EPTHappy Meal Toy Ban in San Francisco - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
| ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:33 LiGhtoftheSwaRm wrote: What's really dissapointing is we would rather blame McDonalds for obesity instead of ourselves. There are legitimate issues with fast food places directly taking advantage of the poor by selling terrible for you crap that happens to cost exactly what's left in your wallet at the time. The problem is that the legislation used actually does nothing to solve this but rather gets passed without a second thought because "Won't someone think of the (fat) children?" So great for SF, they just acknowledged an existing problem, passed a piece of legislation designed to solve it, and changed nothing in the process. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4137 Posts
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? | ||
|
MinoMino
Norway1103 Posts
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. | ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
| ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On November 16 2010 20:04 dogabutila wrote: So basically you are irresponsible and undisciplined and you want other people to fix your problems for you. Jesus, I was wondering how idiots like this got elected but now I know why. No wonder you've been arguing that side so vehemently. Um...When did I say that? I'm pretty sure that in my OP I stated that I think the responsibility falls into the parents' hands. But if you look at how many kids today are obese, the parents aren't doing shit. The government needs to step in. There is some scary logic in this thread. It seems like some people think it'd be a facist nanny state if the government took children away from their parents because the parents abused the children. It's just the parents' choice on how to raise their kid(s), right? No. The government has to protect people in some cases because the people can't/aren't protecting themselves. Also, I don't live in San Francisco so I didn't elect the board of supervisors  @ ShatterStorm: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/blog/nsb061609_casino.html That's an article I used for an essay about cancers contracted in workplaces. Second hand smoke leads to things like lung cancer. But if people want to be inconsiderate douches and help people develop lung disease(s), that's their lifestyle choice right? How dare that nanny state government try to promote public health and well-being! Edit: Here in Michigan, an indoor smoking ban was enacted in public places on May 1. Except in casinos. Casinos have discretion about whether or not they wish to allow smoking. Every casino in downtown Detroit allows smoking on the gaming floors. My point is, some people say "Then just let the people who own the public place decide." Well, obviously that's not going to work. Businesses aren't going to ban smoking in their places of business. So the government needs to regulate things that are extremely hazardous to human health. And I think that eating McDonald's is pretty hazardous to human health. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4137 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:45 Irrelevant wrote: So many hypocrites in here, if this was a ban on computers because they make people more likely to sit around the house instead of exercising(which a lot of studies show inactivity is a bigger health risk than fast foods) you would all be ready to firebomb the nearest government building. My hometown (the city of Guelph, Ontario) actually gives preferential treatment (for access to sports fields) to dog walkers over the city's football teams even..... Yes, I think there is a big fucking problem with that, and I know it's overall worse in the USA (redneck family ftw)..... | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
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. | ||
|
FindingPride
United States1001 Posts
| ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:55 FindingPride wrote: Parents are the problem, when will people figure it out? I agree, the parents in America generally suck. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4137 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:55 Offhand wrote: 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. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:44 MinoMino wrote: 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. | ||
|
Pibacc
Canada545 Posts
| ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On November 17 2010 03:59 Impervious wrote: 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. | ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On November 17 2010 04:02 Pibacc wrote: It's not McDonalds fault, it's not the kids fault, it's not society's fault. It's the parents fault. Parents now adays are plain awful. They'd rather blame video games, TV, internet, restaurants, anyone but themselves. Time for parents to become parents. Yeah, it seems that Americans today can't take personal responsibility for ANYTHING. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4137 Posts
On November 17 2010 04:03 Offhand wrote: 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. | ||
Chill
Calgary25951 Posts
| ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but I think this is one of those news stories that got super blown out of proportion. "My kid has to eat fucking apples now to get a toy at McDonalds!?!", as if that's some unreasonable expectation. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
| ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
I remember when I was a kid, everytime I saw a McDonalds I used to beg if we could eat there, but most of the times my parents would say "No, we're eating at home", I don't think we ever ate at McDonalds more often than once a month. | ||
| ||
