• 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!

Soda Is Target of New Assault

But why? Why not let businesses choose - and target the use of trans fats through other means?

We expect the government to protect us. We expect flu vaccine to be available every year. We expect the government to properly quarantine people with contagious diseases to prevent epidemics and people from dying. That is what we expect from the government because the companies are not going to tell us that trans fats are bad for us as long as they are making money.

So? That person is that person, that person is not me... I don't need protection from myself.
I hate to break it to you, but it isn't all about you.
 
They, "We" in fact do pay for those hikes in the parks. We pay when we have to rescue one of the idiots that hikes without being prepared. We pay for those houses when they are destroyed by said tornado, hurricane, and fire..
You only pay for those hikers that have to be rescued. It would have been cheaper if the government had designated the area as dangerous, of course they can't foresee all possibilities for accidents.

As for the tornados, floods and hurricanes, the government doesn't pay, the insurance companies do. If you build a house in a flood zone and it gets flooded, if you paid the extremely high flood insurance, the insurance company will take care of you, if you didn't, you are out of luck.


Did you seriously just mkae that argument?
Do you seriously believe the government will pay for your house when it burns down, when a hurricane blows it away, when a tornado destroys it? The government may make loans available for you to rebuild, but they will not rebuild it for you. Where do you get such nonsense?
 
We could also tax obesity by the pound which would wipe out the fed debt overnite. While we're at it... we could quickly generate an enormous surplus if we'd simply legalize and tax heroin, pot, prostitutes, independent bookies, bootlegging.... etc. We could also give tax credits and deductions for using lower income whores, bookies, dealers.
.

Tax those fatsos!!! I love it... no more deficit and those like myself who are thin and trim can continue to enjoy life without paying taxes!!! :) let's do it.... :rock
 
Tax those fatsos!!! I love it... no more deficit and those like myself who are thin and trim can continue to enjoy life without paying taxes!!! :) let's do it.... :rock

Yes, tax the elderly!

Oh, wait... :lol:
 
Just like the smoking ban, the trans fat ban, people were like "yeah right" and called us all sorts of consiracy nuts....


I tell you salt is next.


Bloomberg is a tyrant.
That's why I support the end of Food Stamps, and the allotment of food (based on the current value of food stamps alloted to recipients) at local supermarkets. The govt decides the menu of food you eat when you're on welfare. Govt nutritionists will determine the food stuffs available at supermarkets to recipients. If you don't like, get off of welfare. The govt can cut out all the crap food it wants. You will also be taught how to prepare meals with the available list of food. Why should we leave the decision up to these people to spend our tax dollars in a smart way to care for their families. If you don't want to learn to cook, then you'll have to eat flour out of the bag.
 
That's why I support the end of Food Stamps, and the allotment of food (based on the current value of food stamps alloted to recipients) at local supermarkets. The govt decides the menu of food you eat when you're on welfare. Govt nutritionists will determine the food stuffs available at supermarkets to recipients. If you don't like, get off of welfare. The govt can cut out all the crap food it wants. You will also be taught how to prepare meals with the available list of food. Why should we leave the decision up to these people to spend our tax dollars in a smart way to care for their families. If you don't want to learn to cook, then you'll have to eat flour out of the bag.

I'm all for it. And it would lead to a much healthier class of people. But it will be more expensive. healthy food costs.

But I like the idea of seeing making people healthy as a pubnishment. Funny stuff. :lol:
 
Let me tell you
How it will be.
There's one for you,
Nineteen for me,

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman.

Should five percent
Appear too small,
Be thankful I don't
Take it all.

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman.

If you drive a car,
I'll tax the street.
If you drive to city,
I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold,
I'll tax the heat.
If you take a walk,
I'll tax your feet.

Taxman!

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman.

Don't ask me what I want it for,
(Uh-uh, Mr. Wilson.)
If you don't want to pay some more.
(Uh-uh, Mr. Heath.)

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman.

And my advice to
Those who die.
(Taxman!)
Declare the pennies
On your eyes.
(Taxman!)

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman,
And you're working for no one but me.
(Taxman!)

JOHN LENNON :stars:
 
If you don't want to learn to cook, then you'll have to eat flour out of the bag.

Oooh! That's cold. Flour don't taste very good.
 
You seem to be ignorant of the fact that politicians are tax payer funded employees and tax payer dollars does not stop being tax payer dollars just because the government takes it from you.

Alright. Since you seem to think that it is "your" money and that you should be able to determine how and on what it is spent how about you go and tell a politician the same thing and then demand that their paycheck be cut in half. How long do you think that it would take before you're laughed out of the building? Assuming of course that you're just not thrown out first.



Telling someone what they can and can not use MY MONEY for is not telling them how to live their lives. Why do you fail to understand the fact that foodstamps are not a gift, they are a helping hand.

Again, lending a helping hand does not mean that you can tell them how to live their lives. How many times must I repeat myself? It doesn't matter how many times that you state that it is "your money" (which it's not) and that you have a "right" to tell them what they can/cannot buy with it, you do not. Thier life equals more rights than "your" money. Or any money period.
 
Alright. Since you seem to think that it is "your" money and that you should be able to determine how and on what it is spent how about you go and tell a politician the same thing and then demand that their paycheck be cut in half. How long do you think that it would take before you're laughed out of the building? Assuming of course that you're just not thrown out first.


I do not think any politician would have the balls to say its not your money,sensible people would be outraged and that politician thrown out. I guess you libs have this idea that the money some how grows on trees that tax payers should shut the **** up when those in office wish to spend tax payer dollars a certian way. As a tax payer and a voter I have every damn right to make sure the clowns in office do not waste my money and I have every damn right to make sure that when they give my money to other people that strings come attached with it so that they are not wasting my money.



Again, lending a helping hand does not mean that you can tell them how to live their lives. How many times must I repeat myself? It doesn't matter how many times that you state that it is "your money" (which it's not) and that you have a "right" to tell them what they can/cannot buy with it, you do not.

Again I am not telling them how to live. I am telling them what they can and can not use my money for. If they want soda,cupcakes or other luxery foods then they can get a job and pay for those things. Should those on food stamps and welfare be allowed to buy booze and smokes with that money, should they be allowed to use their welfare check to gamble or pay for the services of prostitutes? After in your eyes telling them they could not buy those things is telling them how to live their life.

Thier life equals more rights than "your" money. Or any money period.
Their life does not entitle them to spend my money however the **** they please, nor does their life entitle them to my money.
 
Alright. Since you seem to think that it is "your" money and that you should be able to determine how and on what it is spent how about you go and tell a politician the same thing and then demand that their paycheck be cut in half. How long do you think that it would take before you're laughed out of the building? Assuming of course that you're just not thrown out first.

I don't understand this at all. Do you not have any opinions on what government spends money on? As soon as you pay your taxes, the money just disappears into a black hole and you have no right to voice any opinion at that point?

Kal'Stang said:
Again, lending a helping hand does not mean that you can tell them how to live their lives.

No, but you do have the right to prohibit them from buying **** that isn't within the scope of the program. Soda provides no nutrients, and therefore does not fulfill the goal of the food stamp program in any way.

Kal'Stang said:
How many times must I repeat myself? It doesn't matter how many times that you state that it is "your money" (which it's not) and that you have a "right" to tell them what they can/cannot buy with it, you do not. Thier life equals more rights than "your" money. Or any money period.

"Their life"? Are they going to die if they don't get to buy soda with taxpayer money?
 
James James James... There are 130m taxpayers. Your share of the grocery bill is therefore 130 millionth of each dollar spent. Who can say what part of the grocery bill your 130millionth paid for?
 
James James James... There are 130m taxpayers. Your share of the grocery bill is therefore 130 millionth of each dollar spent. Who can say what part of the grocery bill your 130millionth paid for?

How much I pay into the system verses where or how much is spent on any particular thing is irrelevant to the fact that I have a right to demand that my money is not wasted. You may feel that some one on tax payer funded assistance deserves such as food stamps is entitled to have me and everyone else pay for energy drinks, soda, cookies and other luxury foods most reasonable people like me would argue is that if you want those things then get a job and pay for those things yourself.
 
Last edited:
How much I pay into the system verses where or how much is spent on any particular thing is irrelevant to the fact that I have a right to demand that my money is not wasted. You may feel that some one on tax payer funded assistance deserves such as food stamps is entitled to have me and everyone else pay for energy drinks, soda, cookies and other luxury foods most reasonable people like me would argue is that if you want those things then get a job and pay for those things yourself.

I have money, and I don't buy those things.

People can live without it, they just don't want to.
 
I do not think any politician would have the balls to say its not your money,sensible people would be outraged and that politician thrown out. I guess you libs have this idea that the money some how grows on trees that tax payers should shut the **** up when those in office wish to spend tax payer dollars a certian way.
Before you start throwing out barbs, you should know that Libs are not the ones that are insisting that no restrictions should be put on what can or can't be bought with food stamps. At least, not this one. I'm a Dem, don't consider myself a Lib, but am labeled as such by cons, but I agree that if soda is not nutritional, it shouldn't be allowed with food stamps. Neither are cigarettes and alcohol.

As a matter of fact, I believe it was a conservative that claimed it was taking away their freedoms, that we couldn't tell them how to spend the food stamps.


As a tax payer and a voter I have every damn right to make sure the clowns in office do not waste my money and I have every damn right to make sure that when they give my money to other people that strings come attached with it so that they are not wasting my money.
As a tax payer you have a voice, but if the majority decides they want to spend the money a certain way, it doesn't matter what you think.

Again I am not telling them how to live. I am telling them what they can and can not use my money for. If they want soda,cupcakes or other luxery foods then they can get a job and pay for those things.
Ironic, I'm a Dem, and I feel the exact same way.

Should those on food stamps and welfare be allowed to buy booze and smokes with that money, should they be allowed to use their welfare check to gamble or pay for the services of prostitutes? After in your eyes telling them they could not buy those things is telling them how to live their life.
They are not allowed to buy booze or cigarettes. And I think sodas should be added to the list.

Their life does not entitle them to spend my money however the **** they please, nor does their life entitle them to my money.

If they are poor, the government allows them to apply for food stamps, and whatever has been approved by our dieticians to be allowed with food stamps is what they will be able to buy. You only have a voice through your Congressmen and it may not be what the rest of the country agrees on. Sad, but true.
 
Back
Top Bottom