If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Consumerist)   Stupidity races up East Coast as Cambridge, Mass tries to copy NY in banning large sodas. Apparently the mayor is unfamiliar with the concept of refills   (consumerist.com) divider line 230
    More: Dumbass, Cambridge, lot, WBZ NewsRadio 1030, stupidity, mayors  
•       •       •

3065 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jun 2012 at 10:42 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



230 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-20 11:42:33 AM  
Gee one would think all other issues n the world have been solved with how the Government is going after all these silly little things now.

So when do all the troops come home?
 
2012-06-20 11:42:40 AM  

Jairzinho: If I, as a taxpayer, am going to keep subsidizing hospital bills for the diabetic coma treatment of any ass broken fatty who enjoyed too many gallons of high fructose corn syrup, then I'm ok with this ban.



Despite its various flaws and shortcomings, our government is farking brilliant. Implement restrictions on liberty in the correct order, and the governed will be begging for each additional one as a "logical consequence" of all of the previous impositions. Throw in a party switch every few years to enhance such mentalities as

- "my team vs. their team"
- "it's not tyranny when my team does it"
- "well since the other team already took away freedoms x and y, my guy might as well take z too"

Because progress!
 
2012-06-20 11:45:05 AM  

The_Sponge: Jairzinho: (I know "significant" "big" can be subjective, that's why precise measures have to be determined in each case).


Well I think it's fair to say that 1L beers are "big", so should we ban those from German style restaurants?


Again, will you consuming that will have a significant chance of affecting negatively someone else? No? Drink up!
 
2012-06-20 11:45:57 AM  
I work in Cambridge and if this gets between me and my venti latte on mornings with 7am meetings I will shiv every last motherfarker in this city.

/kind of has a caffeine dependency
//fell off the wagon in a big way when I took this job
 
2012-06-20 11:47:29 AM  

MDGeist: Gee one would think all other issues n the world have been solved with how the Government is going after all these silly little things now.

So when do all the troops come home?


I'm pretty sure Cambridge's army is still deployed along the Somervile front, and their navy continues to bombard Copley Square from the Charles River to this very morning. But I'll let them know you're asking about them, they'll appreciate it.
 
2012-06-20 11:49:36 AM  

Mad_Radhu: Prank Call of Cthulhu: This is really farking stupid. My only complaint about restaurant sodas is that I'd like the option for unsweetened iced tea. I don't want something sugary, and artificially-sweetened stuff tastes nasty. If someone really has a bug up their ass about legislating something, I'd much rather they force places to offer an unsweetened beverage (other than water).

You must live in the south. In Washington State where I live, just about all the tea they serve is unsweetened. A few chains like McDonald's and Burger King have started to offer the sweet tea option, but for the most part every time you go to any other restaurant your only option is unsweet.



Pre-sweetened tea is catching on and spreading, for several reasons. Your area would appear to be a holdout.
 
2012-06-20 11:50:56 AM  
So, I don't get it. Do people not know that this shiat is bad for them, or do they just not care?
 
2012-06-20 11:53:29 AM  
Stupidity races up East Coast as Cambridge, Mass tries to copy NY in banning large sodas. Apparently the mayor is unfamiliar with the concept of refills

Apparently subby is unfamiliar with the concept of "googling." That's the reply the mayor gives when defending the policy. He's not limiting how much soda you drink, you can get a refill or you can buy two or three smaller sized sodas. They are simply trying to drive home the idea that 44oz or whatever is not "one soda" it is more like three sodas. I think they are stupid and wrong for doing it but I'm gonna go ahead and place subby along side them as stupid and wrong.
 
2012-06-20 11:53:51 AM  
Peopel, People; It is not a difficult concept: If you do not want government control do not accept government money. You cannot expect the tax payers to finance things like your health care without them exerting controls over what it costs them. You bring this stuff on yourself when you asked for government to treat you like a child.

Other government types see this as just another means to assume more power of course "for our own good".


"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
 
2012-06-20 11:54:34 AM  

yves0010: Cymbal: poodebunker: gfoley2334: Do we still live in America, the Home of the Free or has the Communist taken over? Who the hell are they to say what size of drink I can buy?

My thought exactly. I'm getting soooooo sick of the dictators. If only as much time was spent trying to fix real problems in this country rather than making stupid dietary laws...sigh.

It is a real problem. How can you possibly be that myopic to think being obese is a life choice that will not have any consequences? Not just to you but to everyone else in this country?

But it is still the choice of the person and no one else.


When your choice has a direct correlation to the size of my bank account then I think you should listen to reasoning and have some empathy for your fellow American. We are not talking about something you have no control over, we are talking about a choice, one that has effects on many different people.
 
2012-06-20 11:58:03 AM  
First they came for the sodas, and I said nothing.
Then they came for other stuff, and I still didn't say anything.
Then they came for me, and there was no soda.
 
2012-06-20 11:58:26 AM  
How does this "personal responsibility" thing work again?

Once again we stoop to the lowest common denominator.
 
2012-06-20 11:59:21 AM  
I work in Harvard Square, and can tell you that it's not the soda in Cambridge - it's the giant iced coffees with cream from DD and Starbucks, and the copious amounts of booze consumed in this city that they ought to ban.

OK, not ban, but that's definitely a bigger source of calories than soda around here.

/knows firsthand about the booze part
 
2012-06-20 12:00:35 PM  
Constitution 101

It is not the Government's responsibility to protect me from myself;
It is Government's responsibility to protect me from others.

If someone wants to skydive, ride a motorcycle, ski, not wear a seatbelt, eat a burger, smoke a cigarette, scuba dive, live in Detroit, smoke crack, own a gun, never brush their teeth or anything else is their own farking business.

::pre-empt::
Don't cry about how it effects your insurance, because that is between you and your insurance company NOT the Government.
 
2012-06-20 12:01:05 PM  

hasty ambush: Peopel, People; It is not a difficult concept: If you do not want government control do not accept government money. You cannot expect the tax payers to finance things like your health care without them exerting controls over what it costs them. You bring this stuff on yourself when you asked for government to treat you like a child.

Other government types see this as just another means to assume more power of course "for our own good".


"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster


The government in this case isn't telling the people they cannot have soda, they are limiting the soda-pushers because the people are clearly too stupid to make smart choices when faced with a 64 ounce big gulp.
 
2012-06-20 12:01:35 PM  

ph0rk: So, I don't get it. Do people not know that this shiat is bad for them, or do they just not care?


They don't care. Nor do you.

Unless you wanna stop eating red meat?
 
2012-06-20 12:02:33 PM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: This is really farking stupid. My only complaint about restaurant sodas is that I'd like the option for unsweetened iced tea. I don't want something sugary, and artificially-sweetened stuff tastes nasty. If someone really has a bug up their ass about legislating something, I'd much rather they force places to offer an unsweetened beverage (other than water).


Second!

I hate sugar sweetened tea. Prefer to poison myself with sweet n low.
 
2012-06-20 12:02:54 PM  

ph0rk: The government in this case isn't telling the people they cannot have soda, they are limiting the soda-pushers because the people are clearly too stupid to make smart choices when faced with a 64 ounce big gulp.


Why am I required to make a smart choice that only effects me?
 
2012-06-20 12:03:24 PM  

lennavan: ph0rk: So, I don't get it. Do people not know that this shiat is bad for them, or do they just not care?

They don't care. Nor do you.

Unless you wanna stop eating red meat?


Prove my locally sourced, grass fed buffalo meat is bad for me.

Further:

I'll happily support a drink-all-the-soda-you-want society when two things happen:

1: Heroin is legal, and can be purchased at my local CVS
2: Any private company can fire your fat ass simply for being a fat ass.
 
2012-06-20 12:03:32 PM  

vento: How does this "personal responsibility" thing work again?

Once again we stoop to the lowest common denominator.


I think that achieving personal responsibility for most or all Americans is a pipe dream. Sure some people have self control, but many don't. Are you really this naive to think just telling people they shouldn't eat unhealthy things is going to be a solution? Excuse me while I laugh and laugh and laugh.
 
2012-06-20 12:04:03 PM  

Cymbal: yves0010: Cymbal: poodebunker: gfoley2334: Do we still live in America, the Home of the Free or has the Communist taken over? Who the hell are they to say what size of drink I can buy?

My thought exactly. I'm getting soooooo sick of the dictators. If only as much time was spent trying to fix real problems in this country rather than making stupid dietary laws...sigh.

It is a real problem. How can you possibly be that myopic to think being obese is a life choice that will not have any consequences? Not just to you but to everyone else in this country?

But it is still the choice of the person and no one else.

When your choice has a direct correlation to the size of my bank account then I think you should listen to reasoning and have some empathy for your fellow American. We are not talking about something you have no control over, we are talking about a choice, one that has effects on many different people.


So why not regulate how many kids a person can have. Last I checked, that has an impact on your wallet. Or social security, which takes money away from you. Personally, I agree. I earn my money and I should keep my money. But I still think it is not the government's place to micro manage a persons private life.
 
2012-06-20 12:07:49 PM  

lennavan: ph0rk: The government in this case isn't telling the people they cannot have soda, they are limiting the soda-pushers because the people are clearly too stupid to make smart choices when faced with a 64 ounce big gulp.

Why am I required to make a smart choice that only effects me?


Because it doesn't only affect you, how do you not understand this?
 
2012-06-20 12:07:51 PM  

ph0rk: lennavan: ph0rk: So, I don't get it. Do people not know that this shiat is bad for them, or do they just not care?

They don't care. Nor do you.

Unless you wanna stop eating red meat?

Prove my locally sourced, grass fed buffalo meat is bad for me.

Further:

I'll happily support a drink-all-the-soda-you-want society when two things happen:

1: Heroin is legal, and can be purchased at my local CVS
2: Any private company can fire your fat ass simply for being a fat ass.


It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. It is none of my business if my neighbor wants to drink a two-liter of Coke a day, live on Starbucks Mochas or live in the Alaska with bears. In the United States of America you can live your life the way you want. (allegedly)
 
2012-06-20 12:09:25 PM  

HandsUp: It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. It is none of my business if my neighbor wants to drink a two-liter of Coke a day, live on Starbucks Mochas or live in the Alaska with bears. In the United States of America you can live your life the way you want. (allegedly)


Freedom in America has always been a lie. No nation desires citizens to be entirely free, and no person desires to live in a society that is entirely free, either.
 
2012-06-20 12:09:54 PM  

yves0010: Cymbal: yves0010: Cymbal: poodebunker: gfoley2334: Do we still live in America, the Home of the Free or has the Communist taken over? Who the hell are they to say what size of drink I can buy?

My thought exactly. I'm getting soooooo sick of the dictators. If only as much time was spent trying to fix real problems in this country rather than making stupid dietary laws...sigh.

It is a real problem. How can you possibly be that myopic to think being obese is a life choice that will not have any consequences? Not just to you but to everyone else in this country?

But it is still the choice of the person and no one else.

When your choice has a direct correlation to the size of my bank account then I think you should listen to reasoning and have some empathy for your fellow American. We are not talking about something you have no control over, we are talking about a choice, one that has effects on many different people.

So why not regulate how many kids a person can have. Last I checked, that has an impact on your wallet. Or social security, which takes money away from you. Personally, I agree. I earn my money and I should keep my money. But I still think it is not the government's place to micro manage a persons private life.


Because kids and fat are exactly the same? Lol wut?
 
2012-06-20 12:11:48 PM  

lennavan: ph0rk: The government in this case isn't telling the people they cannot have soda, they are limiting the soda-pushers because the people are clearly too stupid to make smart choices when faced with a 64 ounce big gulp.

Why am I required to make a smart choice that only effects me?


Unfortunatley it does just effect you. Since the tax payers will be on the hook at some point for your health care what you do that may impacts your health impacts their wallet.
 
2012-06-20 12:13:19 PM  

ph0rk: Prove my locally sourced, grass fed buffalo meat is bad for me.


Dude, it isn't exactly news that red meat is unhealthy for you.

Meat is a major source of protein and fat in most diets. Substantial evidence from epidemiological studies shows that consumption of meat, particularly red meat, is associated with increased risks of diabetes,1 cardiovascular disease (CVD),2 and certain cancers...

Red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total, CVD, and cancer mortality. Substitution of other healthy protein sources for red meat is associated with a lower mortality risk.


Link

ph0rk: I'll happily support a drink-all-the-soda-you-want society when two things happen:

1: Heroin is legal, and can be purchased at my local CVS
2: Any private company can fire your fat ass simply for being a fat ass.


I'll agree with your analogy when:

1. You show me a story where someone got so high on red meat they started committing crimes effecting other people.
2. All private companies are required to provide 100% subsidized health insurance.
 
2012-06-20 12:14:56 PM  

ph0rk: HandsUp: It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. It is none of my business if my neighbor wants to drink a two-liter of Coke a day, live on Starbucks Mochas or live in the Alaska with bears. In the United States of America you can live your life the way you want. (allegedly)

Freedom in America has always been a lie. No nation desires citizens to be entirely free, and no person desires to live in a society that is entirely free, either.


Well I may be wrong but I thought that (individual freedom/responsibility) was kinda the whole point of the creation of this Country.
 
2012-06-20 12:18:16 PM  

Cymbal: Because it doesn't only affect you, how do you not understand this?


hasty ambush: Unfortunatley it does just effect you. Since the tax payers will be on the hook at some point for your health care what you do that may impacts your health impacts their wallet.


Fair point. Your eating red meat drives up my costs. Did you exercise 5 times last week? That's driving up my costs. Do you consume alcohol? That's driving up my costs. Have you ever eaten fast food? You're driving up my costs still.

Is that the society you want to build? Where we legislate behavior and ban behavior with the goal of minimizing health care costs?

By the way, you never actually showed increased costs. Here's a fun thought - think about all that cigarette smoking causes. You'd think it's more expensive but really it's not. The reason, the healthy people who last on into their 80's, 90's, 100's and so on are getting a shiat ton of expensive ass health care. The fatties and smokers dying in their 40's and 50's never go through that.

Your argument is weak and your goals are terrifying. You should probably get off the computer now, carpal tunnel and all.
 
2012-06-20 12:18:35 PM  

tommyl66: MDGeist: Gee one would think all other issues n the world have been solved with how the Government is going after all these silly little things now.

So when do all the troops come home?

I'm pretty sure Cambridge's army is still deployed along the Somervile front, and their navy continues to bombard Copley Square from the Charles River to this very morning. But I'll let them know you're asking about them, they'll appreciate it.


As a guy currently stationed along the Somerville front, I'm getting a kick.
 
2012-06-20 12:18:55 PM  
i893.photobucket.com

Sandra Bullock Warned Us

I remember, back when I was a kid, thinking how funny and outrageous this movie was.

/could go for a rat burger right now
 
2012-06-20 12:19:03 PM  

lennavan: ph0rk: Prove my locally sourced, grass fed buffalo meat is bad for me.

Dude, it isn't exactly news that red meat is unhealthy for you.


Those people aren't eating what I'm eating. Further, they suggest eating less than 1.5 ounces (42 grams) per day. I eat less than 8 ounces per week, some weeks none. Why? Because too much red meat is probably not healthy. I was able to figure this out for myself. Legislation banning the sale of 16 ounce steaks in restaurants wouldn't really affect me, and if I couldn't get the local stuff anymore that would probably just save me money. Boca burgers are tasty enough, anway.

lennavan: ph0rk: I'll happily support a drink-all-the-soda-you-want society when two things happen:

1: Heroin is legal, and can be purchased at my local CVS
2: Any private company can fire your fat ass simply for being a fat ass.

I'll agree with your analogy when:

1. You show me a story where someone got so high on red meat they started committing crimes effecting other people.
2. All private companies are required to provide 100% subsidized health insurance.


What happens to sick people when they show up at the emergency room in renal failure from diabetes and they have no insurance?

Are they turned away, or are they treated anyway? If treated anyway, who foots the bill?

Either you and I are paying for it, or we tell those farkers to die in the street.
 
2012-06-20 12:20:09 PM  

HandsUp: ph0rk: HandsUp: It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. It is none of my business if my neighbor wants to drink a two-liter of Coke a day, live on Starbucks Mochas or live in the Alaska with bears. In the United States of America you can live your life the way you want. (allegedly)

Freedom in America has always been a lie. No nation desires citizens to be entirely free, and no person desires to live in a society that is entirely free, either.

Well I may be wrong but I thought that (individual freedom/responsibility) was kinda the whole point of the creation of this Country.


I'd wager the cessation of tax revenues to the Crown had far more to do with it.
 
2012-06-20 12:21:19 PM  
Isn't it ironic that the political party the portrays itself as the party of pro choice (At least where abortons are concerned but not things like education or gun ownership.) does not want to allow a person the right of choice on size of their soft drink.

The same party that wants to allow two guys who like farking each other to get married does not want them to be able to order a 64oz soft drink.
 
2012-06-20 12:22:23 PM  

hasty ambush: Isn't it ironic that the political party the portrays itself as the party of pro choice (At least where abortons are concerned but not things like education or gun ownership.) does not want to allow a person the right of choice on size of their soft drink.

The same party that wants to allow two guys who like farking each other to get married does not want them to be able to order a 64oz soft drink.


Who will pay for their kidney dialysis?
 
2012-06-20 12:23:01 PM  

Cymbal: Because kids and fat are exactly the same? Lol wut?


It is in relation to your argument... which is the government is free to control people's choices when the outcome of said choices effects others. People having a ton of kids raises the education costs as well as healthcare plus puts a strain on the system in general as it now has more people to take care of.

Personally, I don't think the government should be in the business of telling people what to do when it comes to what they eat. Even if you think its ok, you have to see the how crazy it is to ban/limit the portion size of the beverage part of a meal when the appetizer, main course, and dessert add up to over 1500 cals for 1 meal anyway.

/ in a sit down style restaurant I don't see how limiting the glass size will have any effect anyway.
// the longer my glass sits empty, the lower your tip.
 
2012-06-20 12:23:37 PM  

Imperialism: Walker: Imperialism: Walker: "Banning smoking in the workplace, and banning smoking in playgrounds, all those kinds of things have been helpful to everyone," said Mayor Davis.

Did he seriously just compare smoking (which is harmful to others) with soda (which is only harmful to those drinking it)? Seriously?

The burden of obesity-related healthcare costs is shared by all of society.

Wow. You're going that route huh? OK, the burden of alcohol related deaths and injuries is shared by all of society. Are you fine with banning alcohol? How about salt? How about sugar. It's people like you and others in this thread that say they have "no problem with this" that are the problem in society. If you don't like large sodas fine, don't drink them. But don't tell me I can't.

I'm not telling you that you can't drink 32 ounces. I'm telling you that you have to buy two 16 ounce drinks to do that.

Believe it or not, even though it's as easy as that, it's going to make a difference.


Sure will. People will drive to the next town to get their fast-food burgers.
 
2012-06-20 12:27:18 PM  

Eirik: Sure will. People will drive to the next town to get their fast-food burgers.



No, they won't. 16 ounce sodas 1/4 miles away are still more convenient than 64 ounce sodas 10 miles away.


I don't really have a dog in this race as I don't drink sodas. I'd just be happy for the pro- big gulp agenda to be able to square it's liberty agenda with the prohibition on heroin, cocaine, and the problem of people with chronic disorders as a result of dietary choices who do not have medical insurance.
 
2012-06-20 12:30:19 PM  
neopuritan progressive paternalistic authoritarian assholes.

the *good news* with them is you are immediately and forever absolved of any and all failures in your life as well as transgressions against your fellow man no matter how serious.

the bad news is with them is you are treated as so much flotsam being tossed along the eddies of society incapable of making logical choices for yourself or family and therefore your autonomy is limited for your own good and the good of the collective.
 
2012-06-20 12:31:06 PM  
Next up, mandatory morning exercise all in the name of combating obesity and bubble wrapping children on the play ground.
 
2012-06-20 12:32:03 PM  

relcec: neopuritan progressive paternalistic authoritarian assholes.

the *good news* with them is you are immediately and forever absolved of any and all failures in your life as well as transgressions against your fellow man no matter how serious.

the bad news is with them is you are treated as so much flotsam being tossed along the eddies of society incapable of making logical choices for yourself or family and therefore your autonomy is limited for your own good and the good of the collective.


How much autonomy is acceptable? How acceptable is a society with no safety nets? Does one preclude the other?
 
2012-06-20 12:33:51 PM  
Not really choosing sides here, but people should have at least enough decency and shame to not own nor use a cup over 32 ounces. The "Bubba Keg," and all its multi-gallon variants, is a disgrace upon this earth.
 
2012-06-20 12:35:22 PM  
First they came for the Transfatty cooking oil and I did not speak out because I do not deep fry.

Then they came for the Foie Gras and I did not speak out because I do not eat Foie Gras .

Then they came for the soda and I did not speak out because I do not drink soda.

Then they came for the beer and there was no one left to speak out for Drew.
 
2012-06-20 12:35:53 PM  

Joe Blowme: Next up, mandatory morning exercise all in the name of combating obesity and bubble wrapping children on the play ground.



Blowme! 6079 Blowme J! Yes, you! Bend lower, please! You can do better than that. You're not trying. Lower, please! That's better, comrade.
 
2012-06-20 12:36:10 PM  

gfoley2334: Do we still live in America, the Home of the Free or has the Communist taken over? Who the hell are they to say what size of drink I can buy?


When your sorry ass is in the hospital getting pieces carved off of it and you can't afford to pay for it THEN it's all fine if the Fed or State pay for THAT. Am I getting it right?

Because I don't want my tax dollars paying for enabling your stupidity and inability to curb your appitite for empty calories. When you can't pay for your amputations necessary due to diabetes I DON'T WANNA PAY FOR IT.

I'm not telling you that you can't drink 32 ounces. I'm telling you that you have to buy two 16 ounce drinks to do that.

Believe it or not, even though it's as easy as that, it's going to make a difference.


Because you can't get off your fat ass to get the refill.
 
2012-06-20 12:38:12 PM  

ph0rk: Eirik: Sure will. People will drive to the next town to get their fast-food burgers.


No, they won't. 16 ounce sodas 1/4 miles away are still more convenient than 64 ounce sodas 10 miles away.


I don't really have a dog in this race as I don't drink sodas. I'd just be happy for the pro- big gulp agenda to be able to square it's liberty agenda with the prohibition on heroin, cocaine, and the problem of people with chronic disorders as a result of dietary choices who do not have medical insurance.


Oddly enough, the ones that want to ban large sodas are the same ones that tend to want to legalize all drugs.

The slippery slope is usually poo-pooed as an argument, but really what's to stop the same government that cut a large soda down to 16oz to later cutting it to 8, or 4? How about the size of the steak you want? An 8oz sirloin is too large, so you can only have a 4oz. And deep fried foods are bad for you, so we're going to limit the number of fries you can have. lets ban HFCS, then limit the amount of cane sugar you can have.

And burning gas is bad for the environment, so we're only going to allow you to fill your tank with four gallons at a time. what's the big deal? You just need to stop in again when you need it.

And no one needs to live in an oversized house, so we'll limit all new construction (when we allow any at all) to 1000 square feet. Or 750. or 500.

What's to complain about? It's for your own good.
 
2012-06-20 12:38:28 PM  

HandsUp: Constitution 101

It is not the Government's responsibility to protect me from myself;
It is Government's responsibility to protect me from others.


lolwut
 
kgf
2012-06-20 12:39:16 PM  
I can understand you young'uns thinking this is outrageous because you don't know any better. 30 years ago a Large soda was the same size as today's Small!! Now, what has changed to make that possible? Are people thirstier now? No. Restaurants are in business to make money. They make a certain amount of money on every ounce of food they sell. So by making yesterday's "large" today's "small", they have effectively forced you to buy twice as much soda as you want. They've increased their profits at your expense. Same thing happens with food portions. How many times have you gone to a restaurant and not finished your meal? Why? Because they gave you too much. Why? Because they made more money that way. We're all paying for food we don't want, and some of us feel responsible to eat what we paid for even though it's too much. It's farked up.
 
2012-06-20 12:40:05 PM  

ph0rk: relcec: neopuritan progressive paternalistic authoritarian assholes.

the *good news* with them is you are immediately and forever absolved of any and all failures in your life as well as transgressions against your fellow man no matter how serious.

the bad news is with them is you are treated as so much flotsam being tossed along the eddies of society incapable of making logical choices for yourself or family and therefore your autonomy is limited for your own good and the good of the collective.

How much autonomy is acceptable?


you have this exactly backward.
and your stupid questions immediately tempt me to to label you a neopuritanical progressive paternalistic authoritarian asshole. regulating personal behavior that doesn't directly injure others is beyond the pale.


How acceptable is a society with no safety nets? Does one preclude the other?



who said anything about various forms of welfare?
if I want freedom then necessarily I'm against all forms of government intervention? is that what you are implying?
 
2012-06-20 12:43:41 PM  

Eirik: What's to complain about? It's for your own good.


I'm laughing because I have around 750 sq feet of living space, walk everywhere and get 50 MPG when I don't, don't eat fried foods and avoid HFCS and cane sugar. I am clearly not typical.

However, you forgot to mention alcohol, but that ended ridiculously in the past so I'd expect it to be the last on the chopping block for a new prohibition.

Now that I have brought it up, clearly in some cases demand is strong enough for a black market to step in when legal sales of some of the above are curtailed. I think that's a bad thing, and the spike in violent crimes around such black markets are clearly a problem.

What amuses me most, though, is that many of those screaming loudest about the soda bans wouldn't legalize marijuana, heroin, or cocaine and would never support single payer healthcare - they'd let people without insurance die in the streets (or waiting rooms, as the case may be).
 
Displayed 50 of 230 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report