• 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!

New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks

ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. It takes no "trial run" to see if requiring the purchase of two 16 oz. cups of soda pop is better than allowing the purchase of one 32 oz. cup of soda pop. If someone wants 32 oz. of soda pop then they will buy it, even if made slightly less convenient and slightly more costly by the gov't. At some point, by making it hard enough to get legally, an alternate market will emerge to supply that want, beyond the reach of the law, such as we now see for marijuana. ;-)
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except that in this case it is true. This ban of bloombergs only covers select stores. It is still legal for grocery stores to sell 16oz soda's or larger. As such the product is still being legally allowed. What Bloomberg has created here is an ineqality in how the law is applied. It is OK for X store to sell this but not Y store.
Click to expand...

Stores don't have a right to sell whatever product they like.

Do you know why grocery stores are not included (hint: it has to do with regulation of commerce)?
 
Centinel said:
Holy sh1t! That is scary. So whatever they decide to legislate is fine by you?
Click to expand...

If they want to mandate the wearing of pink in their own locale, why the **** should I give a ****? It's not like there are any human rights violations going on.
 
Shouldn't people make their own choices for themselves? Why is it necessary for the government to regulate them? That is my issue with this entire thing. It wasn't a group that made the proposal, it was the mayor. A unelected board is going to make the decision. This is bad governing.
 
Hmm.. what I find odd is that when I watched this on FOX news last week, the women were throwing a tizzy over government intrusion on their 44oz soda, but they have no problem with government intrusion on marriage and a woman's body.

Wtf?! :: scratches head ::
 
Flippinfunky said:
Hmm.. what I find odd is that when I watched this on FOX news last week, the women were throwing a tizzy over government intrusion on their 44oz soda, but they have no problem with government intrusion on marriage and a woman's body.

Wtf?! :: scratches head ::
Click to expand...

Yah, that is wrong too.
 
Tucker Case said:
If it's bad governing, it's ultimately brought on by bad voting. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Ok, so the people of NY voted poorly...or not. Who am I to say? But the act that they are proposing limits choices. That is what is wrong here.
 
The way I see it, "soda" isn't what's making people fat...poor choices are. This is taking personal responsibility away from people. It's like blaming cheeseburgers for being over weight when in reality, you dont HAVE to eat cheeseburgers.

In an effort to curb smoking, Washington State voters approved a tax on cigarettes(28 bucks a carton)...if people want to smoke, they can pay a higher price for it and contribute to our local economy at the same time...our personal responsibility remains though...we get to decide what's best, or not best for us.


*(However, I fully support our Government requiring schools to provide healthier lunches for our kids, as it's a different situation)
 
Blue_State said:
Shouldn't people make their own choices for themselves? Why is it necessary for the government to regulate them? That is my issue with this entire thing. It wasn't a group that made the proposal, it was the mayor. A unelected board is going to make the decision. This is bad governing.
Click to expand...

That's right!! If I choose to rape a little girl, why do we need the govt to step in and stop me? :roll:

And people who think realize that the mayor doesn't make the law
 
sangha said:
That's right!! If I choose to rape a little girl, why do we need the govt to step in and stop me? :roll:

And people who think realize that the mayor doesn't make the law
Click to expand...
When you do that, you're making a choice for the little girl as well.

You should have the liberty to make your own choices as long as those choices don't impinge on someone else. Drink a barrel of soda every day, get fat, live with the results of your actions. Assault a child, you've hurt the child by your actions, and that's wrong.
 
Dittohead not! said:
When you do that, you're making a choice for the little girl as well.
Click to expand...

How dare she or anyone else limit my liberty!! :roll:

You should have the liberty to make your own choices as long as those choices don't impinge on someone else. Drink a barrel of soda every day, get fat, live with the results of your actions. Assault a child, you've hurt the child by your actions, and that's wrong.
Click to expand...

When those people get diabetes, heart disease, etc, it does impinge on others
 
Flippinfunky said:
Hmm.. what I find odd is that when I watched this on FOX news last week, the women were throwing a tizzy over government intrusion on their 44oz soda, but they have no problem with government intrusion on marriage and a woman's body.

Wtf?! :: scratches head ::
Click to expand...




sure you did. :roll:
 
sangha said:
That's right!! If I choose to rape a little girl, why do we need the govt to step in and stop me? :roll:

And people who think realize that the mayor doesn't make the law
Click to expand...



Why would that be your first thought of an example? :shock:


Your extremist logic is quite extreme.
 
sangha said:
How dare she or anyone else limit my liberty!! :roll:



When those people get diabetes, heart disease, etc, it does impinge on others
Click to expand...




I think you get it. but letting on that you do spoils your fun.... You have the right, or should have the right to do what you want as long as it does not intefere with the rights of others. Raping little girls, (your strange example), infringes on that little girls right, and therefore it is not your right to rape her.

Simple really.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think you get it. but letting on that you do spoils your fun.... You have the right, or should have the right to do what you want as long as it does not intefere with the rights of others. Raping little girls, (your strange example), infringes on that little girls right, and therefore it is not your right to rape her.

Simple really.
Click to expand...


People have a right to vote to have certain morality-based legislation passed in their local region so that people who live that that region conform to the norms defined by that legislation so long as that legislation does not violate the basic human rights of anyone living in that region.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think you get it. but letting on that you do spoils your fun.... You have the right, or should have the right to do what you want as long as it does not intefere with the rights of others. Raping little girls, (your strange example), infringes on that little girls right, and therefore it is not your right to rape her.

Simple really.
Click to expand...

I get it, but I'm not sure you do

Loony libertarians have argued, in this thread, that limiting liberty is a bad thing. They did not qualify it as you just did
 
sangha said:
How dare she or anyone else limit my liberty!! :roll:



When those people get diabetes, heart disease, etc, it does impinge on others
Click to expand...

There you do have a point, as long as the public is paying for their health care in one way or another.

Solution: Make fat people pay more for health insurance, then create a pool of money to be used when other fat people get diabetes and so one. Not all overweight are going to get those diseases, but, that way people who make poor choices will be paying for their own poor choices.
 
I like the law, but it's incomplete.

People can still get free refills and buy 2 16oz drinks.

Maybe taxation would be a more efficient and profitable route.
 
sangha said:
I get it, but I'm not sure you do

Loony libertarians have argued, in this thread, that limiting liberty is a bad thing. They did not qualify it as you just did
Click to expand...



Probably because, it's not the libertarians who are "looney", but the individual, who for some reason, didn't get what the libertarian was talking about when he discussed liberty...



Here let me help you with a definition, so that you may up your status in this conversation, and join us at the level everyone else is.


personal liberty 
noun
the liberty of an individual to do his or her will freely except for those restraints imposed by law to safeguard the physical, moral, political, and economic welfare of others.

Personal liberty | Define Personal liberty at Dictionary.com


I hope that this endeavors you to find what you are so obviously, missing.
 
Dittohead not! said:
There you do have a point, as long as the public is paying for their health care in one way or another.

Solution: Make fat people pay more for health insurance, then create a pool of money to be used when other fat people get diabetes and so one. Not all overweight are going to get those diseases, but, that way people who make poor choices will be paying for their own poor choices.
Click to expand...

You have an odd understanding of what insurance is

True, overweight people are at a higher risk, but insurance is meant to spread and equalize the costs.

But either way, it seems we can can agree a few things

1) Limiting liberty is not inherently wrong
2) Limiting liberty is a legitimate function of govt (depending on the circumstances)
3) Limiting choice is not inherently wrong and is a legitimate govt function (again, depending on the circumstances)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom