|
On November 17 2010 04:07 Chill wrote:
Wow, smart mayor. I like that comment.
He's full of shit - they already do that with their subsidies on corn, soy, etc. which help fuel this entire issue. He said it for more votes, by fighting against the political "evils" that are trying to restrict the choices people can make..... I just hope his veto doesn't stick. Although this individual law is fucking dumb, it's a start in the right direction.
I expect him to get a nice check for funding his next campaign from several different fast-food companies as well now.....
Fuck, I hate politics.....
|
On November 17 2010 03:59 Offhand wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 03:44 MinoMino wrote:On November 17 2010 03:33 LiGhtoftheSwaRm wrote:
What's really dissapointing is we would rather blame McDonalds for obesity instead of ourselves. I doubt kids at that age think, "Oh hey, I'm getting fat, I should stop eating Happy Meals". Sure, you can blame a large part of it on the parents, but then again, that won't stop stupid parents from buying them Happy Meals to avoid making the kids food themselves or stop the kids from complaining. A law that regulates what McDonald's sells is a realistic goal, a law that somehow punishes parents who buy their kids too many Happy Meals is not. It's about protecting the kids from begging their parents for Happy Meals because they saw this toy they must have on an ad or complete a toy collection from the last time he/she got had a Happy Meal. Kids can be very sensitive about their weight. If your kid is one of those, and you cart them to McDonalds all the time because they want a toy then you should probably have a cause/effect conversation with them.
Yeah, some kids can be, but if that kid doesn't realize how fat he/she is or is about to become, you can't blame it on the kid, at least in my opinion. Thus, if the kid wants a toy real bad and the parents choose the easy way out and just buys them the happy meal, the kid's going to suffer the consequences.
I'm not saying McD are the bad guys, they're just doing what best for the business. Sure, the law is pretty harsh on McD, but like I said, passing a law that somehow punishes the parents is something I doubt could work. This law, on the other hand, is pretty easy to make it work.
|
On November 17 2010 04:05 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:03 Offhand wrote:On November 17 2010 03:59 Impervious wrote:On November 17 2010 03:55 Offhand wrote:On November 17 2010 03:44 Impervious wrote:
Do you market adult strength tylenol for a child? How about movies/videogames with excessive gore/nudity/swearing? Because that's one of the things that these fast food companies are doing.....
Woah, giving kids access to violence and sex at an early age via tv, internet, and video games is a American pastime. Also, what does this have to do with food?If you can't stop yourself from taking your kid to McDonalds all the time because you always need to get your kids whatever new toy McDonlads has this week, then you fail as a parent and probably shouldn't have had children in the first place. Simple. They're products which are meant for an adult. A good comparison to a meal with 600+ calories in it. Yeah but these "intended for adults" products you seem so fond of aren't good for adults either. So why don't we ban them outright? Oh right, because we're supposed to have the freedom to chose what we do and don't put in our bodies. Parents have that right over their children as well. You can eat at McDonalds and get your kids a happy meal, once in a while. All things in moderation. Agreed, but the statistics show that too many people are too fucking dumb to realize that. So something needs to be done about it for them. Otherwise, it's going to hurt society much more in the long run.
People are too fucking dumb to realize a lot of things. If we're actually interested in looking out for these people, there's way more important things we should be focusing on.
Hey, if people are too dumb to realize that they're getting scammed, duped, or otherwise taken advantage of in a really obvious manner, let's fix the issue by investing in education. It's ridiculous that higher education costs $20k+ a year in a first world country and our primary education is way too shitty to expect kids to actually complete a bachelors in 4 years.
People tried suing McDonalds for making them fat. It was laughed out of the court. You should be blaming the parents that can't raise their own kids. Not the fast food store they go to all the time.
+ Show Spoiler +It's funny that the conversation hasn't moved beyond McDonalds yet. Any prepared meal in the US is terrible for you. Targeting fast food chains only isn't going to do anything for childhood obesity.
|
Good, now time to Ban McDonalds.
|
On November 17 2010 04:15 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:07 Chill wrote:
Wow, smart mayor. I like that comment. He's full of shit - they already do that with their subsidies on corn, soy, etc. which help fuel this entire issue. He said it for more votes, by fighting against the political "evils" that are trying to restrict the choices people can make..... I just hope his veto doesn't stick. Although this individual law is fucking dumb, it's a start in the right direction. I expect him to get a nice check for funding his next campaign from several different fast-food companies as well now..... Fuck, I hate politics.....
This is a very uninformed, knee-jerk comment that's so far from true it's not even funny.
You do realize this is the same guy that started the whole modern same-sex debate in California by giving marriage licenses to gay couples back in 2004? He's constantly been taking unpopular decisions because he believes they're the right decisions, not because he believes they'll advance his political career. Hell, he LOST the gubernatorial primaries to Jerry Brown this year BECAUSE of his unpopular decisions. And you think that he's doing this just to get more votes?
Please do some fucking research before you slander people like this.
User was warned for this post
|
On November 17 2010 04:18 MinoMino wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 03:59 Offhand wrote:On November 17 2010 03:44 MinoMino wrote:On November 17 2010 03:33 LiGhtoftheSwaRm wrote:
What's really dissapointing is we would rather blame McDonalds for obesity instead of ourselves. I doubt kids at that age think, "Oh hey, I'm getting fat, I should stop eating Happy Meals". Sure, you can blame a large part of it on the parents, but then again, that won't stop stupid parents from buying them Happy Meals to avoid making the kids food themselves or stop the kids from complaining. A law that regulates what McDonald's sells is a realistic goal, a law that somehow punishes parents who buy their kids too many Happy Meals is not. It's about protecting the kids from begging their parents for Happy Meals because they saw this toy they must have on an ad or complete a toy collection from the last time he/she got had a Happy Meal. Kids can be very sensitive about their weight. If your kid is one of those, and you cart them to McDonalds all the time because they want a toy then you should probably have a cause/effect conversation with them. Yeah, some kids can be, but if that kid doesn't realize how fat he/she is or is about to become, you can't blame it on the kid, at least in my opinion. Thus, if the kid wants a toy real bad and the parents choose the easy way out and just buys them the happy meal, the kid's going to suffer the consequences. I'm not saying McD are the bad guys, they're just doing what best for the business. Sure, the law is pretty harsh on McD, but like I said, passing a law that somehow punishes the parents is something I doubt could work. This law, on the other hand, is pretty easy to make it work.
Yeah but you're forgetting that children are capable of thinking. This law is based on the premise that the parents are blameless and that kids are actually just small retards that get whatever toy they want.
I have a little cousin that's 11 now. She was always a thin little kid but recently started gaining weight (hooray for puberty starting to kick in). She's well aware that eating certain foods will cause weight gain to the point where she doesn't want to eat freezer packaged chicken nuggets every meal. That 11 year old kid is capable of seeing a cause and effect and actually wants to prevent herself from getting fat.
+ Show Spoiler +Her dad used to be a professional goddamn chef too. So it's not like the food they cook at home is horrible, quite the contrary. She just had to grow up a bit and stop being a picky eater all the time. She's obviously to young to realize that her metabolism is changing but that's not necessary for her to understand why some foods are worse for you then others.
|
On November 17 2010 03:44 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 03:37 LegendaryZ wrote:
Give the kids their damned toys. WTF is wrong with these people? McDonalds isn't forcing these things down kids' throats. When will people stop blaming corporations for their problems and start looking at their own decision making? You're not mandated to go to McDonalds nor are you mandated to buy a Happy Meal. This is just like when they got rid of their super sized meals, which were frikking awesome... The "600" calorie limit is about what an adult should be eating in a meal..... Do you market adult strength tylenol for a child? How about movies/videogames with excessive gore/nudity/swearing? Because that's one of the things that these fast food companies are doing..... Imagine if those hotwheels cars were attached to mature videogames, or you got a free insert name of popular toy brand here toy in your next bottle of cold and flu medication..... Would you want people to "give the kids their damned toys" then?
Ignoring the fact that you're absolutely wrong about a 600-calorie meal being appropriate for an adult (maybe an adult on a major diet), the issue here is that it's not the government's place to tell you that you're not allowed to include a toy with a meal unless it's healthy. Nobody eats fast food expecting it to be healthy. It's something you eat once in a while. If a parent is taking their child to McDonalds every single day because they're too damned lazy to cook something healthy, that's a problem with the parent, not McDonalds.
Your comparison to gore, nudity, swearing, and mature video games are just random and absurd. This would be more like, "We should stop making medicine that tastes good because stupid kids might overdose on it because they think it's candy." There are plenty of unhealthy things out there that otherwise taste good or come with some other perks. Why don't we ban all of them and make everyone eat celery for the rest of their lives?
What's hilarious here is that most of the people arguing in favor of this here are probably the same exact people arguing for the legalization of drugs and would probably argue against banning tobacco and alcohol all in the name of personal choice.
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500+ calories (Not sure about the exact amount, but I can eat just 1 and be full for the whole day) for $4 and free delivery? Seriously?
|
On November 17 2010 04:30 LegendaryZ wrote:
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500 calories for $4 and free delivery? Seriously?
Dude where do you get Chinese food? I gotta pay like $7 and they don't deliver.
|
Calgary25951 Posts
On November 17 2010 04:15 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:07 Chill wrote:
Wow, smart mayor. I like that comment. He's full of shit - they already do that with their subsidies on corn, soy, etc. which help fuel this entire issue. He said it for more votes, by fighting against the political "evils" that are trying to restrict the choices people can make..... I just hope his veto doesn't stick. Although this individual law is fucking dumb, it's a start in the right direction. I expect him to get a nice check for funding his next campaign from several different fast-food companies as well now..... Fuck, I hate politics.....
If I just take it at face value, as I did, I like that comment.
|
On November 17 2010 04:36 Offhand wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:30 LegendaryZ wrote:
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500 calories for $4 and free delivery? Seriously? Dude where do you get Chinese food? I gotta pay like $7 and they don't deliver.
I live in NYC. Plenty of neighborhood places in Queens where you can get a retarded amount of food for $4-$6 depending. I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5. <33 Chicken over Rice.
Almost every Chinese Take-out around here has free delivery, though. Of course you're going to give the guy a tip either way, but that still makes it like $5...
|
On November 17 2010 04:39 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:36 Offhand wrote:On November 17 2010 04:30 LegendaryZ wrote:
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500 calories for $4 and free delivery? Seriously? Dude where do you get Chinese food? I gotta pay like $7 and they don't deliver. I live in NYC. Plenty of neighborhood places in Queens where you can get a retarded amount of food for $4-$6 depending. I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5. <33 Chicken over Rice. Almost every Chinese Take-out around here has free delivery, though. Of course you're going to give the guy a tip either way, but that still makes it like $5...
I guess I don't live in a big enough city with enough competition then. We have mad good food in Worcester but it's expensive as hell if you get anything delivered.
|
On November 17 2010 04:39 LegendaryZ wrote:
I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5.
53rd and 6th? Although I think that's $6... best meal ever.
|
On November 17 2010 04:41 Offhand wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:39 LegendaryZ wrote:On November 17 2010 04:36 Offhand wrote:On November 17 2010 04:30 LegendaryZ wrote:
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500 calories for $4 and free delivery? Seriously? Dude where do you get Chinese food? I gotta pay like $7 and they don't deliver. I live in NYC. Plenty of neighborhood places in Queens where you can get a retarded amount of food for $4-$6 depending. I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5. <33 Chicken over Rice. Almost every Chinese Take-out around here has free delivery, though. Of course you're going to give the guy a tip either way, but that still makes it like $5... I guess I don't live in a big enough city with enough competition then. We have mad good food in Worcester but it's expensive as hell if you get anything delivered.
Yeah, that probably makes a difference. Heavy competition here drives prices down, which is great for us consumers. Visit some of the ethnic neighborhoods around here and you can get such good food and so much of it for so cheap. Just stay away from eating in Manhattan because everything there is so ridiculously expensive...
|
On November 17 2010 04:43 domovoi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:39 LegendaryZ wrote:
I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5.
53rd and 6th? Although I think that's $6... best meal ever.
That cart is pretty overrated and the line is so ridiculously long. I used to eat that when I worked in the area (my boss was obsessed with it). Now I get my Halal in Jackson Heights and it's honestly just as good if not better without the crazy line.
Besides... the 53rd and 6th cart just has really strange hours.
Halal carts are definitely one of the best "bang for your buck" places to get food in the city and every tourist should try it. Ignore all the stupid hot dog and pretzel carts. No self-respecting New Yorker eats that stuff anymore. LOL
|
On November 17 2010 04:22 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:15 Impervious wrote:On November 17 2010 04:07 Chill wrote:
Wow, smart mayor. I like that comment. He's full of shit - they already do that with their subsidies on corn, soy, etc. which help fuel this entire issue. He said it for more votes, by fighting against the political "evils" that are trying to restrict the choices people can make..... I just hope his veto doesn't stick. Although this individual law is fucking dumb, it's a start in the right direction. I expect him to get a nice check for funding his next campaign from several different fast-food companies as well now..... Fuck, I hate politics..... This is a very uninformed, knee-jerk comment that's so far from true it's not even funny. You do realize this is the same guy that started the whole modern same-sex debate in California by giving marriage licenses to gay couples back in 2004? He's constantly been taking unpopular decisions because he believes they're the right decisions, not because he believes they'll advance his political career. Hell, he LOST the gubernatorial primaries to Jerry Brown this year BECAUSE of his unpopular decisions. And you think that he's doing this just to get more votes? Please do some fucking research before you slander people like this.
Did you listen to the video on CNN? "It's one thing to educate, it's one thing to promote, it's one thing to create options, but it's all together different when we decide as politicians what we believe the private sector can do....."
There are so many situations where this already happens that I don't even want to bother talking about any of them..... And he vetoes one that actually might make a positive difference to a younger generation? PS - Jerry Brown already has a pretty good history in politics, so it's not a fair claim to say he lost because he chose the unpopular decisions only.....
|
Can't seem to think this is a bad idea in any shape of form, other than maybe if you work for mcdonalds?
I dunno - im all for creating a healthier life - including that of myself and my children. Good thing tbh!
|
On November 17 2010 04:30 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 03:44 Impervious wrote:On November 17 2010 03:37 LegendaryZ wrote:
Give the kids their damned toys. WTF is wrong with these people? McDonalds isn't forcing these things down kids' throats. When will people stop blaming corporations for their problems and start looking at their own decision making? You're not mandated to go to McDonalds nor are you mandated to buy a Happy Meal. This is just like when they got rid of their super sized meals, which were frikking awesome... The "600" calorie limit is about what an adult should be eating in a meal..... Do you market adult strength tylenol for a child? How about movies/videogames with excessive gore/nudity/swearing? Because that's one of the things that these fast food companies are doing..... Imagine if those hotwheels cars were attached to mature videogames, or you got a free insert name of popular toy brand here toy in your next bottle of cold and flu medication..... Would you want people to "give the kids their damned toys" then? Ignoring the fact that you're absolutely wrong about a 600-calorie meal being appropriate for an adult (maybe an adult on a major diet), the issue here is that it's not the government's place to tell you that you're not allowed to include a toy with a meal unless it's healthy. Nobody eats fast food expecting it to be healthy. It's something you eat once in a while. If a parent is taking their child to McDonalds every single day because they're too damned lazy to cook something healthy, that's a problem with the parent, not McDonalds.
Really? Eating 3-5 times a day, plus snacks, and a highly active male between the ages of 14 and 18 requires 3200 calories. dividing that into 3 puts it to just over 1000 calories per meal, and you can take a couple hundred away due to eating snacks. And that is the highest calorie requirment for a person for anything short of a professional or semi-pro athlete.....
Your comparison to gore, nudity, swearing, and mature video games are just random and absurd. This would be more like, "We should stop making medicine that tastes good because stupid kids might overdose on it because they think it's candy." There are plenty of unhealthy things out there that otherwise taste good or come with some other perks. Why don't we ban all of them and make everyone eat celery for the rest of their lives?
Is access to better quality medicines/easier to take medicines going to give more people heart attacks with proper use?
Fast food is not a bad thing. Over-use of it is, just like medicines. Guess which one has a little barbie toy, or a Monsters Inc figurine attached to it.....
What's hilarious here is that most of the people arguing in favor of this here are probably the same exact people arguing for the legalization of drugs and would probably argue against banning tobacco and alcohol all in the name of personal choice.
I'm pro-drug and tobacco and alcohol as well. However, I definitely think better constraints on tobacco and alcohol are needed (due to the negative effects they do have at the moment, yet when enjoyed responsibly, there is no problem with it, and if people aren't going to be mature about it, then someone needs to make that decision for them).
If getting rid of obesity is all you care about, then getting rid of Chinese Take-outs or taxing them to discourage people from buying it would probably do more to that end. A lunch special with like 1500+ calories (Not sure about the exact amount, but I can eat just 1 and be full for the whole day) for $4 and free delivery? Seriously?
Taxing anyone who serves unhealthy foods an "unhealthy food" tax would be an awesome thing imo. Far better than taking the toy away from the kids. Giving subsidies to growers of healthy crops rather than the current cash crops would also be a huge step in the right direction as well, since it would increase costs and prices for fast foods and decrease costs for eating healthy foods.
|
Awesome, so now in SF when parents take their kids to McDonald's they will just by them a value meal for about the same price as a happy meal... more food less toys  .
Actually... at least in Canada happy meal costs more than value meal, the toy justified the lower amount of food the kids were getting.
for like $3.50 you can get McDouble + medium fries + medium drink.
vs.
$4.75 you can get hamburger + small fries + small drink + toy
Damn, now parents can pay less for more food for their kids at McDonalds.
|
On November 17 2010 05:00 Insanious wrote:Awesome, so now in SF when parents take their kids to McDonald's they will just by them a value meal for about the same price as a happy meal... more food less toys . Actually... at least in Canada happy meal costs more than value meal, the toy justified the lower amount of food the kids were getting. for like $3.50 you can get McDouble + medium fries + medium drink. vs. $4.75 you can get hamburger + small fries + small drink + toy Damn, now parents can pay less for more food for their kids at McDonalds.
Read the whole OP; apparently, the mayor of San Francisco vetoed the ban.
|
On November 17 2010 04:43 domovoi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 04:39 LegendaryZ wrote:
I also have a Halal cart where I can get a similar amount of food for about $5.
53rd and 6th? Although I think that's $6... best meal ever.
That's hands down the best street meat in NYC. The lamb is crazy delicious...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
