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 26 of 38 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 372

Thread: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

  1. #251
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Odd they want welfare folks to eat healthy, but not school children. Just seems odd to me.
    I'm not saying anyone doesn't want kids to eat healthier, it's just a common sense idea that I think all sides could get by easily.
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

  2. #252
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    As I understand it, it's not even our intake as much as it is our lethargy. WIC doesn't make you exercise for an hour a day.
    Being lethargic can come from eating bad in the first place. Besides that are you really going to try and argue that an average person could eat nothing but bacon and potatoes vs chicken and asparagus and the person eating the second choice wouldn't be better off?
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

  3. #253
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnWOlin View Post
    Being lethargic can come from eating bad in the first place. Besides that are you really going to try and argue that an average person could eat nothing but bacon and potatoes vs chicken and asparagus and the person eating the second choice wouldn't be better off?
    If they ate that and never exercised then they would get fat either way. Any nutritionist will tell you that eating right is only half the battle. You have to get out and be active also.

    But either way it is none of your buisness. Its none of mine. Its no ones buisness. Keep out of their kitchens.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  4. #254
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,106

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnWOlin View Post
    Being lethargic can come from eating bad in the first place. Besides that are you really going to try and argue that an average person could eat nothing but bacon and potatoes vs chicken and asparagus and the person eating the second choice wouldn't be better off?
    I'm reading "Born to Run" right now - a main discussion of which is a rather obscure tribe of Native Americans in the northern hills of Mexico who apparently are the worlds' all-time champion endurance athletes. Their diet, according to the author, is largely centered around corn-beer.

    You can eat alot of crap and as long as you are moving, you're fine. I had a friend who ate Burger King 2 meals a day and ran a 16:30 3-mile and could do 28 dead-hang pullups.

  5. #255
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Of course if you exercise vs needed calorie intake you will lose weight. Certain foods help metabolism though, and eating more healthy foods help as well. Look at most Asian cultures, obesity is far less prevalent and the typical diets there consist of fish and many leafy vegetables vs pork/beef corn/potato.
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

  6. #256
    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
    No, the NUMBER of things one is having faith in is irrelevant to the point that I am making.
    A legislator is a very different thing from the legislators. The legislators, as a whole, have very different characteristics from a legislator, singular.



    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.
    False. I was talking about people putting pressure on the legislators in that particular quote.

    Interesting, because in your initial response to me, you just said legislators.
    You realize that situation =/= people upon whom the faith is placed, right?



    No, in OUR conversation, you told me what specific situation you were referring to when you said:
    The first quote, the one that you claim is an absolute was not from "OUR' conversation. It triggered it, but it was from another conversation.


    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.
    you are misrepresenting the order of the quotes. I have made statements about the faith placed in the legislators. The one you originally quoted form me was not one of them.


    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.
    It doesn't have to be necessarily true.

    It only has to be likely to be true. The evidence suggests that there is little chance of it not being true. Thus it requires faith to conclude that it won't be true.

    Consequently, everything I said before applies to this premise as well.
    And it's wrong because you are operating under the false assumption that it must be true, rather than just being extremely likely to be true, in order to draw the conclusion that faith is required to assume the opposite.




    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."
    False. I'm defining proof as "the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact".

    The past history is merely the evidence that must be considered.

    Since the preponderance of available evidence supports the conclusion that they won't treat such sin tax revenue in the described manner, it would absolutely require a leap of faith to assume that they would go and do something different this time around.

    That's not the only measure of proof in this situation which is why your comments about it are off base.
    It is evidence which must be considered. If one chooses to ignore that evidence, they must be operating entirely on faith.

    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)
    It's not out of character for me at all. I always get this way when people try to "correct" me when they are misrepresenting my argument. Pretty much without fail I get like this. I'll be the first person to admit it. I'm a dick. An arrogant dick. I don't deny that at all. Especially in logical debates.

    That being said, there's one major problem with your assessment about my use of the word faith that you have still not considered.

    You can't have proof of something that has yet to occur. No matter how much evidence you have to suggest that something won't happen, you cannot prove that it won't happen. There's always a certain degree of faith involved in that which has yet to occur.

    For example, my wife has never stabbed me in my sleep before. All of the evidence available to me suggests that tonight she will not stab me in my sleep. Because of that, I have faith she that she won't stab me in my sleep tonight. That doesn't mean she won't stab me in my sleep. There's no proof that she won't, but I have faith in her not doing so, and that faith is based on the evidence.

    When I say I have no faith in the legislators doing the specific task being discussed, and that I have no faith in the people pressuring them to do said task, that simply means I do have faith in them not doing those things. I'm basing my faith on evidence, but I could be wrong. The fact that it has yet to occur means every possibility is open. It doesn't mean that there is no faith required to believe that one of those possibilities will come about.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  7. #257
    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'm not sure we're agreed what this was about. I told everyone I once weighted in excess of 350 lbs. At that time not only did I work every day, play racketball, and was politically active, I ran four miles a day and lifted weights. Exactly what part was me not getting off my ass?
    We're having a disconnect here. I would have faith in you doing what you say. I have no reason to doubt your commitment to the issue. I don't have faith in other people joining your cause in enough numbers to make the difference that would be required.
    Faith, as you defined it, is wating for others to do it. A belief that it will just happen.
    That's absolutely false. I have no idea where you got that idea from, but it's absolutely positively false on every single level.

    Sure, I do believe in people in general, and you may call that faith if you like.
    That's what I did. I called your faith in other people faith. I stated I don't have that same faith in others that you do.

    But I do not believe in just sitting back and believing they will do.
    I still have no idea where you got the idea that I said anything remotely close to this.

    I specifically laid out what I woould support, and what I was willing to do. That isn't faith by your definition.
    Well, technically it would be faith in yourself by the definition I have been using. That said, I would have faith in you to do it too. If you could do it alone, I'd have faith in it actually getting done. I don't have much faith in your ability to gather enough support for the cause to make a difference, though. That's because I lack faith in others to do that which would be required, not because I lack faith in you.

    Your definition and attitude seems rather defeatist to me. But, we should explore that elsewhere.
    My definition of faith is the definition of faith, and it's nothing like what you have said it is.

    My attitude is cynical, not defeatist. That doesn't mean I don't put forth the effort. Defeatist would be not putting forth any effort.

    Cynical just means I've fruitlessly beaten my head against the brick wall of humanity enough to know that most people would rather sit on their asses than make a difference. Thus, I seek to make a difference at a level I can actually have an effect at. Locally. While other people complain about hardships caused by people not having healthcare, I've organized fundraisers for people in my community who needed help paying for healthcare, for example.

    I have learned that our society is filled with people who want to help, as long as it's convenient. I can use that to my advantage to make very real, very important differences in people's lives on the small level. But it makes very real, and very important national level changes far more difficult.

    Basically, my choice to embrace cynicism has made me a far more effective activist.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #258
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnWOlin View Post
    Being lethargic can come from eating bad in the first place. Besides that are you really going to try and argue that an average person could eat nothing but bacon and potatoes vs chicken and asparagus and the person eating the second choice wouldn't be better off?
    There is a whole lot more to this.
    IMO, the bacon is good, for my diet, anyway (diabetic)
    We must exercise, all these labor saving devices are not necessarily good for our health.
    We must learn how to cook, how to make food taste good.
    We must wean ourselves from so much sugar and salt...this starts at day one, or even earlier.

  9. #259
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

    My current beliefs:

    1) Tax the incredibly unhealth & pre-made foods only, for now.
    2) Tax people for being overweight. Exclude muscle mass.
    3) Stop food corporations from brainwashing our young and impressionable children.
    4) Either support bad rights and the cost for those rights, or don't support said right and don't pay for the costs involving it.

  10. #260
    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
    We're having a disconnect here. I would have faith in you doing what you say. I have no reason to doubt your commitment to the issue. I don't have faith in other people joining your cause in enough numbers to make the difference that would be required.


    That's absolutely false. I have no idea where you got that idea from, but it's absolutely positively false on every single level.



    That's what I did. I called your faith in other people faith. I stated I don't have that same faith in others that you do.



    I still have no idea where you got the idea that I said anything remotely close to this.



    Well, technically it would be faith in yourself by the definition I have been using. That said, I would have faith in you to do it too. If you could do it alone, I'd have faith in it actually getting done. I don't have much faith in your ability to gather enough support for the cause to make a difference, though. That's because I lack faith in others to do that which would be required, not because I lack faith in you.



    My definition of faith is the definition of faith, and it's nothing like what you have said it is.

    My attitude is cynical, not defeatist. That doesn't mean I don't put forth the effort. Defeatist would be not putting forth any effort.

    Cynical just means I've fruitlessly beaten my head against the brick wall of humanity enough to know that most people would rather sit on their asses than make a difference. Thus, I seek to make a difference at a level I can actually have an effect at. Locally. While other people complain about hardships caused by people not having healthcare, I've organized fundraisers for people in my community who needed help paying for healthcare, for example.

    I have learned that our society is filled with people who want to help, as long as it's convenient. I can use that to my advantage to make very real, very important differences in people's lives on the small level. But it makes very real, and very important national level changes far more difficult.

    Basically, my choice to embrace cynicism has made me a far more effective activist.
    Cynical is not much better than defeatist. While I admire Don Quixote, but think most are more like Aldonza. They want to believe and when motivated will act. The problem is in the motivation.

    However, none of this really address what I have said. I said what I will support, under what conditions, and what I will do. I think we start at that level.

    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.

Page 26 of 38 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... 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
  •