Your politics thread

[Tuxedo T-shirt]

So Shiftless - commence complaining about Democrats.

I will kick it off by talking about Michael Bloomberg's idea to ban sodas in containers that are larger than 16oz in NYC. Nearly everybody hates this idea and thinks it's stupid. I find myself torn because on the one hand, I dislike Bloomberg, New York, and ideas, but I actually think this is pretty smart and actually might be an effective and even libertarian way to combat the obesity problem in the U.S. because it doesn't prevent you from drinking as much cola as you want, all it does is it says you have to drink it in certain portions. Since portion size is part of the obesity problem, you're basically telling the person buying the 20oz soda that they have to buy a 16 oz soda. Now if they legitimately want more cola, OK they can get as much as they want, but what I think is likely to happen is most people will just shrug their shoulders, drink slightly less cola, and be all the healthier for it. Honestly, it strikes me as a pretty good idea.

[Beldo]

Not sure how government eliminating freedom of choice is a libertarian solution. I think any legislation geared towards saving people from themselves flies directly in the face of libertarian ideals.

[Macho]

Not sure how government eliminating freedom of choice is a libertarian solution. I think any legislation geared towards saving people from themselves flies directly in the face of libertarian ideals.

^ My exact thought as well.

[Blaze]

There was a time when 16 oz was the max size....or you could be crazy and go for the liter. Then 20 oz became the gold standard. Pepsi even tried to do a 24 oz thing for a while. Looks like soda has become the new cigarettes. Soon they will have surgeon general's warnings on them.

[TANEYTOWN]

It's wrong. U should be able to drink all the soda u want. Eat nothing but candy for all I care.

I'm pro choice.
Pro gay marrige.
Against the death penalty
For pot to be legal.
For Prostition to be legal and taxed.

I'm for low taxes against cradle to the grave entitlements.
Would love some form of organized and civil immigration plain.
Would love some form of energy plain.

[TANEYTOWN]

There is nothing libertarian about that idea! Nothing. It's my right and my freedom to be as fat as I please. I don't drink soda and I don't visit whores or smoke pot. Doesn't mean u shouldn't be able. I love the smoking ban in Dallas. But guess what it should be left up to the owner. Not the government.

[Tuxedo T-shirt]

Not sure how government eliminating freedom of choice is a libertarian solution. I think any legislation geared towards saving people from themselves flies directly in the face of libertarian ideals.

It's not a libertarian solution per se because the only purely libertarian solution to any problem is "remove regulation and let the free market decide."

Rather it's a more libertarian way of dealing with the obesity problem than say a govt mandate (you have to eat broccoli) or absolute prohibition on a product (no trans fats or happy meals or whatever). This doesn't prevent you from buying as much cola as you want at all. Rather it just changes the default size to something slightly smaller. If you seriously want more cola, you can get it. But for your average beverage purchaser who doesn't particularly give a shit whether their drink is 16 or 20 oz, mandating the 16 oz size is a pretty painless way to cut down calories without actually eliminating anyone's freedom to be as fat as they want.

[TANEYTOWN]

Let's drive soda under ground! We see how that worked with booze.

[Tuxedo T-shirt]

It's not making soda illegal. You're getting really riled up about this, Taney. Maybe if you smoked some whores and visited some pot you'd relax a little.

[Beldo]

Your examples of alternatives sound like pretty extreme measures, so, yes, it's more libertarian than those, but there's a huge chasm between that and leaving it alone. It should be noted that this is Bloomberg's last resort after he failed to get Albany to pass a sugary soda tax. Frankly, I don't think this is the kind of thing a mayor should use his authority to do. I don't like that this sort of thing doesn't go through the city council. Kind of creepy that he figured out a way that he can do it without anyone else voting on it (apart from the Board of Health, who he controls). On the real though, is there any evidence that this would curb calorie intake?

[El Santo]

I think it's a bit much. Not to use this old argument, but I feel like it fits here better than anywhere else.
Where does it end?

I don't mean that in a sensationalist sort of way. I mean literally, who decides where this ends? I have friends that think I'm disgusting because I will eat fast food AT ALL (I only have it maybe every other month or so). What about vegans? Aren't they technically living a healthier lifestyle? You might be able to prove that they are.
I was reading an article recently about the dangers of red meat and such. The article seriously said something just like:
"Replace a 6oz serving of beef with nuts or seeds and...."
NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is like saying "Well, I know that you haven't had sex in 3 years, but in the absence of that, maybe just have your genitals rubbed through your pants by a doctor or trained therapist.
AS IF IT'S THE FUCKING SAME.

All it takes is a few really militant people with some specific views/lifestyles to get control, and we'll all be forced to eat leeks and rice cakes for dinner. We need lives, for fucks sake. Why go skydiving then? WHY DRIVE A FUCKING CAR. Cars are statistically very dangerous.

I know a few people that generally use their eating/exercising habits as a way to elevate themselves over others. "John may have written a very interesting published book and he certainly raised his kids right, but look at what he eats. . I would never do that to my body. Look at my level of self control. Look at my resolve. Excuse me, I suddenly have the urge to rub one out while making eye contact with myself in the mirror."

[Blaze]

It kind of goes both ways. It's fine if you want to drink your gallons of sodas and smoke 2 packs a day, but why should the government have to pay for the massive health care costs you will rack up with your COPD and Diabetes? I'm for a slight tax on soda and junk food(or not allowing food stamps to buy it, which Bloomburg tried to do).

[Tuxedo T-shirt]

Your examples of alternatives sound like pretty extreme measures, so, yes, it's more libertarian than those, but there's a huge chasm between that and leaving it alone.

I don't know, I can't think of anything that's less restrictive but still likely to be effective, if you can I'd honestly be curious about it. The only thing that's bad about it is the politics of it - it just looks bad and it sounds like a bad thing to do even if it's actually a good idea.

It should be noted that this is Bloomberg's last resort after he failed to get Albany to pass a sugary soda tax. Frankly, I don't think this is the kind of thing a mayor should use his authority to do. I don't like that this sort of thing doesn't go through the city council. Kind of creepy that he figured out a way that he can do it without anyone else voting on it (apart from the Board of Health, who he controls). On the real though, is there any evidence that this would curb calorie intake?[

I don't know if there's any evidence since I don't think there are any bans like this in place but I think common sense would suggest that it would work. If it doesn't work then the only real harm that I see is increased pollution, I guess. I do agree with your procedural problems with the ban but that's different than opposing the law on substantive grounds.

[TANEYTOWN]

It's dumb. Won't do anything.

[Tuxedo T-shirt]

I think it's a bit much. Not to use this old argument, but I feel like it fits here better than anywhere else.
Where does it end?

I don't mean that in a sensationalist sort of way. I mean literally, who decides where this ends? I have friends that think I'm disgusting because I will eat fast food AT ALL (I only have it maybe every other month or so). What about vegans? Aren't they technically living a healthier lifestyle? You might be able to prove that they are.
I was reading an article recently about the dangers of red meat and such. The article seriously said something just like:
"Replace a 6oz serving of beef with nuts or seeds and...."
NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is like saying "Well, I know that you haven't had sex in 3 years, but in the absence of that, maybe just have your genitals rubbed through your pants by a doctor or trained therapist.
AS IF IT'S THE FUCKING SAME.

All it takes is a few really militant people with some specific views/lifestyles to get control, and we'll all be forced to eat leeks and rice cakes for dinner. We need lives, for fucks sake. Why go skydiving then? WHY DRIVE A FUCKING CAR. Cars are statistically very dangerous.

I know a few people that generally use their eating/exercising habits as a way to elevate themselves over others. "John may have written a very interesting published book and he certainly raised his kids right, but look at what he eats. . I would never do that to my body. Look at my level of self control. Look at my resolve. Excuse me, I suddenly have the urge to rub one out while making eye contact with myself in the mirror."

Yeah I think that's a real concern here. I'd have a serious problem with someone banning soda even though it's pretty clearly terrible for you. Likewise I'm not a fan of sin taxes in most cases (smoking is probably excluded from that). That's why I like laws like this - they don't take away your choice to do anything, you can do all the exact same stuff, it's just that you have to make the conscious effort to do it, and most people probably won't bother.