiest goods, not just the biggest portions.

Considering that 36% of the U.S. population is obese, far too many Americans aren't connecting the dots between weight and chronic disease, particularly diabetes and heart disease. And that's not just a personal health issue. Studies have shown that preventable diseases linked to behavioral choices are responsible for about half the premature deaths in the U.S. annually, and for much of the demand for costly medical care. At least some of those costs are borne directly by Medicare, Medicaid and other taxpayer-funded public programs, and indirectly by healthy people who carry private insurance.

The larger and more difficult question for the public is where to draw the line between an appropriate government effort to improve public health and an inappropriate interference with individual autonomy. If the only consideration were reducing how much taxpayers had to spend on healthcare, then Bloomberg's next logical step would be to require restaurants to serve vegetables with every food order, or to require every New Yorker to join a health club, or to ban ice cream.

He's not about to do that, though, because Bloomberg is a canny politician. Ultimately, society will decide what limits to place on individuals in the name of public health, and officials who go further than their constituents are ready to go will be tossed out at the next election. New Yorkers have given Bloomberg a lot of leeway on health issues so far, which suggests his views reflect their concerns about diet and obesity. Others who follow his lead may not find their constituents to be so tolerant.




Thoughts?

I'm conflicted. Sure, obesity is an issue. But aren't we free to choose our own food?

Are we? Are we really? Can you choose to order cat or dog at a restaurant? Horse?

If I want to kill myself with sugary drinks, isn't that my business?

What if I want to kill myself with a gun? Are you legally REQUIRED to sell me ammo, even if you can tell that I'm a danger to myself?


I'm glad Bloomberg is concerned, but I'm not sure I want him THIS concerned!



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 1:37 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Dumb, dumb idea.

Suppose a restaurant or burger joint puts in a cold case and sells 2 liter ( or even 1 liter) bottles of soda. Pizza joints here in California do that all the time. Will that be illegal? When the 7-11 next door sells the same bottle? When that 7-11 with the snack bar sells the same 2 liter bottle ( or a one liter bottle) with the snacks it sells? When that same 7-11 sells pre-packaged bottles of soda right next to the same sized fountain sodas? When that same 7-11 sells 40 oz-ers of beer?

Ridiculously stupid, dumb idea.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 1:48 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


I'm kinda there with ya, NOBC.

Sin tax is probably a better idea than an outright ban. Hey, it was all fine and good when they were taxing the fuck out of things I liked at the time, like booze and cigarettes!

So yes, you can kill yourself. But I don't have to make it cheap for you to do so.

It's kind of funny, too, because there's going to be lots of people coming out yelling "You shouldn't be able to regulate what I put in my body!" To which I have to respond, "Really?" What if you're a man putting a cock in your body? Or a woman using a dildo? What if you're a junkie shooting heroin or meth into your veins, or snorting coke up your nose?

So, do we ALWAYS have to respect your right to kill yourself? And if so, do we have to HELP you kill yourself?


Personally, I feel that whatever you want to do to your own body is your own damn business, as long as it doesn't cause harm to another person.






"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 2:05 PM

WHOZIT


This is Bloombag governing by NYC dinner party, even the N.Y. Dems are against this.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 2:17 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
This is Bloombag governing by NYC dinner party, even the N.Y. Dems are against this.




Reagan's Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.


You mean St. Ronald was wrong?


ETA: Looks like Bloomberg's not a Republican this year after all. Now he's an "independent". Allegedly.





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 4:02 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Can you choose to order cat or dog at a restaurant?


So you've never eaten at a Chinese restaurant?

Quote:

Horse?

Some places in the U.S., especially in Florida, apparently. Also Canada and Mexico, so not far from you in Austin. Many places in Europe and I've seen a butcher shop specializing in horse in Casablanca.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 4:11 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

I'm conflicted. Sure, obesity is an issue. But aren't we free to choose our own food?


Yes.

Quote:

Are we? Are we really?


Yes.

Quote:

Can you choose to order cat or dog at a restaurant? Horse?


Yes. And if not, let's fix that straight away.

Quote:

If I want to kill myself with sugary drinks, isn't that my business?


Yes.

Quote:

What if I want to kill myself with a gun? Are you legally REQUIRED to sell me ammo, even if you can tell that I'm a danger to myself?


This is an interesting and insightful question.

My feeling is Yes. You can off yourself however you choose. Your life belongs to you.

--Anthony





Note to Self:
Raptor - women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Never forget what these men are.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 4:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Thoughts?


No.

All Laws are, ultimately, backed by lethal force.
I've pointed it out, actually went and described in detail how a parking ticket could lead to death.
Eric Peters does it here in regards to seat belt laws.
http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/05/23/a-small-thing-can-lead-to-big-tr
ouble
/

Even the smallest, tiniest, nitpick of an ordinance - eventually defiance WILL lead to a man with a gun in your face, and defying THAT will get you dead, especially if you show any hint of being able to successfully do so, since that would bring into question the unbridled power of the Almighty State.

So...

Are you willing to KILL someone, are you willing to see someone dead, for enjoying a double big gulp ?

If the answer to that question is no, then you've utterly no right, ryhme or reason to support such an idea.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 1, 2012 4:40 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Anthony, you're a mensch. I mean that in the best possible way, of course.

That's pretty much my feelings on those matters as well.

Society keeps saying we need to regulate such things. I wonder.

If we say that you can eat or drink what you want, when you want, as much as you want, even if it kills you...

Are we advocating assisted suicide?

And if so, can we just go ahead and codify that into law?

The irony is, there are people who will hail Bloomberg for this, who would shudder at the thought of assisted suicide.





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:02 AM

PENGUIN


Quote:

Originally posted by ANTHONYT:
Quote:

I'm conflicted. Sure, obesity is an issue. But aren't we free to choose our own food?


Yes.

Quote:

Are we? Are we really?


Yes.

Quote:

Can you choose to order cat or dog at a restaurant? Horse?


Yes. And if not, let's fix that straight away.

Quote:

If I want to kill myself with sugary drinks, isn't that my business?


Yes.

Quote:

What if I want to kill myself with a gun? Are you legally REQUIRED to sell me ammo, even if you can tell that I'm a danger to myself?


This is an interesting and insightful question.

My feeling is Yes. You can off yourself however you choose. Your life belongs to you.

--Anthony



Just don't take anyone else with you...





King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:12 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Penguin:
Quote:

Originally posted by ANTHONYT:

Quote:

What if I want to kill myself with a gun? Are you legally REQUIRED to sell me ammo, even if you can tell that I'm a danger to myself?


This is an interesting and insightful question.

My feeling is Yes. You can off yourself however you choose. Your life belongs to you.

--Anthony



Just don't take anyone else with you...




That is key.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:23 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:

But aren't we free to choose our own food?



No, you are not.

And make no mistake, nothing is being taken from you. You're simply being forced, by the govt, to understand what's good for you.

Which is completely counter to what he says, during the interview, where he says they give us the information, and let the people decide what they want.

" We have the responsibility to tell you, and then you have the responsibility to take care of yourself and be in charge of your own destiny."

Just not when it comes to sugared sodas.

You can enjoy the world's largest donut, just don't wash it down with a 'full sugar' soda.







" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:24 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


I think the point is being missed by a wide margin (I can always count on rwed bcoaters to take it to the nth degree). This is mainly about awareness. "This sugar crap is killing you faster than normal... do you want that?" If so, just order another one, no one is stopping that. The fact that it is being discussed out here on the rim suggests to me that the campaign is working.


Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:54 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

The fact that it is being discussed out here on the rim suggests to me that the campaign is working.



How is it 'working' already ? I mean, of course, folks are talking about this, because it's a stupid, over bearing, nanny state act by Bloomberg, but exactly how is it achieving its goal ? Who has lost an ounce of weight because of this ?



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 3:15 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

The fact that it is being discussed out here on the rim suggests to me that the campaign is working.



How is it 'working' already ? I mean, of course, folks are talking about this, because it's a stupid, over bearing, nanny state act by Bloomberg, but exactly how is it achieving its goal ? Who has lost an ounce of weight because of this ?




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/03/09/weight-loss-success
-kim-konkel_n_1316533.html



Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 4:26 AM

FREMDFIRMA


*growls*

I Repeat.

ARE. YOU. WILLING. TO. KILL. SOMEONE. OVER. THIS. ?


Don't play coy, don't pretend I didn't say it - IF you want a law, a regulation, THEN you are authorizing Agents of The State to enforce it, with whatever force it takes.

Doesn't matter than your finger, personally, will not be on the trigger, the moment you say "Yes", then you have issued your express consent to enforce compliance, up to and including lethal force.
Cause, yanno, that's what laws are.

No excuses.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 4:52 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I think it's stupid, yes, and totally wrong.

But what's being completely missed here is that obesity COSTS US, every single one of us who has health insurance, and even those who don't. Spending due to obesity exceeds the costs of even smoking. What's more, those medical costs affect everyone, not just those who are obese. Higher health insurance premiums lead everyone to cover those extra medical costs. The U.S. spends an excess of $190 billion a year because of it.

Betcha nobody thought about this:
Quote:

Obesity results in physical changes outside of individuals' waistlines - from wider stadium seats to sturdier, floor-mounted toilets (in comparison to the wall-mounted kind), businesses need to spend more to accommodate widening bodies.

The Daily Mail reported at the country's fourth largest hospital at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, administrators have had to widen doors, replace wall-mounted toilets with floor models able to hold more than 250 pounds, bought plus-size wheelchairs (costing double the price of a regular model) as well as get mini-cranes to hoist obese patients out of bed.

Cars burn nearly a billion gallons of gasoline more a year than they did in 1960, due to heavier passengers and in the skies, fuel costs have risen to carry carry heavier customers. Not to mention the skyrocketing costs of missed work days from people taking off because of poor health. The impact of obesity is everywhere.

"Smoking added about 20 percent a year to medical costs," Dr. James Naessens, researcher at the Mayo Clinic, told Reuters. "Obesity was similar, but morbid obesity increased those costs by 50 percent a year." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57424148-10391704/u.s-obesity-c
osts-soar-as-nation-packs-on-pounds/
extra weight carried by vehicles as a result of obese and overweight Americans is responsible for almost one billion additional gallons of gasoline being burned each year by our automobiles—nearly 1 percent of our total gasoline usage.

How serious is the problem? Obesity has risen a full 34% since 1960 while morbid obesity is up sixfold.

Making the cost impact all the more troubling is the fact that, unlike smokers, obese people tend to live almost as long as those who keep their weight under control. ”Smokers die early enough that they save Social Security, private pensions, and Medicare trillions of dollars”, said Duke’s Eric Finkelstein. “But mortality isn’t that much higher among the obese.”

Yes, I think his idea is stupid; you can't regulate obesity. But I FULLY understand his frustration, and I don't care for the fact that I'm subsidizing morbidly-obese people to live miserable lives.

So let's see. I pay extra for many, many things people don't think about because there are so many obese people in America, it hits me in the pocketbook every time I turn around. Does that bother anyone?

I don't know what the answer is; obviously not this, and bringing obesity into the conversation, in my opinion, does nothing about it. The conversation's been around a long time already, and the government can't "fix" it. But I wish there WERE an answer.

By the way, you righties will hate this and call it government intervention:
Quote:

What you may not know is that the Affordable Care Act directly confronts this crisis in a number of ways— beginning with empowering employers to battle obesity by allowing them to charge obese employees 30 to 50 percent more in what they contribute toward their health insurance benefit should an employee refuse to participate in a qualified wellness program designed to help them lose weight. You may also not know that the reform law includes incentives to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries to get them into a primary care doctor to discuss and execute a weight loss program. Obamacare even funds community programs designed to help people take off the extra pounds. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/04/30/obesity-now-costs-ame
ricans-more-in-healthcare-costs-than-smoking/
, I don't see that as government intervention...I see it as giving employers, health insurers, Medicare and Medicaid tools with which to ACTUALLY confront the issue. But go ahead, root for them to strike it down, but bear in mind: "While the preventative medicine approach to cost controls which lay at the very heart of the Affordable Care Act directly tackles the serious impact of obesity on our healthcare costs, nothing in the GOP proposals now emerging as potential replacement legislation, should the ACA be stricken by the Supreme Court, appear to address the problem in any meaningful way."

Bitch and moan all you want about efforts to tackle this very real problem, even stupid ones like this, but don't think it doesn't impact you, even if you're very responsible about your health.

You wanna discuss the issue, discuss the ISSUE, not the silly things people are trying to do to deal with it.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 5:05 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
*growls*

I Repeat.

ARE. YOU. WILLING. TO. KILL. SOMEONE. OVER. THIS. ?


Don't play coy, don't pretend I didn't say it - IF you want a law, a regulation, THEN you are authorizing Agents of The State to enforce it, with whatever force it takes.

Doesn't matter than your finger, personally, will not be on the trigger, the moment you say "Yes", then you have issued your express consent to enforce compliance, up to and including lethal force.
Cause, yanno, that's what laws are.

No excuses.

-Frem



Safe to say that thousands more will die from inaction on this than will die because they refused to stop selling big gulps.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 6:37 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

The fact that it is being discussed out here on the rim suggests to me that the campaign is working.



How is it 'working' already ? I mean, of course, folks are talking about this, because it's a stupid, over bearing, nanny state act by Bloomberg, but exactly how is it achieving its goal ? Who has lost an ounce of weight because of this ?






[Raises hand] 35 pounds, so far. And kept it off. Dumping sugary drinks (limiting myself to one soda per week, and then it's Mexican Coke, made with REAL cane sugar) and limiting calories.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 6:41 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:

But aren't we free to choose our own food?



No, you are not.

And make no mistake, nothing is being taken from you. You're simply being forced, by the govt, to understand what's good for you.




Those sound like endorsements of Bloomberg's idea. If you're already not free to choose your own food, then does it matter if you're limited in how big a soda you can order? If nothing is being taken from you, what's the problem?

Quote:


Which is completely counter to what he says, during the interview, where he says they give us the information, and let the people decide what they want.

" We have the responsibility to tell you, and then you have the responsibility to take care of yourself and be in charge of your own destiny."

Just not when it comes to sugared sodas.

You can enjoy the world's largest donut, just don't wash it down with a 'full sugar' soda.




Bingo.


Of course, Michelle Obama has been trying to ramp up education about food and diet, too, but she gets routinely piled on as "the food police" for her efforts, even though she hasn't passed any law regarding what you can or can't eat...






"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 6:45 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
This is Bloombag governing by NYC dinner party, even the N.Y. Dems are against this.




Reagan's Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.


You mean St. Ronald was wrong?


ETA: Looks like Bloomberg's not a Republican this year after all. Now he's an "independent". Allegedly.





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy



I just checked Wikipedia, Mickey is now an "Independent".....and a douche.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 7:07 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
This is Bloombag governing by NYC dinner party, even the N.Y. Dems are against this.




Reagan's Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.


You mean St. Ronald was wrong?


ETA: Looks like Bloomberg's not a Republican this year after all. Now he's an "independent". Allegedly.





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy



I just checked Wikipedia, Mickey is now an "Independent".....and a douche.




Yeah, I get that. You righties never have been fond of the independents, have you?



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 7:19 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
This is Bloombag governing by NYC dinner party, even the N.Y. Dems are against this.




Reagan's Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.


You mean St. Ronald was wrong?


ETA: Looks like Bloomberg's not a Republican this year after all. Now he's an "independent". Allegedly.





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy



I just checked Wikipedia, Mickey is now an "Independent".....and a douche.




Yeah, I get that. You righties never have been fond of the independents, have you?



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy



I bet all the Cannibals we've been reading about lately are "Independents", just a bunch of gay juckie flesh eatting Zombie Independents.

Has anyone seen Keith Olbermann lately? I bet he's out to lunch

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 7:29 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:


I bet all the Cannibals we've been reading about lately are "Independents", just a bunch of gay juckie flesh eatting Zombie Independents.




Ya left out "cowards" and "pisspots" .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 8:02 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Seems the Zit is none too fond of Browncoats...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 8:41 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Seems the Zit is none too fond of Browncoats...



Them's fighten words!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 9:17 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

The fact that it is being discussed out here on the rim suggests to me that the campaign is working.



How is it 'working' already ? I mean, of course, folks are talking about this, because it's a stupid, over bearing, nanny state act by Bloomberg, but exactly how is it achieving its goal ? Who has lost an ounce of weight because of this ?




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/03/09/weight-loss-success
-kim-konkel_n_1316533.html





Nice story, but it only goes to make MY point, even more. She did this, as well as Kwickie, on their own volition. No one needs a law like this. Whether it's for marijuana, or 20 oz of straight coca-cola, what we eat, what we put into our bodies is OUR choice. Not the govt's.

I liken it to the words from the R.E.M. song, World Leader Pretend -

" I raised this wall, and I will be the one to knock it down. "

The individual has the right to make these choices, not Bloomberg.

And props to anyone who let them self go, for what ever reason or circumstance, and then took it upon themselves to live healthier. I was pushing 300 lbs myself ( 296 ), and doc had me on 2 different medications. This sort of condition was unknown to me, I'd generally been in pretty decent health, for most of my life. Took me a while to get motivated, but in the end, that's who has to answer for what sort of shape you're in... the man in the mirror.

So, I changed things, watched what I ate, dropped 30 lbs, all before stepping foot into a gym or doing any real exercise. Then I started working out, and lost another 45 lbs. All with in 8 months. ( Jan 2 - Sept 1st ) That was a few years ago, and I've kept the weight off.

Like is the case so often, Mayor Bloomie may have good intentions, but so did those who wanted to ban alcohol. It doesn't work. Even though not drinking may be healthier for you, folks will still do what they want. And using the law to 'help' folks decide , in matters like this... is over bearing.

And you think you have it bad ? There's nothing you can do to change anything, and the way you are now is pretty much how you'll be , for good ?

Guess again.




*Not sure if this is posting or not, so I'll offer another link

h ttp://



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 11:26 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Why am I not surprised at the usual suspects defending this?

I'm continually disapointed by these people here who claim to have watched Firefly defending the works of the purple-bellies.

Drinking a 300 ounce Coke as I write this.

"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 11:48 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by WULFENSTAR:
Why am I not surprised at the usual suspects defending this?

I'm continually disapointed by these people here who claim to have watched Firefly defending the works of the purple-bellies.

Drinking a 300 ounce Coke as I write this.




1) Who's defending it? Name names.

2) You noticed Zit-boy calling independents "douche bags" and worse, right? I thought he was one of your beloved mighty-whitey righties.

3) Enjoy your Type 2 Diabetes. Please don't call on others to help you when your health fails.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 2, 2012 3:42 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-ed-soda-ban-bloomberg-20120601,0,3737
836.story





Thoughts?

I'm conflicted. Sure, obesity is an issue. But aren't we free to choose our own food?

Are we? Are we really? Can you choose to order cat or dog at a restaurant? Horse?

If I want to kill myself with sugary drinks, isn't that my business?

What if I want to kill myself with a gun? Are you legally REQUIRED to sell me ammo, even if you can tell that I'm a danger to myself?


I'm glad Bloomberg is concerned, but I'm not sure I want him THIS concerned!





I'm conflicted too, but maybe for different reasons. My issue is about how free are we really to make choices. In recent history we have come to see as a truth self evident that we are masters of our own destiny, free to make individual choices for good or bad that determine how our lives will transpire. But where is the evidence for this?

There is more evidence to suggest that our behaviour can be fairly reliably predicted based upon our race, class, income, level of education and a number of other factors. Prisons are not full of an even cross section of the population, and obese people are more likely to be lower in economic status. We may think we choose as individuals, but is the patterns of our behaviour set by our own parents, and grandparents more than the choices we make?

Businesses, advertisers, marketing people know all this, and they spend many billions of dollars researching human behaviour, and what influences behaviour. They can and do target each and every one of us with our differences, and use very sophisticated methods to influence our behaviour, and not for our individual betterment, but for the profit of their business. And if the two class, as it does with things like tobacco, alcohol, fast food, then once again, its said to be about solely individual choice.

Any attempt to counter this influence is met with howls of outrage around individual rights. But these aren't individuals, they are massive corporations earning billions of dollars, who have, past and present, been at least partially responsible for massive health issues.

My solution - if you market and sell unhealthy products then part of your profit needs to go to health care costs. Why should tax payers be responsible?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:05 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

My solution - if you market and sell unhealthy products then part of your profit needs to go to health care costs. Why should tax payers be responsible?



Then why market your products at all ? You're saying it's ok for them to sell their goods and make a little profit, but not a lot ? Who decides how much is too much ? And as long as they're selling drinks that have sugar in them, and not rat poison, advertised as sugar, why punish them at all ?

Tax payers shouldn't be any more responsible for hc costs than those selling the goods, imo. As long as what is being sold is legal, let the free market decide what products get bought and sold.



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 3:57 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

As long as what is being sold is legal, let the free market decide what products get bought and sold.



So who decides what's legal and what's not? If you have such distinctions, you don't have a "free market". In a truly free market, you actually COULD put rat poison in soda and market it as sugar. You could do anything you wanted in the interest of short-term gains, and to hell with the consequences. This is the face of modern capitalism, after all.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:34 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!


Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Thoughts?


No.

All Laws are, ultimately, backed by lethal force.
I've pointed it out, actually went and described in detail how a parking ticket could lead to death.
Eric Peters does it here in regards to seat belt laws.
http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/05/23/a-small-thing-can-lead-to-big-tr
ouble
/

Even the smallest, tiniest, nitpick of an ordinance - eventually defiance WILL lead to a man with a gun in your face, and defying THAT will get you dead, especially if you show any hint of being able to successfully do so, since that would bring into question the unbridled power of the Almighty State.

So...

Are you willing to KILL someone, are you willing to see someone dead, for enjoying a double big gulp ?

If the answer to that question is no, then you've utterly no right, ryhme or reason to support such an idea.

-Frem



Actually the law would prohibit the sale of big gulps, not people drinking them. Businesses selling them would be find or loss their license to operate.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:02 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree, Mike. And Magons is right:
Quote:

Businesses, advertisers, marketing people know all this, and they spend many billions of dollars researching human behaviour, and what influences behaviour. They can and do target each and every one of us with our differences, and use very sophisticated methods to influence our behaviour, and not for our individual betterment, but for the profit of their business. And if the two class, as it does with things like tobacco, alcohol, fast food, then once again, its said to be about solely individual choice.

Any attempt to counter this influence is met with howls of outrage around individual rights. But these aren't individuals, they are massive corporations earning billions of dollars, who have, past and present, been at least partially responsible for massive health issues.

What our "free marketers" don't realize, aside from the dangers of no regulation, is that WE are paying not only for the health-cost result (and others) of obesity, we are paying for the ADVERTISING that gets us to buy them. So WE are subsidizing both the cause AND the effect, and all they can do is argue about "freedom" to "choose". So get real folks; we aren't "choosing", we're being brainwashed into choosing many things, and we pay for the brainwashing, then we pay for all the attendant consequences, to boot! But hey, keep believing it's all our own decisions, and contributing your money, they love it that way.

Congrats on shedding the pounds, by the way. Choey taught me a great trick which avoids the need for counting calories; just remove carbs from your diet, that's all. No exercise needed, just cutting out sugar (of course) and BREAD works wonders! My little experiment with Lyrica gave me ten extra pounds, thank you very much!, which seems to have no desire to leave, so I may break down and finally do something about it, too. Hope I'll have equal luck...

The huge containers of crap don't affect me...I drink ice tea (which I make myself by making a gallon at a time of decaf), which of course has sugar, and maybe once or twice a week one of those mini-cans of Canada Dry. Way back when I saw what Coke can do to you, and never had another. Of course, I make up for it in other ways... :o(

What a shame so few here want to discuss the REAL issues, but would rather be like every other flame-throwing website all over the internet. Too bad Browncoats aren't better than that...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 9:00 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


But Niki, I *like* bread!

I just have to watch what breads I eat, and how much. A slice of rye toast isn't going to kill me or kill my diet.

After counting calories pretty strictly for a few months, it gets quite easy to have a good estimate of where you're at for the day and adjust accordingly.

The harder thing for me is getting on the bike on a regular basis. 30 miles used to feel like a good workout, but some days it just feels like an ordeal to be endured...



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero


"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 12:09 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Then why market your products at all ? You're saying it's ok for them to sell their goods and make a little profit, but not a lot ? Who decides how much is too much ? And as long as they're selling drinks that have sugar in them, and not rat poison, advertised as sugar, why punish them at all ?

Tax payers shouldn't be any more responsible for hc costs than those selling the goods, imo. As long as what is being sold is legal, let the free market decide what products get bought and s





yes, why market them at all? Good point. Why were tobacco companies able to get away with it for so long, marketing their highly addictive, dangerous product? It was and is an immoral industry.

Re the free market, if you actually read and understood my post, I think I argued why the concept consumer choice is flawed. That is why you cannot rely solely on consumer behaviour (especially when dealing with addictive products).

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 12:45 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



The tobacco companies colluded to hide the facts, and try to tell us something counter to what we already knew.... prolonged use of tobacco leads to cancer. ( The terms 'cancer sticks' and 'coffin nails' go back to the 1800's. )

That's not what we have here. No one is claiming that sugary sodas are 'healthy'. Same as no one claims doughnuts or candy bars are either. What next... only 'fun size' candy bars sold in NYC ? Makes as much sense as reducing the size of sodas.

But if you want to continue to be as a hapless member of a focus group, and let others decide for you how to live your life, go right ahead.



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:01 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!


You should know that no one is defending this Rappy.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:20 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

The tobacco companies colluded to hide the facts, and try to tell us something counter to what we already knew.... prolonged use of tobacco leads to cancer. ( The terms 'cancer sticks' and 'coffin nails' go back to the 1800's. )

That's not what we have here. No one is claiming that sugary sodas are 'healthy'.



Tobacco companies, for many years at least, never marketed tobacco as being healthy either. They promoted 'image'and used very sophisticated campaigns to link smoking with being successful, sexy, cool etc etc long after the health effects were well known.

Soft drink companies like Cocacola do the same. They never say healthy, but they make the same sort of links as above, despite the fact that their product contains an addictive drug and unhealthy levels of sugar.


Quote:

But if you want to continue to be as a hapless member of a focus group, and let others decide for you how to live your life, go right ahead.





But other already do decide. One Mayor deciding to put some limits around the size of drinks is not even going to put a pin prick size dent in the profit margins of these companies, who spend vast amounts of resources promoting health damaging, addictive products. And its not going to stop anyone drinking this shit. You just buy two, or three or five hundred.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:31 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
You should know that no one is defending this Rappy.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.



Maybe not on THIS particular issue, but some sure do seem to want to make a bogie man out of 'marketing', and the evils of trying to reach customers.

My point is that it's not something sinister or to be feared. Understood, perhaps, but not scorned. It's information.

And putting a 'pin prick' in the profit of beverage companies isn't the goal here, is it ? I thought it was to alert folks that drinking too much soda is bad for them. So, which is it ?

If you allow the govt to start making these decisions for you, what next ? This is beyond the proper function of govt. Period.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:37 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

Tobacco companies, for many years at least, never marketed tobacco as being healthy either



Maybe not 'healthy', bu the implication is clear enough....






" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:41 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Maybe not on THIS particular issue, but some sure do seem to want to make a bogie man out of 'marketing', and the evils of trying to reach customers.



It is pretty evil to be marketing something that is fundamentally bad for you. The tobacco companies were evil in my view.

Quote:

My point is that it's not something sinister or to be feared. Understood, perhaps, but not scorned. It's information.


It's not information at all, its a very complex way of influencing behaviour, and now used by media outlets and politicians. its the opposite of truth, its as stephen colbert puts it 'truthiness'. And yes, it is better if we understand how exactly we are being targeted and influenced, because mostly consumers are blind to it and companies prefer it that way.

Quote:

And putting a 'pin prick' in the profit of beverage companies isn't the goal here, is it ? I thought it was to alert folks that drinking too much soda is bad for them. So, which is it


I never said it was, I was referring to the possible influence of two different actions.

Quote:

If you allow the govt to start making these decisions for you, what next ? This is beyond the proper function of govt. Period.


I know, I know. "Gubmint bad, free market good" Repeat until your brain goes numb.

If we let the Mayor decide about soft drink sizes, next step auschwitz like concentration camps.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 1:46 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

Tobacco companies, for many years at least, never marketed tobacco as being healthy either



Maybe not 'healthy', bu the implication is clear enough....






You really don't read my responses, do you? I said 'in recent times'. In past times, it was advertised as healthy. But even after everyone knew how bad it was, they continued to market their product, never mentioning the whole disease and death thing, until evil governments steppped in and forced them to acknowledge the negative outcomes.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:04 PM

1KIKI

Today, scientists sound the alarm on other environmental dangers. Vested interests still hire their own scientists to confuse the issue. But in the end, nature will not be fooled. Neil deGrasse Tyson


I love it when people debate little Rappy with facts. It’s fun to watch his brain blow up.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:05 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Maybe not on THIS particular issue, but some sure do seem to want to make a bogie man out of 'marketing', and the evils of trying to reach customers.



Marketing is not bad, dishonest marketing is. One of the proper roles of government is to protect people form dishonest marketing. Now soda makers are not claiming it to be healthy or anything, nor are they hiding the amount of sugar in a soda, that is why this purposed law is stupid.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:09 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



And clearly, you don't read MY posts either. The ill effects of cigarette smoking was known well over 100 years ago.

*
Quote:

Harper's Weekly 04/11/1896


COFFIN NAILS.

MILLIONS OF MEN ARE DRIVING THEM HOME DAILY.
A CHAPTER FULL OF WARNING TO THOSE WHO
WOULD AVOID MENTAL AND MORAL DECAY.

An English Courtier said during Walter Raleigh's im-
prisonment that he deserved freedom, for he had done
more for mankind in introducing tobacco in Europe than
had Columbus by the discovery of the new world.

Amid luxury, folly, and vice, the pleasure of the hour
was enhanced and an affliction entailed on mankind that is
now being realized, 400 years later, and all the mischief
turned loose upon the world by that impish Pandora's Box
—Tobacco—is coming home keenly to this generation.

The alarming growth of the cigarette habit in the United
States is a sad commentary on our condition from an eco-
nomical, as well as an ethical, standpoint.




I mean, it's almost like living the saga of Battlestar Galactica, minus the Cylons and world ending wars. We keep living the same story, over and over, and act as if this has never happened before.

* Note - That isn't a typo. The date is correct. It reads 1896, over 116 years ago. ( Not 1986, or even 1996 )



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:10 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I love it when people debate little Rappy with facts. It’s fun to watch his brain blow up.



Only thing is, that never happens. I'm correctly making my point, with facts. It's just some love to look past the facts and continue on arguing, even when we might be on agreement with an issue.

Like here.



" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:13 PM

1KIKI

Today, scientists sound the alarm on other environmental dangers. Vested interests still hire their own scientists to confuse the issue. But in the end, nature will not be fooled. Neil deGrasse Tyson


THANKS for the laugh!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:24 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
THANKS for the laugh!



Dunning-Kruger ,exhibit A.





" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2012 2:36 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Quote:

Harper's Weekly 04/11/1896


COFFIN NAILS.

MILLIONS OF MEN ARE DRIVING THEM HOME DAILY.
A CHAPTER FULL OF WARNING TO THOSE WHO
WOULD AVOID MENTAL AND MORAL DECAY.

An English Courtier said during Walter Raleigh's im-
prisonment that he deserved freedom, for he had done
more for mankind in introducing tobacco in Europe than
had Columbus by the discovery of the new world.

Amid luxury, folly, and vice, the pleasure of the hour
was enhanced and an affliction entailed on mankind that is
now being realized, 400 years later, and all the mischief
turned loose upon the world by that impish Pandora's Box
—Tobacco—is coming home keenly to this generation.

The alarming growth of the cigarette habit in the United
States is a sad commentary on our condition from an eco-
nomical, as well as an ethical, standpoint.






They thought it was a disgusting and immoral habit, but were not really aware of the health effects.

Nevertheless, you are kind of proving my argument rather than your own in trying to prove that the tobacco industry undertook immoral and misleading campaigns to promote their product. Thank goodness for the actions of those terrible gubmits that stepped up and made them accountable.

Quote:

I mean, it's almost like living the saga of Battlestar Galactica, minus the Cylons and world ending wars. We keep living the same story, over and over, and act as if this has never happened before.




Really?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
This is a perfect example of why video games are MOSTLY a bad thing.
Tue, September 30, 2014 10:04 - 41 posts
Why doesn't anybody here ever bitch about the gravity of the ever-increasing Texting While Driving outbreak?
Tue, September 30, 2014 09:37 - 1 posts
Samuel L Jackson in "Blackish"
Tue, September 30, 2014 09:26 - 8 posts
GOP tries to convince voters that Republicans are actually human.
Tue, September 30, 2014 09:22 - 4 posts
If a bomb falls in Syria and nobody is watching CNN, MSNBC or FOX NEWS, does it make any sound?
Tue, September 30, 2014 09:20 - 1 posts
So, we bombed Syria last night.
Tue, September 30, 2014 09:13 - 10 posts
The United States of Pants Sh**ters
Tue, September 30, 2014 08:53 - 7 posts
Holder resigns.
Mon, September 29, 2014 19:56 - 44 posts
oddball question
Mon, September 29, 2014 19:49 - 40 posts
New Trend - Shoot the Unarmed Black Man
Mon, September 29, 2014 18:31 - 32 posts
More great moments from that religion of PEACE !
Mon, September 29, 2014 18:00 - 90 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine
Mon, September 29, 2014 17:51 - 407 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL

OUR SPONSORS