Milk Or Water: California Bill Aims To Curb Kids’ Soda Drinking At Restaurants

holbritter said:

Yup, me too. It was called 'Parenting' Something that seems not to be as important these days. But why bother when the government can parent for you?

Click to expand...

Well, the government decided to parent a long time ago when it established standards and restrictions through Child Labor laws. And guess what? Parents still managed to parent without sending their kids off to the mines.

This mindset that some of you have that forces you to cry "liberty against tyranny" every time the government yawns is obtuse. If you have an argument, declare it. Defaulting to the cliches is senseless. And guess what? You asking for soda, instead of milk or water, is a parenting decision. So even if this Bill passes, which it won't, you still can **** your kids up. Yay liberty!

Nap said:

Then what is the point of the bill?

Click to expand...

To give the rabid right something to howl about... eace

Helix said:

i don't support this. Democrats need to focus on more important issues. this is the kind of thing that results in them being defeated by cultists.

Click to expand...

They can't focus on more important things. It's the trivial things like this that allows them to avoid having to define a plan for the future anymore. And then when things get too difficult in Washington, Democrats and Republicans avoid by entertaining us with stagnate discussions about gun control or abortion.

Renae said:

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/08/16/kids-soda-restaurants/

My sig is proving too accurate, it's scary.

Click to expand...

What we really need are laws to wean Californians off the God-rejecting, voter-frauding, sexually-perverted, communistic, slavery-creating democrat party.

Helix said:

i don't support this. Democrats need to focus on more important issues. this is the kind of thing that results in them being defeated by cultists.

Click to expand...

Like the Rabid right does, attempting to prohibit same sex marriage and equal treatment in civil law. Or what citizens do while the anthem plays. I'd opine what elects cult leaders was the vast majority of so-called conservative leaders unable to close the racial, 'nativist' Pandora's Box Reagan opened. Remember the cultists seized control of a major party and their Pied Piper defeated a slew of GOP rivals to seize control. The GOP leadership cringes in fear while calculating what they can carve out for themselves while a modern day Caligula rants in the White House...

This might be a bit of a non event given the fight over healthcare which the rabid right uses to proclaim socialism is alive and well after 'we defeated' the E-Vile Empire...

Focus... eace

MSgt said:

They can't focus on more important things. It's the trivial things like this that allows them to avoid having to define a plan for the future anymore. And then when things get too difficult in Washington, Democrats and Republicans avoid by entertaining us with stagnate discussions about gun control or abortion.

Click to expand...

i'd recommend hyper-focusing on job issues. for example, i have to pretend to be a contractor so that they can pay me about half. if i quit my job, i'll go somewhere else where i can pretend to be a contractor and get paid about half. my entirely industry works under this scam. skip the nanny bull**** and help me out with that.

they can run against Trump and his cult for now, but that's not a long term strategy. be the party of the worker again, and skip this piddly nanny bull****.

It is a silly law, and it only does more damage to the state: when people look at it from the outside.

notquiteright said:

Like the Rabid right does, attempting to prohibit same sex marriage and equal treatment in civil law. Or what citizens do while the anthem plays. I'd opine what elects cult leaders was the vast majority of so-called conservative leaders unable to close the racial, 'nativist' Pandora's Box Reagan opened. Remember the cultists seized control of a major party and their Pied Piper defeated a slew of GOP rivals to seize control. The GOP leadership cringes in fear while calculating what they can carve out for themselves while a modern day Caligula rants in the White House...

This might be a bit of a non event given the fight over healthcare which the rabid right uses to proclaim socialism is alive and well after 'we defeated' the E-Vile Empire...

Focus... eace

Click to expand...

the right can't or won't even properly define socialism. however, it has successfully gerrymandered itself into almost invincible power and has even convinced poor workers that the path to prosperity is letting the hyperwealthy raid the treasury again and again. FFS, fight back with a focused message, Democrats. fighting Republicans with Democrats sometimes feels like showing up to a gun fight armed with spit balls.

I think the Bill is great. In fact I think we should also extend it to welfare recipients as soda is the number one purchase with food stamps.

We could put up signs in grocery stores and have checkout tellers suggest to welfare families that they shouldn't buy soda as well as have concerned citizens take video of them using their SNAP benefits for unhealthy sugar drinks so later on some government bureaucrat can later contact them to explain the error of their way or 'other' measures.

You know,...for their own good.





https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html

Helix said:

i'd recommend hyper-focusing on job issues. for example, i have to pretend to be a contractor so that they can pay me about half. if i quit my job, i'll go somewhere else where i can pretend to be a contractor and get paid about half. my entirely industry works under this scam. skip the nanny bull**** and help me out with that.

they can run against Trump and his cult for now, but that's not a long term strategy. be the party of the worker again, and skip this piddly nanny bull****.

Click to expand...

"They" as in private industry or government work?

And yes. They really should focus expressly on the working class instead of allowing the Right to get away with the illusion that by catering to the wealthy the middle class will reap the benefits. That Trickle-Down crap that they keep pushing by another name has proven to be piss.

Anarchon said:

Then what use is it? What is the reason for the bill's existence?

Click to expand...

As usual, they are just getting their foot in the door. It's just a start. Standard tactic.

MSgt said:

"They" as in private industry or government work?

And yes. They really should focus expressly on the working class instead of allowing the Right to get away with the illusion that by catering to the wealthy the middle class will reap the benefits. That Trickle-Down crap that they keep pushing by another name has proven to be piss.

Click to expand...

i currently work in private industry. i spent many years in public research, as well. the pay was lousy, but the benefits were good. as for the rest of your post, i agree.

Nap said:

Water and milk are typically options for which a person could choose already. If parents can still ask for the soda, then how does that cut down on the amount of soda?

Click to expand...

It shifts it from a default to an option.

A decision the parent makes instead of just goes along with.

We did not evolve (or god didn't make us, if you need that option), to eat anywhere near as much sugar as we do.

Lots of health costs derive from it.

And we ALL pay the price.

(Plus profits)

JMR said:

The kid's meal comes with milk or water. If the parent would like to feed their child soda, they can purchase it. Perhaps more parents may consider encouraging a healthier drink.

Click to expand...

imo, the bill is ridiculous. What you seem to be saying is parents in CA need the CA govt. to help them raise their kids. My parents had no trouble instructing me on what beverage I should have with a meal. Why just milk or water? Is orange juice not good enough for you. How about V-8 or cranberry juice? So glad I do not live in CA.

dobieg said:

I think the Bill is great. In fact I think we should also extend it to welfare recipients as soda is the number one purchase with food stamps.

We could put up signs in grocery stores and have checkout tellers suggest to welfare families that they shouldn't buy soda as well as have concerned citizens take video of them using their SNAP benefits for unhealthy sugar drinks so later on some government bureaucrat can later contact them to explain the error of their way or 'other' measures.

You know,...for their own good.





https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html

Click to expand...

I'd be OK with no junk food being purchasable with food stamps.

Why subsidize future health insurance premium increases so the sugar lobby can make profits?

Renae said:

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/08/16/kids-soda-restaurants/

My sig is proving too accurate, it's scary.

Click to expand...

This bill makes no sense on a number of levels. Most restaurants already have milk or juice as the 'default' with children's meals. Why not include other healthy alternatives? But the key thing is that water is essentially the default already -- you have to order and pay for something else.

This is a stepping stone bill to further restrictions, and campaign fodder in a state that seems to love layering on regulations.

EMNofSeattle said:

Yet.... and the fact is when they do finally ban it you as a good liberal will be all on board, it’s in the name of “public health” afterall.

Click to expand...

And when the United States disbands you'll cheer for that, because you like small government and all.

I love making up opinions for people so that I can attack it. It's way simpler than actually reading what they write.

Deuce said:

It just makes the "default" choice milk or water. Soda is still available by request. In reality, the bill accomplishes very little other than making the children of a few lazy parents buy healthier beverages.

Deal with it.

Click to expand...

If the bill accomplishes very little, while subsequently making otherwise legal businesses subject to costs (reprint menus, change beverage stock, staff training and enforcement, etc.) or face fines, then it is simply bad legislation that should be opposed.

It's also part of a larger trend of legislatures putting the onus on service-sector businesses to solve the nation's social and environmental ills. It's misguided and unnecessarily punitive.

Nap said:

I'm curious as to how you even violate this law. Say the menu advertises it as coming with milk or water it would be considered the "default", I don't see why it would stop the worker from still simply asking "What would you like to drink with that?"

Click to expand...

Red:
From what I can tell, to violate the law, the restaurant's menu would have to designate in its menu(s) or advertizing in CA that the children's meal comes with something other than water, sparkling water, or flavored water (non-sugared variety), as specified, or unflavored milk or a nondairy milk alternative.

Given the bill's language, restaurants have several options:

• List one of the indicated beverages as the drink that comes with the children's meal.
• Present a la carte menus that designate children's portions but without calling something a children's meal.
• Say nothing about what drink accompanies a children's meal

Basically, the bill stipulates the nature of what is advertised and/or published as the drink that comes with children's meals, not what's done in practice.


Blue:
I think what the bill is going for is that servers/cashiers can ask that question, the thinking being that it's less likely that they would ask that because the meal comes with a drink. Thus rather than prompting customers to indicate a drink, servers/cashiers would hear the request for a children's meal and not ask, "What would you like with that drink." Customers would have to initiate a desire for a substitution by asking something to the effect of, "May I have 'such and such' instead of [default beverage], please?" Obviously, the order taking process will vary by type of establishment and how children's items are presented:

• Fast food and others having predefined children's meals --> Order takers may or may not ask. Depends on the profit profile of the default drink vs. that of alternatives. (Same selling principle as that applicable to waiters asking if one cares for wine or a cocktail when at a "white tablecloth" restaurant.)
• Schools --> Order takes almost certainly won't ask whether one wants an alternative to the default beverage.
• Full and limited service restaurants --> Order taking process will be based on what information waiters need to know and on beverage profit profiles.

It's probably worth noting that in a human-conducted order-taking process as it occurs now, this bill has little to no material impact. Prospectively and when the order-taking process becomes automated, however, the bill may have a small impact, that of kids just drinking the beverage that comes with a children's meal rather than bothering/remembering to expressly ask for a sweetened beverage.

Deuce said:

Jesus Christ the bill doesn't actually stop you from buying your kid a coke calm the **** down

Click to expand...

Then what is the point of such a bill in the first place?

It's overreach, plain and simple.

trouble13 said:

I was never big soda drinker either but when I went on Atkins I had to eliminate it completely. It was adjustment learning to drink black coffee and unsweetened tea, but now I'm off Atkins and still don't use sugar in my drinks. I mostly drink water with some lemon juice in it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Coffee: the pink packets

I drink whatever brand of artificially sweetened ice tea powder I can find, usually Kroger "Lite" Peach Iced Tea, which is sorta like Crystal Lite Diet Peach Iced tea. I might add 1/3 of a packet to 24 oz of ice water, so it's not even really all that concentrated, just a pinch of flavor, like your lemon water.
If I'm on the road I look for the Diet Snapple version, which is pretty okay, even the kids think it's pretty good.
Being diabetic and thirsty is remarkably difficult in this world, the SUGARY drinks make up about 99.99999 percent of every shelf in every store, you almost can't get away from it.

JMR said:

Many studies have linked diet soda with weight gain. The more diet soda drunk, the more pounds gained.

Click to expand...

Yes I heard that. It is remarkable how the body responds to these tricks.

MSgt said:

The same point that going after cigarette smoking had: to maybe change the culture for the better. We are hardly the cigarette-smoking culture of yesteryear when Fred Flintstone smoked up on television.

View attachment 67238324

Yet, you can still go by cigarettes. Liberty did not die. You want your kid to have soda? Buy him a soda. Crisis averted.

Click to expand...

Watch, they'll be calling them "Freedom Spritzers" now, just like those "Freedom Fries".

holbritter said:

Yup, me too. It was called 'Parenting' Something that seems not to be as important these days. But why bother when the government can parent for you?

Click to expand...

It's a message TO parents.
Oh wait, I forgot, we should all be going to church three times a week and learning our parenting skills and getting tips there instead, like in the church social afterward where they have all the soda you can get your hands on.

God forbid a state takes action to give parents a little leg up, how unthinkable!

"Sorry Junior, see the sign? That kids meal only comes with milk or water (little white lie) so take your pick."

holbritter said:

Yes, those dirty little soda drinkers. They can now be looked upon as second class citizens by the water drinkers.

Side question: Will they still serve water when the drought hits again? I though CA had such big restrictions on water.

Click to expand...

Yeah, we're all drinking from the one water toilet we're still allowed to have.