detlef

The NY soda law

Recommended Posts

So government needs increasingly greater control as we slowly devolve, catering to the weak, the nonproductive, the dependant, a class that grows disproportionally being unconstrained by any natural laws,common sense, or personal judgement and sense of responsibility.

 

We'll it's all relative since your suggestion of letting people die in the streets certainly sounds like devolving to me. :shrug: Why do you hate civilization?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So government needs increasingly greater control as we slowly devolve, catering to the weak, the nonproductive, the dependant, a class that grows disproportionally being unconstrained by any natural laws,common sense, or personal judgement and sense of responsibility.

 

 

:lol:

 

 

What I'm saying is the most expensive medical procedures become a social service for those who can't pay for it whether you like it or not, and it will always be that way. I don't know what the silver bullet solution is. But we are in a health crisis that puts a tremendous burdern on our country and may eventually be the primary financial component of our downfall. Some sort of govt. intervention will be a necessary component of mitigating the issue. And we have not only failed to provide reasonable ideas, many of us can't even acknowledge the seriousness of it.

 

My buddy's wife, marathon runner, covered on insurance, had to pay 30K out of his pocket after coverage when she suffered a heart attack. While this is just one ancedotal quip on how we deal with escalating health care costs today, it's not uncommon and contradicts what you refer to as " natural laws,common sense, or personal judgement and sense of responsibility." The burden of responsibilty is being shifted to folk who are responsible and have insurance. Putting the burden on workers and business owners who are responsible, via free market dictation, is the status quo that has failed miserably. Call me a Socialist if you need to, but my only major point is that health care becoming nationalized on some level is a more realistic and responsible outlook than "let's just let everyone die."

 

While an encompassing modern day health program doesn't necessarily directly coordinate to the need for roads, railroads, law enforcement, fire services, public power...etc........it's pretty f'n close. And thank God, back in the day, your attitude wasn't prevelant...cause our country wouldn't have lasted past WW2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The present path is unsustainable. The balance is tipping. There are too few producers and far too many consumers who do not produce. These latter have become congenitally physchologically unable and unwilling to produce. We call their created dependancy and infantilism compassion. Creating an ever expanding class of permanently dependant is not compassion particularly when that so called compassion comes at the expense of decreasing freedom and imagination to produce. We have been on this pathway since before LBJ's war on poverty. The Great Society remains conspicuous in its absence. The destination of the present path is clear and yet some insist it is the only path. A paradigm shift will come. Whether it comes cataclysmatically from staying this devolving course over time, or comes sooner it will come.The civilized veneer some cling to believing in will evaporate before our eyes. There is no free lunch. There is only work.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

You can't blame a guy for trying to catch the huddle's biggest fish. Still, an A for effort in expressing yourself like a college freshman with his first thesaurus.

 

ETA:....I'm not purposely trying to be a dick (honestly).....but after my initial reading, I read it again and thought it might be serious and not bait. It sounds like Hunter Thompson was resurrected from the dead, high on bad acid, re-born as a fascist, while forgetting how to effectively synthesize his thoughts and write a punchline. The quantity of forced multi-syllabic and unnecessary placed adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and nouns kind of threw me for a loop.

Edited by bushwacked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am comfortable with letting the perpetually nonproductive die. I am comfortable stepping over bodies on the street until the dead collection squads round up the corpses.

 

 

So government needs increasingly greater control as we slowly devolve, catering to the weak, the nonproductive, the dependant, a class that grows disproportionally being unconstrained by any natural laws,common sense, or personal judgement and sense of responsibility.

 

 

Yes. It is kind of what civilized societies do so one does not step over piles of corpses.

 

You really need to get over yourself if you find that a government limit on the size of a soda you can buy is too extreme but piles of corpses in the street are reasonable. I'd call you an idiot but we all know you are just a tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, just perhaps, if the consequences of nonproductivity were born by the nonproductive they would change their behavior. Perhaps being willing to step over corpses means one will not actually have to do so all that often.

 

Using up the resources and wealth needed to seed the future to delay the inevitiable, maybe, is madness. I do not share the current denial of consequences view so in vogue. I understand death comes. I do not view it as a social tagedy that the nonproductive not be able to temporarily delay it. If there is a tragedy it is that human potential was wasted by those who enable sloth and feelings of entitlement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, just perhaps, if the consequences of nonproductivity were born by the nonproductive they would change their behavior. Perhaps being willing to step over corpses means one will not actually have to do so all that often.

 

Using up the resources and wealth needed to seed the future to delay the inevitiable, maybe, is madness. I do not share the current denial of consequences view so in vogue. I understand death comes. I do not view it as a social tagedy that the nonproductive not be able to temporarily delay it. If there is a tragedy it is that human potential was wasted by those who enable sloth and feelings of entitlement.

 

 

:lol:

 

Life certainly is like a box of chocolates, Forest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Life certainly is like a box of chocolates, Forest.

 

 

I've noticed that you have a tendency to not engage in the arguement, but rather to move instantly to attempts at insults. Given this is your "go to" position you are not very good at it. I also notice you like to speak for everyone. You use the terms "we all" or "everybody" frequently when you post. You need to feel your position is the universal consensus, or nearly so. You seem to need that comfort zone. I do wonder, sometimes, whether others really want you as the spokesperson for the group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually applaud DW's rather complete stance on the topic, assuming that this is truly how he feels. I am not prepared to give up the notion that a society should ultimately care about one another enough to provide a safety net, so we will certainly have to agree to disagree on that level. However, if you're prepared to go to the wall to defend everyone's right to be an idiot, you should at least be prepared to truly come to grips with the consequences of that.

 

And, again assuming that he's being serious here, at least he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed that you have a tendency to not engage in the arguement, but rather to move instantly to attempts at insults. Given this is your "go to" position you are not very good at it. I also notice you like to speak for everyone. You use the terms "we all" or "everybody" frequently when you post. You need to feel your position is the universal consensus, or nearly so. You seem to need that comfort zone. I do wonder, sometimes, whether others really want you as the spokesperson for the group.

 

 

:lol:

 

Dude, you advocate piles of fat corpses in the streets as your version of reasonableness. I'll take your criticisms with the appropriate grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Dude, you advocate piles of fat corpses in the streets as your version of reasonableness. I'll take your criticisms with the appropriate grain of salt.

 

 

I did not advocate for corpulent corpses in the streets. I acknowledged I would accept some corpses, regardless of their heft, as the price of imbuing society with a sense of responsibility. My belief is that very quickly people would learn responsible behavior if the consequences of their actions fell to them, and their networks of family and friends. My belief is that in a very short time the sum total of suffering would decrease, life expectancy would rise, mortality rates would drop, all because motivated people would take action on their own behalf. The path of learned helplessness has been tried now for multiple generations. It is not working. It is getting worse. We do not need to fix it by seeking more of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not advocate for corpulent corpses in the streets. I acknowledged I would accept some corpses, regardless of their heft, as the price of imbuing society with a sense of responsibility. My belief is that very quickly people would learn responsible behavior if the consequences of their actions fell to them, and their networks of family and friends. My belief is that in a very short time the sum total of suffering would decrease, life expectancy would rise, mortality rates would drop, all because motivated people would take action on their own behalf. The path of learned helplessness has been tried now for multiple generations. It is not working. It is getting worse. We do not need to fix it by seeking more of it.

 

This path of "learned helplessness" is the result of policy that was put in place to dig us out of a massive hole that staying out of the way got us into.

 

So, even if what you're saying, that things are only getting worse, is true. All that shows is that, now, both strategies have been proven to be bad. The inhumane manner in which workers were treated in the early part of the 1900s and the complete and total collapse of our markets showed why we simply can't just stay out of the way. Now, perhaps, we're learning that it does barely more good if any, to involve ourselves.

 

So, bash away at the short comings of our government's increased involvement in our lives, but don't pretend that we were doing any better before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This path of "learned helplessness" is the result of policy that was put in place to dig us out of a massive hole that staying out of the way got us into.

 

So, even if what you're saying, that things are only getting worse, is true. All that shows is that, now, both strategies have been proven to be bad. The inhumane manner in which workers were treated in the early part of the 1900s and the complete and total collapse of our markets showed why we simply can't just stay out of the way. Now, perhaps, we're learning that it does barely more good if any, to involve ourselves.

 

So, bash away at the short comings of our government's increased involvement in our lives, but don't pretend that we were doing any better before.

 

 

I understand, and perhaps I am mistaken, that it was not government involvement that addressed the plight of the workers in the early part of the 19th century, a time and the conditions of which are long gone. I understood that it was the workers, working to band together, who changed matters, and that to do so they had to fight some rather ruthless capitalist and the government. I understand that government did not lead, but rather opposed, and then eventually followed by acknowleging a fait accompli.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I acknowledged I would accept some corpses, regardless of their heft, as the price of imbuing society with a sense of responsibility.

 

 

:lol: Obestity is already the #1 preventable cause of death in America.

 

You find corpses in the street reasonable, I find government enforced portion control more reasonable. To each their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Dude, you advocate piles of fat corpses in the streets as your version of reasonableness. I'll take your criticisms with the appropriate grain of salt.

 

How much salt? It is not good for us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand, and perhaps I am mistaken, that it was not government involvement that addressed the plight of the workers in the early part of the 19th century, a time and the conditions of which are long gone. I understood that it was the workers, working to band together, who changed matters, and that to do so they had to fight some rather ruthless capitalist and the government. I understand that government did not lead, but rather opposed, and then eventually followed by acknowleging a fait accompli.

 

It was the 20th century, and yes, you're right that it was the workers who banded together. Formring unions that are now about as oft-vilified as the government programs that rose to address mess left by still more reckless behavior by essentially the same group that inflicted such inhumane conditions on the workers.

 

In other words, we should be careful about which good old days we harken back to. That the decline over the last few generations you speak of was preceded by some pretty effed up times as well. Each effed up for exactly opposite reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Obestity is already the #1 preventable cause of death in America.

 

You find corpses in the street reasonable, I find government enforced portion control more reasonable. To each their own.

 

 

I find both to be equally unreasonable. I cannot believe that anybody truly believes that government limiting the size of SOME sodas served is going to accomplish anything useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find both to be equally unreasonable. I cannot believe that anybody truly believes that government limiting the size of SOME sodas served is going to accomplish anything useful.

 

 

I'll note you are crazy too. Corpses in the street or requiring the fat to buy 2 sodas instead of one. If you can't see the difference in reasonableness then you are a lunatic.

 

ETA - you seirously have to be jerking my chain. You got me and my vote for FOTY. :tup::bow:

Edited by Clubfoothead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll note you are crazy too. Corpses in the street or requiring the fat to buy 2 sodas instead of one. If you can't see the difference in reasonableness then you are a lunatic.

 

ETA - you seirously have to be jerking my chain. You got me and my vote for FOTY. :tup::bow:

 

 

Unreasonable in terms of not being well thought out and having a chance of succeeding. We will not just let people die in the streets, not going to happen. We are also not going to change the eating habits of a couple generations worth of Americans with a law in NYC which only limits what restaurants can serve. (Nothing to stop me from walking into a store in NYC and buying a 2L bottle of Coke and drinking the whole thing.)

 

I am not fishing, I've said in this thread from the beginning that this is not going to accomplish any good, and really goes in the wrong direction of limiting the rights of individuals to do something in the hope that it prevents abuse of the product.

 

I'd be in favor of requiring warning, content labeling, and other things to help educate. But the law as I understand it doesn't appear to be addressing the real problem. Outlaw sodas if they're so bad (cannot because the industry is too big) or tax it to make it more expensive so people will drink less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we need more corpses than the current system provides?

 

Here is a link to a Reuters article on a Harvard study that links 45,000 US deaths per year to lack of insurance. It's a few years old so maybe we average even more dead bodies now.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E58G6W520090917

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance the soda in that icon can be made larger?

 

 

Sure but the bag of popcorn shrinks at the same time. You have to find the optimum mix. And then get approval from your government approved dietian before buying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure but the bag of popcorn shrinks at the same time. You have to find the optimum mix. And then get approval from your government approved dietian before buying it.

 

Approved, but the soda is replaced with prune juice and the popcorn is replaced with corn on the cob.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.