View Poll Results: What do you think we should do about the Obesity Epidemic?

Voters
72. You may not vote on this poll
  • We do nothing. People have the right to live unhealthily.

    48 66.67%
  • Use sin taxes.

    4 5.56%
  • Use regulations.

    1 1.39%
  • Combinations of methods to fight the Obesity Epidemic.

    17 23.61%
  • I don't know.

    2 2.78%
Page 22 of 38 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 372

Thread: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

  1. #211
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    My comment is accurate in both cases because it's based on a definition of faith not on the number of objects one has confidence in.
    It's inaccurate because you are ignoring the context in which faith is being used.

    The point is that arguing that trusting legislators is faith is not necessarily true. As an absolute statement, it is false.
    What, exactly, do you think I said that causes you to think that there was an absolute statement made which caused it to be necessary for you to claim that it is false to make such a statement? (Hint: you aren't even accurately portraying my comment that you responded to, since I was not talking about legislators in that instance AND i was talking about a very specific scenario)
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  2. #212
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    You're not talking about something that has ever actually gotten done, you're talking about something that has never gotten done.

    Even still, expecting something to get done simply because that is how things get done is an exercise in faith.

    If there was some prior history upon which to place that faith, then that'd be one thing. We're talking about placing one's faith upon something getting done that not only doesn't have a prior history of getting done, but actually has a prior history of getting ****ed up.

    that's adding a whole new level of faith into the equation.
    Many things have gotten done. And no, faith means, in context here, sitting back and waiting for it to happen. I believe in us working to make things happen, which includes us speaking to our representatives. The work government does is messy, as is all work for that matter, but those who complain about too often ignore how much has been done by people working through government.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #213
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    It's inaccurate because you are ignoring the context in which faith is being used.
    The contextual "explanation" that you provided - legislators vs. legislator - has no effect on what I'm arguing. The number of legislators is irrelevant.

    What, exactly, do you think I said that causes you to think that there was an absolute statement made which caused it to be necessary for you to claim that it is false to make such a statement? (Hint: you aren't even accurately portraying my comment that you responded to, since I was not talking about legislators in that instance AND i was talking about a very specific scenario)
    Well, I thought you said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Having faith in others to do their work in diligence is faith. Unless this can be achieved by a single person, you are espousing faith.
    If that comment is, in fact, yours, then you made an absolute statement. And in your "very specific scenario" which you said was "evenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes," your aforementioned statement remains not necessarily true for the reasons you ignored:

    First, you assume that the only means of evaluating legislators in their past record of dealing with this specific situation. That's not the case. Second, your statement is based on the premise that legislators remain the same as a group and as individuals. This is not true either.

    The main problem is that you have a very narrow definition of "proof" that doesn't necessarily apply.

  4. #214
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Many things have gotten done.
    As I said earlier, we're not talking about many things, we're talking about a specific thing.


    And no, faith means, in context here, sitting back and waiting for it to happen.
    That's not what faith means. In any context, but certainly not the context I have used the word in. I tend to use real definitions for words, not fake ones.

    I believe in us working to make things happen, which includes us speaking to our representatives.
    And one or two people can't do it alone. I have faith that I would do that for something I felt was a good idea. I don't have faith in other people doing it for this particular issue.

    The work government does is messy, as is all work for that matter, but those who complain about too often ignore how much has been done by people working through government.
    Much has been done by people working through the government. I'm not sure why you think that fact means this particular has any chance of working though. I accomplish tons of things every single day through hard, messy work, that doesn't mean I can accomplish pulling a rabbit out of Newt Gingrich's ass.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  5. #215
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    As I said earlier, we're not talking about many things, we're talking about a specific thing.




    That's not what faith means. In any context, but certainly not the context I have used the word in. I tend to use real definitions for words, not fake ones.



    And one or two people can't do it alone. I have faith that I would do that for something I felt was a good idea. I don't have faith in other people doing it for this particular issue.



    Much has been done by people working through the government. I'm not sure why you think that fact means this particular has any chance of working though. I accomplish tons of things every single day through hard, messy work, that doesn't mean I can accomplish pulling a rabbit out of Newt Gingrich's ass.
    Never suggested one or two. I suggest a majority of us quit complaining and actually participate. Nor is this comparable to pulling a rabbit out anyone's ass.

    BTW, if you follow the context, I was using a real definition. Being snarky isn't actually a good debate tactic . . . . just saying.


    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #216
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    The contextual "explanation" that you provided - legislators vs. legislator - has no effect on what I'm arguing. The number of legislators is irrelevant.
    The thing one is having faith in is irrelevant in your mind? Why is that?


    Well, I thought you said:
    I did say that. Now take a wild stab at who those "others" were and what their "work" was in that context?


    If that comment is, in fact, yours, then you made an absolute statement.
    Yes. About others doing their work in diligence. Not about legislators.

    And in your "very specific scenario" which you said was "evenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes," your aforementioned statement remains not necessarily true for the reasons you ignored:
    Now you are lying. You skipped about ten posts and ignored their content.

    First, you assume that the only means of evaluating legislators in their past record of dealing with this specific situation.
    If you try to base it on anything else but the available evidence, you are not basing it on proof. The only available evidence is what the legislators in general have doen when faced with such legislation. One or two individual legislators might be different from the rest as a whole, but they won't be able to pass **** all laws on their own.

    That's not the case.
    What proof can one have outside of all of the available evidence?

    Second, your statement is based on the premise that legislators remain the same as a group and as individuals. This is not true either.
    False. My statement is based on the premise that legislators remain the same types of people, not that they are the same as a group or individuals.

    The problem here is clearly that you cannot accurately assess my premises because you have false beliefs about what premises would be required to reach my conclusions.

    The main problem is that you have a very narrow definition of "proof" that doesn't necessarily apply.
    If by "narrow" you mean real, then yes I do have a narrow definition of proof.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  7. #217
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I suggest a majority of us quit complaining and actually participate.
    And what evidence exists which would suggest that this is possible with regard to obesity? Remember, we're specifically talking about an issue that is caused by people not getting off of their asses and doing something about it.


    Nor is this comparable to pulling a rabbit out anyone's ass.
    When you think about the issue we are talking about, getting people off of their asses and doing something is probably much more difficult than pulling a rabitt out of Newt's ass would be.

    BTW, if you follow the context, I was using a real definition. Being snarky isn't actually a good debate tactic . . . . just saying.
    You just said that faith means "sitting back and waiting for it to happen". That is a fake definition for Faith.

    And pretending that I'm being snarky by pointing out that fact is not a very good debate tactic. Of course, making up definitions for words and then pretending that the person you are debating with actually used such an imaginary definition is an even worse debate tactic.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #218
    Educator
    Chiefgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Lake Jem, FL pop:35
    Last Seen
    05-08-15 @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    If it were legal for medical insurance companies to deny payment for weight related maladies, I fully believe the obesity rate would drop. When you don't have to worry about how you were going to pay for it, there is little incentive to change your lifestyle.

    Except the whole "keep living" thing.....
    As a dreamer of dreams and a travellin' man, I have chalked up many a mile.
    Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks and I've learned much from both of their styles!

  9. #219
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    The thing one is having faith in is irrelevant in your mind? Why is that?
    No, the NUMBER of things one is having faith in is irrelevant to the point that I am making. I already clarified that a while ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    I did say that. Now take a wild stab at who those "others" were and what their "work" was in that context?
    You clarified that you were talking about legislators and "revenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes." We've already gone over this as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    Yes. About others doing their work in diligence. Not about legislators.
    Interesting, because in your initial response to me, you just said legislators.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Second: We're talking about a very specific situation: revenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes. In that instance, the legislators (plural) have proven themselves incompetent time and time again.

    Thus, it is an exercise in faith to assume that this time would be different since it would be a belief without proof.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    Now you are lying. You skipped about ten posts and ignored their content.
    No, in OUR conversation, you told me what specific situation you were referring to when you said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    We're talking about a very specific situation: revenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes. In that instance, the legislators (plural) have proven themselves incompetent time and time again.
    That's what I was referring to. If that's not what you meant by specific situation, then you shouldn't call me a "liar" from literally quoting your definition of specific situation. Quoting you is the exact opposite of lying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    If you try to base it on anything else but the available evidence, you are not basing it on proof. The only available evidence is what the legislators in general have doen when faced with such legislation. One or two individual legislators might be different from the rest as a whole, but they won't be able to pass **** all laws on their own.

    What proof can one have outside of all of the available evidence?
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    False. My statement is based on the premise that legislators remain the same types of people, not that they are the same as a group or individuals.

    The problem here is clearly that you cannot accurately assess my premises because you have false beliefs about what premises would be required to reach my conclusions.
    And that premise is not necessarily true either nor is it the only way to measure whether or not one should have confidence in legislators. Consequently, everything I said before applies to this premise as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case
    If by "narrow" you mean real, then yes I do have a narrow definition of proof.
    No, I mean narrow. You're defining proof simply as how legislators have behaved in the past specifically with regard to "revenue raised from sin taxes going primarily towards programs dealing with the effects of the products receiving those taxes." That's not the only measure of proof in this situation which is why your comments about it are off base.

    I don't know what your problem is today, bro, but you're acting like a real dick right now which is out of character for you (from what I've seen), I'm just gonna bow out of the conversation and let you go at this with Boo until you get over whatever your problem is.
    Last edited by ThePlayDrive; 05-30-12 at 06:50 PM.

  10. #220
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,185

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    We seem to be breaking down, wallowing in our debilitation and lack of willpower. There is a group of people in America that on one hand opines that we Americans should be allowed to slowly kill ourselves through unhealthy food, and on the other hand complain about increasing taxes for the costs of affording the results of said unhealthy living. You should not be able to have it both ways; either support unhealthy living and pay taxes because of it, or don't support unhealthy freedom and don't pay taxes for it.

    Look, we've got problems, and people need to start caring before America develops its own heart attack, per se.



    Overweight and Obesity in the U.S. Food Research & Action Center

    Supposedly 2/3 of all U.S. adults are overweight/obese. That's insane.



    Obesity Costs America $4 Billion Per Year At The Pump

    This directly affects the cost of our gasoline. This likely affects our airlines in some way as well.



    Health Buzz: 42 Percent of Americans Will Be Obese in 2030 - US News and World Report

    The supposed projection for obesity in America is that 42% of all adults will be obese by 2030, and 1/4 of that group severely obese. The next 100 years if nothing is done...?



    We need to act. If sin taxes "don't work" then perhaps we need to start applying regulations, because obviously education isn't reaching enough people. Charge people through their insurance for being obese. Don't feel sorry for them, because they know what they're doing. Don't charge them obscene amounts of money; start it very gradually, and moniter those results. Incorporate a "sin" tax as effectively as possible, like a scalpel. If taxing sugar and salt doesn't work, target doughnuts and fried food. Target what this group of people is inclined to devour.

    Add some sort of gradual and minute benefit to those with the foresight of healthy eating. Wean the fat man off the nipple of the taxpayer, and wake up the taxpayer who supports unhealthy behavior yet complains about rising taxes.

    You may think you have the freedom to kill yourself, but you don't have the freedom to kill America's future.

    If there are valid links that showcase the results of Europe's regulation of healthy living that'd be deeply appreciated.



    Butt out.


    I don't wish to live in a country where we legislate based on the lowest common denominator and the assumption that most people are dimwitted children with no self-control.

    Let nature take its course and it will sort itself out eventually.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

Page 22 of 38 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •