Citing Obesity of Children, County Bans Fast-Food Toys

digsbe said:

Kids are obese because parents feed them crap and the kids live very sedentary lives. The government shouldn't ban any food for any reason (unless it's poisoned or something, that's where the FDA can step in and ban it). Really the only thing the government should be allowed to do is have intense PE exercises in public schools and encourage kids to stop sitting in front of a TV and computer and go out and do something.

Click to expand...

Nobody is saying that the Government is banning food.

The issue is about banning toys, which is seen as a rewards system for children. A HappyMeal means a toy and to a kid this lives with them more than the taste or the nutritional makeup of the McHappyMeal

Arch Enemy said:

and that would be damn good advice if what I consumed was the only affect on me. The truth is that those who do not heed the advice that smoking is a leading cause of cancer, and that fast-food (high-fat, high sodium, high carbohydrate) diet is a leading cause of cardiovascular disease, still affect me.
Those who become jobless because of their ailments from preventable diseases, I might add, are no longer the recipients of their own actions-- their health costs get passed onto the tax payers; their jobless status affects the economy.

Click to expand...

They'll die soon enough, you won't have to worry about them for too long. Plus it takes well more money to keep the really old alive for the last 6 months than it does to try to fight off cancer from a middle aged person. So if that person kicks the bucket, we're up money on the deal. Also, dying early subsidizes pensions. Yay for early death. Let people drink, eat, or smoke their way into an early grave. We save money when they do.

Those Happy Meal toys are crap anyways, and always end up on the floor of the backseat of the car.

Arch Enemy said:

Nobody is saying that the Government is banning food.

The issue is about banning toys, which is seen as a rewards system for children. A HappyMeal means a toy and to a kid this lives with them more than the taste or the nutritional makeup of the McHappyMeal

Click to expand...

But it's so dumb, and not the government's concern. In the end, it's the parent controlling everything, not the child. So the kid gets a toy...who cares? They get lots of toys and if the parent doesn't want to go to McDonald's, then that's that; end of story. It will do nothing, it's an overstep of the boundary, it's useless, intrusive government. It can go piss off and mind its own god damned business.

chevydriver1123 said:

Another plank of the nanny state, stuff like this makes my head hurt.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's the "nanny state" that is the problem but rather the millions of Americans who are unable to make the right choices for a myriad of reasons. The top few are, no time to cook because both parents are working so much, the food is tastey, it's easy to get, MARKETING WORKS.

So, I'd like all you cons to tell us how lazy these millions of Americans are, and don't forget to throw in that, if you can do the wise thing, anyone can, because we're all exactly a like...

NoJingoLingo said:

I don't think it's the "nanny state" that is the problem but rather the millions of Americans who are unable to make the right choices for a myriad of reasons. The top few are, no time to cook because both parents are working so much, the food is tastey, it's easy to get, MARKETING WORKS.

Click to expand...

Uhm nannies are there to make sure the children make the right choices... so yeah, this is "nanny state" lunatic fringe kook liberalism and statism in action.

So, I'd like all you cons to tell us how lazy these millions of Americans are, and don't forget to throw in that, if you can do the wise thing, anyone can, because we're all exactly a like...

Click to expand...

This makes no sense, I think you just wanted to use the "con" vernacular.... :lamo

MyOwnDrum said:

These round about laws are ridiculous. If they think junk food is dangerous to the kiddos, then come right out and ban it.

Next thing is they'll want to ban the McDonald's playland. That was the only reason we ever went there...

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I often just buy the damn toy and forgo the happy meal.
In fact - most of the time my kids don't EAT the food because they're BUSY playing with the damn toy. :rofl Or, i might buy the meal and forgo the toy - it depends on why we're having to eat the crap (away from home and I can't cook is usually the only reason we ever get fast food)

I'd also think it unconstitutional for the government to tell what a business can and cannot do as an incentive to purchase said item - why stop at the toy, then? why not take it to the games like McD's yearly Monopoly . .. which is just a ploy to sever people from their money. Or coupons and buy-one-get-one-free if it's anything other than fruits and veggies?

Unfortunately, there have been irresponsible parents since the dawn of time. I'd rather see a kid being fed MacDonalds crap than eating a bag of chips for dinner.

The bottom line is that it's not the gov't's business to tell business that they cannot offer a toy with a meal. *Every* time I take my son out to eat somewhere, someone brings over a little box of crayons for him to keep. Is that going to go, too?

StandUpChuck said:

Unfortunately, there have been irresponsible parents since the dawn of time. I'd rather see a kid being fed MacDonalds crap than eating a bag of chips for dinner.

The bottom line is that it's not the gov't's business to tell business that they cannot offer a toy with a meal. *Every* time I take my son out to eat somewhere, someone brings over a little box of crayons for him to keep. Is that going to go, too?

Click to expand...

Are the crayons edible and flavorful. Do they have warnings on them about sticking them up your nose?

NoJingoLingo said:

I don't think it's the "nanny state" that is the problem but rather the millions of Americans who are unable to make the right choices for a myriad of reasons. The top few are, no time to cook because both parents are working so much, the food is tastey, it's easy to get, MARKETING WORKS.

So, I'd like all you cons to tell us how lazy these millions of Americans are, and don't forget to throw in that, if you can do the wise thing, anyone can, because we're all exactly a like...

Click to expand...

Since you seem to have us all figured out roll why don't you tell us what your solution is to the "millions of Americans who are unable to make the right choices". And please, be specific.

Yes the ads get them in the door but I have never taken a kid, and I mean mine, nieces, nephews and friends kids that actually finished the food.

They like the toy and the playland.

My son will take 2 bites of the nuggets and a few fries then goes to play.

If there were no toy in the pack he wouldn't want to go there at all. He really doesn't like the food.

I don't think will catch on anyway.

There are some pretty weird people in California and I must say the laziest.

By the way I have no problem saying no to my son, I kind of enjoy it.

*snip - wrong quote!*

Well, your statement is the center of the issue.

People have to simply WANT to raise their kids to be healthy, with a well balanced diet. Short of classifying obesity as child abuse and punishing the parents somehow - there's nothing you CAN do other than encouragement, support and push for options.

The other part of the issue is that our fast food culture has honestly changed what people consider to be 'good to eat' - More and more people opt for burgers and fries over the equally priced Caesar salad that's on the menu.

I realized this a while back when I was debating the 'healthy foods vs fast foods' issue with another mother. Her argument was that healthy foods (fruits, veggies, etc) were expensive and cooking them was too time consuming - it was cheaper and more convenient for her to just buy fast food for dinner. (maybe true for her family but if I bought fast food for everyone in my family I'd go BROKE)

So, since cost was in question - I came up with a week's worth of healthy home-cooked recipes that she could pull off for the same amount of money within an hour. She didn't like that too much. In fact, she had a few choice words for my efforts . . . and then told me (I do quote) " . . . eggplant, green beans and broccoli. My family just doesn't like those things."

They're AFFORDABLE. Readily available. Extremely healthy and none were complicated to prepare.
But they just don't LIKE the taste. . . so, no matter how cheap and affordable they were, she would NEVER buy them and prepare them.

I'm looking at my bobble-headed Stitch with the moveable ears and the four articulated arms and wondering who the hell buys a Happy Meal for the food?

I'm also wondering from what legal authority a mere county has to ban the marketing practice of bundling products together.

Are hamburgers illegal?

Nope.

Are french fries illegal?

Nope.

Are soft-drinks and milk illegal?

Nope.

Are toys illegal?

Nope, except certain battery-powered appliances can't be sold to children.

So, since none of those objects are illegal on their own, on what grounds do the county supervisors base their ban on product bundling? I can't see this standing up in court.

Also, would the law not be avoided if McDonald's SOLD the toys seperately, with a major discount if purchased in combination with a hamburger, small fries, and drink, say like down to two cents?

McDonald's in 1999 sold Millenium glasses for a buck, with the purchase of a big mac. I bought the glasses, tossed the burders. They're excellent glasses.

I don't see in the Constitution any authority for elected bodies to assume the roll of nanny.

Question: How long does it take for McDonald's fries to decompose?

I have heard rumors that they are unable to decompose due to all moisture being drawn out in the cooking and lamp process.

Goldenboy219 said:

Question: How long does it take for McDonald's fries to decompose?

I have heard rumors that they are unable to decompose due to all moisture being drawn out in the cooking and lamp process.

Click to expand...

They decompose just fine.

Take a handful of McDonald's fries to the park and scatter them on the lawn.

Nature decomposes them in mere minutes using self-replicating waste-matter aerodynamic composting machines.

I think they are just giving out the wrong type of toys.

NoJingoLingo said:

I don't think it's the "nanny state" that is the problem but rather the millions of Americans who are unable to make the right choices for a myriad of reasons. The top few are, no time to cook because both parents are working so much, the food is tastey, it's easy to get, MARKETING WORKS.

Click to expand...

Its up to the parent to decide what their brat eats, not the government.

So, I'd like all you cons to tell us how lazy these millions of Americans are, and don't forget to throw in that, if you can do the wise thing, anyone can, because we're all exactly a like...

Click to expand...

Im not a conservative, keep trying.

Goldenboy219 said:

Question: How long does it take for McDonald's fries to decompose?

I have heard rumors that they are unable to decompose due to all moisture being drawn out in the cooking and lamp process.

Click to expand...

Hey, their fries are the only tasty thing on the menu!

Goldenboy219 said:

Question: How long does it take for McDonald's fries to decompose?

I have heard rumors that they are unable to decompose due to all moisture being drawn out in the cooking and lamp process.

Click to expand...

It's not a lack of moisture - it's the anaerobic environment (oxygen free) that's created in the frying process.
However, for all the reading I've done on experiments - nothing goes well into several decades of testing on the issue.

Unlike the fruitcake.

Fruit cake is a good example - the content within the cake creates an ideal anaerobic environment and it's been proven that such a cake can stay edible for at least 130 years, proven by an actual taste test.

Aunt Spiker said:

Agreed.

I often just buy the damn toy and forgo the happy meal.
In fact - most of the time my kids don't EAT the food because they're BUSY playing with the damn toy. :rofl Or, i might buy the meal and forgo the toy - it depends on why we're having to eat the crap (away from home and I can't cook is usually the only reason we ever get fast food)

I'd also think it unconstitutional for the government to tell what a business can and cannot do as an incentive to purchase said item - why stop at the toy, then? why not take it to the games like McD's yearly Monopoly . .. which is just a ploy to sever people from their money. Or coupons and buy-one-get-one-free if it's anything other than fruits and veggies?

Click to expand...

Maybe what we need is a truth in advertising law, not the current, it's not really untrue, law that we have now.

Come to think of it, I've never seen a sale on fruits and veggies but, for the last year now I've seen huge bins of "10 for $10" Rice-a-Roni and Chips and power drinks and Chips Ahoy cookies...

StandUpChuck said:

Unfortunately, there have been irresponsible parents since the dawn of time. I'd rather see a kid being fed MacDonalds crap than eating a bag of chips for dinner.

The bottom line is that it's not the gov't's business to tell business that they cannot offer a toy with a meal. *Every* time I take my son out to eat somewhere, someone brings over a little box of crayons for him to keep. Is that going to go, too?

Click to expand...

Why isn't the governments business? We live in a democratic society, a representative republic, so we (the government) can decide anything that happens in the country. Of course, that's just theory since WE the PEOPLE don't actually have control of the government anymore.

chevydriver1123 said:

Its up to the parent to decide what their brat eats, not the government.

Click to expand...

Unless it's a danger to society. Which obesity is.

Im not a conservative, keep trying.

Click to expand...

Don't be silly, of course you are. Today isn't my first day here. :roll:

NoJingoLingo said:

Unless it's a danger to society. Which obesity is.

Click to expand...

Someone being fat doesnt infringe on my rights, therefore isnt a danger to society. Its a danger to the person in question

Don't be silly, of course you are. Today isn't my first day here. :roll:

Click to expand...

No Im not, I dont justify warrantless wiretaps, the drug war, police killing innocent people, bombing third world countries in the name of "security". I believe organized religion is an authoritarian structure. I think Israel and the rest of the countries we have bases in should stand on their own two feet not on the feet of our soldiers. Im far from being a conservative.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:

I'm looking at my bobble-headed Stitch with the moveable ears and the four articulated arms and wondering who the hell buys a Happy Meal for the food?

I'm also wondering from what legal authority a mere county has to ban the marketing practice of bundling products together.

Are hamburgers illegal?

Nope.

Are french fries illegal?

Nope.

Are soft-drinks and milk illegal?

Nope.

Are toys illegal?

Nope, except certain battery-powered appliances can't be sold to children.

So, since none of those objects are illegal on their own, on what grounds do the county supervisors base their ban on product bundling? I can't see this standing up in court.

Also, would the law not be avoided if McDonald's SOLD the toys seperately, with a major discount if purchased in combination with a hamburger, small fries, and drink, say like down to two cents?

McDonald's in 1999 sold Millenium glasses for a buck, with the purchase of a big mac. I bought the glasses, tossed the burgers. They're excellent glasses.

I don't see in the Constitution any authority for elected bodies to assume the roll of nanny.

Click to expand...

Speaking of that, I am not sure how it is in the states right now but here in Mexico if you look at the receipt each item in the Happy Meal (Cajita Feliz) is charged for seperatly including the toy. I wonder if in that case McDonald's would be able to go around the rule.

chevydriver1123 said:

Its up to the parent to decide what their brat eats, not the government.

Click to expand...

Theoretically, yes.

But another theory says that children are the property of the state, just like their parents. And if the state is going to pay for the health care of it's property, it has an obligation, like all good pet owners, to ensure it's property eats a healthy diet.