• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bloomberg Backs Plan to Limit Arrests for Marijuana

So smoking pot won't affect health costs? Why the hell is thier a stop smoking campaign. Statists, are so confusing sometimes.... :lol:

Pot smoking affects health, of course. I have no idea how the two effects would offset each other.
 
But we should make Marijuana legal, but outlaw big sodas..... yeah that makes sense.

No, I obviously didn't say that. Personally I think Bloomberg's plan is idiotic, and I would legalize pot.
 
But we should make Marijuana legal, but outlaw big sodas..... yeah that makes sense.

I don't see the problem in this. He's wanting to decriminalize marijuana possession, so prisons won't be filled with people who committed "petty" crimes. He doesn't want to ban soda's all together, but just limit the huge sizes. Soda is probably terrible for you, and as much of an obesity epidemic as there is, especially with younger kids, I don't really see the problem with this. Or maybe I'm missing something....
 
I don't see the problem in this. He's wanting to decriminalize marijuana possession, so prisons won't be filled with people who committed "petty" crimes. He doesn't want to ban soda's all together, but just limit the huge sizes. Soda is probably terrible for you, and as much of an obesity epidemic as there is, especially with younger kids, I don't really see the problem with this. Or maybe I'm missing something....


You have a right to be a fat **** if you so choose. :prof
 
You have a right to be a fat **** if you so choose. :prof

This ignores the spillover effect which forces associated with the majority of the population trajecting towards obesity. Even though you might not realize it, you will eventually be forced to bare the costs associated with an obese population.

For example, obesity puts a $190 billion cost on health care, and continues to grow.
 
This ignores the spillover effect which forces associated with the majority of the population trajecting towards obesity. Even though you might not realize it, you will eventually be forced to bare the costs associated with an obese population.

For example, obesity puts a $190 billion cost on health care, and continues to grow.

Shouldn't they pay more for their health care?
 
People can have predispositions to obesity. Not all people who are overweight have terrible health habits.
 
You can take measures such as education. Let people choose how they want to live their lives.

Well, that gets into other issues such, such as people who eat unhealthy food because it is cheaper. The United States subsidizes unhealthy food, and its cheaper, which is partly why we see obesity higher in poorer populations.
 
Well, that gets into other issues such, such as people who eat unhealthy food because it is cheaper. The United States subsidizes unhealthy food, and its cheaper, which is partly why we see obesity higher in poorer populations.

Yes, that is a whole other can of worms.
 
Shouldn't they pay more for their health care?

Of course. My point is, why should everybody pay more (and in more implicit ways than health care costs)?
 
People can have predispositions to obesity. Not all people who are overweight have terrible health habits.

That the current proportion of obesity has diverged from its steady state is simply a matter of fact. 37.5% of the American population are not genetically predisposed to obesity; i would be shocked if it was greater than 1%.
 
I must have misread your statement then. No, everyone shouldn't pay for fatty. Agreed.

How about U.S. companies who lose productivity because obese workers are more likely to need sick days due to health issues caused by obesity? Or how about we think in terms in opportunity costs: how many less surgeries will a surgeon be able to preform as more and more of his/her patients become obese?

This is a topic in which many people miss the forest for the trees.
 
How about U.S. companies who lose productivity because obese workers are more likely to need sick days due to health issues caused by obesity? Or how about we think in terms in opportunity costs: how many less surgeries will a surgeon be able to preform as more and more of his/her patients become obese?

This is a topic in which many people miss the forest for the trees.

There are all kinds of indirect costs. For example, higher fuel costs and the need for wider seats on airplanes, ever larger portion sizes at restaurants (even if you don't want a pound of food), etc.
 
This ignores the spillover effect which forces associated with the majority of the population trajecting towards obesity. Even though you might not realize it, you will eventually be forced to bare the costs associated with an obese population.

For example, obesity puts a $190 billion cost on health care, and continues to grow.


So, then tax soda more?
 
So, then tax soda more?

That is (IMO) the most effective idea. However, disincentivizing the bulk-sales marketing technique should have a similar (albeit less profound) effect.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom