Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(New York Daily News)   Mississippi, the fattest state in the union, reacts to NYC mayor Bloomberg's "big soda ban" by passing a law to make it illegal for any city in THEIR state to ever force restaurants to limit portion sizes or post calorie counts   (nydailynews.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, Michael Bloomberg, calorie counts, Mississippi, nyc mayor, Dietary Reference Intake, Big Gulp, Stonewall, speed limits  
•       •       •

3782 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2013 at 12:33 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-03-13 07:14:42 PM  

GORDON: Uranus Is Huge!: Remember that Upton Sinclair book about all that freedom in Chicago in the early 20th century? What a utopia!

People keep saying I am trolling, but I am dead serious.  These people DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR THEM.  They are uneducated, ignorant savages, and they need to have the 64 ounce cups of liquid sugar slapped out of their hands.  If they have a problem with it, they can be sent to the kind of fat camp that has barbed wire and guard towers until they learn the correct way to do things.

Freedom is not only stupid, it is dangerous for our society as a whole.


I don't think you're trolling, but your mindset rarely makes things better and usually just ends in tyranny. Those "knowing" what is best for others sit on their highest chair in judgement, and in doing so usually blind themselves to the actual reasoning. They're also usually the exact same people you could point out and say they should have worked on their own life's problems first.
 
2013-03-13 07:20:45 PM  

occamswrist: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

Its not just one isolated law that makes a nanny state, its the sum total of all the laws.



I think your tinfoil hat is getting a bit tight.  No matter how many laws that are implemented that increase consumer information, they would be the exact opposite of a "nanny state."
 
2013-03-13 07:25:57 PM  
I went through a drive through for an In n Out burger and I asked to have a nutritional information brochure (in fact the ordering board says feel free to ask for one).  I've been on a recent kick to count my daily calories.

The teller says "sure" and with a smile she gives me the brochure and says, "You're really not going to like what you see".
 
2013-03-13 07:30:51 PM  

Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: occamswrist: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

Its not just one isolated law that makes a nanny state, its the sum total of all the laws.


I think your tinfoil hat is getting a bit tight.  No matter how many laws that are implemented that increase consumer information, they would be the exact opposite of a "nanny state."


My tinfoil hat reaches all the way down and goes between my legs. When my diaper is full it tugs on my hat.

Thank you mentioning that because it reminded me to change my diaper or at least pull it to the side and let the poop fall out.
 
2013-03-13 07:41:34 PM  

Teufelaffe: Theaetetus: Banning limiting portion size, I can understand. From a libertarian perspective, it's "hey, if you want to eat yourself stupid, it's not the government's place to stop you."
But banning requiring calorie counts? What's the theory there? "Freedom requires ignorance"?

That should be the new motto of the Republican party.


Seems to be consistent with their old logo.

i1.cpcache.com
 
2013-03-13 07:46:36 PM  
This must be more of that "let local governments and communities decide what's best" sort of governance that conservatives are always harping on about.
 
2013-03-13 07:57:24 PM  

occamswrist: Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: occamswrist: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

Its not just one isolated law that makes a nanny state, its the sum total of all the laws.


I think your tinfoil hat is getting a bit tight.  No matter how many laws that are implemented that increase consumer information, they would be the exact opposite of a "nanny state."

My tinfoil hat reaches all the way down and goes between my legs. When my diaper is full it tugs on my hat.

Thank you mentioning that because it reminded me to change my diaper or at least pull it to the side and let the poop fall out.


You have just been farkied as "no longer a credible source for ANYTHING." Nice one.
 
2013-03-13 07:57:26 PM  

KrustyKitten: Uchiha_Cycliste: Just because:
I'm the kind of guy who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine.

How you doin'?


I'm doin' good. It's nice to be able to do what I want.
 
2013-03-13 08:58:47 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: History has shown, again and again, that unless businesses are prodded to provide information by the government, they don't. Consumer choice doesn't enter into the picture unless there are a range of businesses offering the choice. Since asymmetry of information tends to favor businesses, there's very little incentive to do so, and default market forces aren't sufficient to counter that.


In other words, the consumers don't care enough about the information to demand it, and businesses don't bother posting it because no one's demanding it.  Sounds like a case of people interacting with each other voluntarily in ways that other people disapprove of.  Basically, a form of "stop liking what I don't like".

Consumers are bombarded with talk about how bad fast food is for health, yet they continue to buy it.  Sounds like they made their choice.

Most fast food restaurants post the calorie estimates (they'll never be perfect) near the register and online for those who are interested.  The smaller places that do not are also the same ones that no one really cares about the calorie count, AND are the ones that will be hurt by posting (and the testing requirements to get the totals).
 
2013-03-13 09:00:23 PM  

ImpendingCynic: This must be more of that "let local governments and communities decide what's best" sort of governance that conservatives are always harping on about.


Oh fark off. The left is in love with local control only when it's stricter than state or federal law.

Let one city in California decide to allow smoking in bars and we'll see how quickly state supremacy rises to the top of the lefty platform.
 
2013-03-13 09:02:37 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: KrustyKitten: Uchiha_Cycliste: Just because:
I'm the kind of guy who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine.

How you doin'?

I'm doin' good. It's nice to be able to do what I want.


That's cool.  I like being able to make informed decisions.  It's nice.
 
2013-03-13 09:05:29 PM  

pedrop357: In other words, the consumers don't care enough about the information to demand it,


I'm guessing when you got to "asymmetry of information" you're stopped reading because you couldn't figure out what it says. Also, small places are exempt.

Either way calorie counts are just product labeling laws. In no way are they "nanny state" style laws.

And you can't say no one cares about the calorie count. When people start finding out that dish they've been eating sports 1500 calories, they might care. Ignorance is bliss.
 
2013-03-13 09:07:37 PM  

kiwimoogle84: occamswrist: Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: occamswrist: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

Its not just one isolated law that makes a nanny state, its the sum total of all the laws.


I think your tinfoil hat is getting a bit tight.  No matter how many laws that are implemented that increase consumer information, they would be the exact opposite of a "nanny state."

My tinfoil hat reaches all the way down and goes between my legs. When my diaper is full it tugs on my hat.

Thank you mentioning that because it reminded me to change my diaper or at least pull it to the side and let the poop fall out.

You have just been farkied as "no longer a credible source for ANYTHING." Nice one.


Your loss not mine.
 
2013-03-13 09:15:13 PM  

pedrop357: Oh fark off. The left is in love with local control only when it's stricter than state or federal law.

Oh fark off. The left isn't constantly preaching "let local governments and communities decide."

Saying "the left," "the liberals," "democrats," (basically every non-Republican) like stricter laws is just Lying Republican Scum strawman bullshat.

And by "stricter" they mean "different." Republicans love to control the fark out of every aspect of peoples' lives. Yet, since they're Republican, they lie like they scum they are, and spout off how they love freedom and small government (both lies). They forget to mention that "small government" just means getting rid of the laws they happen to disagree with. They're just fine with the government having all the laws they do agree with (especially if it's about dictating to Doctors how to handle vaginas.)
 
2013-03-13 09:21:36 PM  

impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.


It's not the lettuce, tomatoes and so on that makes a salad loaded down with fat, cholesterol and salt.  It's the stuff people put on it.
 
2013-03-13 09:28:05 PM  

seadoo2006: [i.imgur.com image 720x588]

'MERICA!


Where do I get one of those 50-cal kits?
 
2013-03-13 09:31:05 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: KrustyKitten: Uchiha_Cycliste: Just because:
I'm the kind of guy who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine.

How you doin'?

I'm doin' good. It's nice to be able to do what I want.


And copy Denis Leary, but only cuz he's awesome (though I don't agree with "smoking in the non-smoking section" Denis. That's the place for me to breath in wonderfully hazy brown polluted fresh air! :)
 
2013-03-13 09:44:22 PM  

PaLarkin: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

It's not the lettuce, tomatoes and so on that makes a salad loaded down with fat, cholesterol and salt.  It's the stuff people put on it.


Why are you so afraid of people being able to make informed decisions about what they put in their bodies?
 
2013-03-13 09:56:11 PM  
I just saw a bumper sticker on the way home tonight "Annoy a liberal. Work hard, get ahead and succeed" and I was thinking how that can't possibly work. But being fat obnoxious and ignorant would probably work. You can't fault them for changing to an effective strategy.
 
2013-03-13 11:13:47 PM  

Baz744: Theaetetus: Banning limiting portion size, I can understand. From a libertarian perspective, it's "hey, if you want to eat yourself stupid, it's not the government's place to stop you."
But banning requiring calorie counts? What's the theory there? "Freedom requires ignorance"?

Whether or not restaurants post calorie counts should be a function of the market, not forced at gunpoint.

Not saying I agree with this. It's crap. Just saying that's what a market fundamentalist would say. Freedom doesn't "require" ignorance. But freedom requires consumers to be allowed to choose to be ignorant, and restaurants to be able to choose to keep them ignorant.


But by that definition, "freedom" requires the government to stay out of fraudulent contracts. For example, if you agree to buy a new car from me for $20,000, and I deliver a matchbox car, "freedom" would require that you be allowed to choose to be ignorant, so you're fuxored (that's a legal term, btw).

In fact, under that definition, I can lie my ass off to you and we can even have a contract that fully specifies the car, terms, and everything else, but then I deliver something else having received full payment, and gee, gosh, that's your problem because you didn't wait for delivery before payment. It's essentially the ultimate "buyer beware" clause... and because an economy cannot thrive without at least some trust, it would be the end of civilization as we know it. Because, honestly, the fundamental purpose of government is enforcing contracts. Fark "national defense" or any other justifications - the primary reason for government is "that jackass isn't living up to his contract", because without that, you have nothing to govern.

So, basically, people saying "restaurants should be allowed to hide calorie counts" are saying "civilization shouldn't exist." In which case, you should feel free to defraud those people and even rob them blind, since that's what they're asking for.
 
2013-03-13 11:19:51 PM  

DarkSoulNoHope: Uchiha_Cycliste: KrustyKitten: Uchiha_Cycliste: Just because:
I'm the kind of guy who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine.

How you doin'?

I'm doin' good. It's nice to be able to do what I want.

And copy Denis Leary, but only cuz he's awesome (though I don't agree with "smoking in the non-smoking section" Denis. That's the place for me to breath in wonderfully hazy brown polluted fresh air! :)


Nobody today remembers that that is from Demolition man, so sad. DM was even referenced upthread.
 
2013-03-13 11:33:24 PM  

Theaetetus: But by that definition, "freedom" requires the government to stay out of fraudulent contracts. For example, if you agree to buy a new car from me for $20,000, and I deliver a matchbox car, "freedom" would require that you be allowed to choose to be ignorant, so you're fuxored (that's a legal term, btw).


Yes.

In fact, under that definition, I can lie my ass off to you and we can even have a contract that fully specifies the car, terms, and everything else, but then I deliver something else having received full payment, and gee, gosh, that's your problem because you didn't wait for delivery before payment.

I wasn't aware that anyone was talking about repealing laws regarding fraud.
 
2013-03-14 12:24:36 AM  

GORDON: Freedom is stupid.  If you can't persuade, then require.  It's the liberal way.


I'm gonna bite on this one:

Having the information IS THE KEY OF BEING FREE TO DECIDE. And don't hand me this sh*t about "the liberal way." The GOP is the one clamoring for mandatory ultrasounds and 'rape wands,' who you marry, etc.

All this boils down to is that restaurant owners fear their customers knowing about what they're eating. We already do it at grocery stores, so why not there? It doesn't mean you can't order the high-calorie content. You're still free to do what you want, just as you can still smoke a cigarette despite the label on the side of the pack.

/if you are genuinely this dumb, I feel for you
//if you are a performance art troll like MikeLowell and some others around here, I applaud you for it
 
2013-03-14 12:54:25 AM  

I created this alt just for this thread: PaLarkin: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

It's not the lettuce, tomatoes and so on that makes a salad loaded down with fat, cholesterol and salt.  It's the stuff people put on it.

Why are you so afraid of people being able to make informed decisions about what they put in their bodies?


I'm not.  I'm against government trying to dictate every detail of our lives.  If the restaurant owner wants to put up a sign with the nutritional information for items on the menu, let him.  If the customers want this information and the owner won't supply it, let them to to a competitor that will.

Some restaurants already supply this information.  Here's a chart of their menu items and information for each.
Here it gives you the same information in the pdf file, but it lets you select what you want and gives you the total.

giving the consumer information about  what they're eating is a good thing.  I'm just tired of every time I turn around the government is trying to impose more rules, regulations and restrictions on people.
 
2013-03-14 12:55:47 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: DarkSoulNoHope: Uchiha_Cycliste: KrustyKitten: Uchiha_Cycliste: Just because:
I'm the kind of guy who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine.

How you doin'?

I'm doin' good. It's nice to be able to do what I want.

And copy Denis Leary, but only cuz he's awesome (though I don't agree with "smoking in the non-smoking section" Denis. That's the place for me to breath in wonderfully hazy brown polluted fresh air! :)

Nobody today remembers that that is from Demolition man, so sad. DM was even referenced upthread.


Well, I wouldn't say "Nobody". You and I do! :) That's two at least in this world of seven billion, maybe even Denis remembers. :-P
 
2013-03-14 02:49:23 AM  
cool
 
2013-03-14 05:12:00 AM  

Theaetetus: pacified: Bloomberg is right, too.  There is no reason to sell large sodas.  I don't care if it is your farking right.  Is it my "right" to have to pay for your fat ass diabetus?!?!?!  No, Mr. Brimley, it is not.  So STFU, get a small coke, and worry about an actual problem.

And what if I want 64 ounces of  diet coke? Or 64 ounces of seltzer? Or 64 ounces of black iced coffee? Some of us have manly thirst requirements.


Er... just order an extra drink?
 
2013-03-14 08:36:48 AM  

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: I thought that posting calorie counts was a mandatory part of Obamacare. Are restaurants in Virginia simply doing it of their own free will?  I think DC requires them too as well.



Agreed. The movie theaters in the RDU area all have calorie counts on their concession menus.

I'm certain they would rather not inform consumers that their nachos have 2200 calories if given a choice.
 
2013-03-14 08:48:21 AM  

PaLarkin: I created this alt just for this thread: PaLarkin: impaler: PaLarkin: There's no real need for calorie counts... People already know salad is a healthier choice than fried chicken...

If you saw the calorie content on some salads, you wouldn't say something so stupid. But hey, it's not needed because people already know this stuff.

PS: posting calorie counts isn't a "nanny state." Limiting portion sizes would be nanny state type activity - giving out information is not.

It's not the lettuce, tomatoes and so on that makes a salad loaded down with fat, cholesterol and salt.  It's the stuff people put on it.

Why are you so afraid of people being able to make informed decisions about what they put in their bodies?

I'm not.  I'm against government trying to dictate every detail of our lives.  If the restaurant owner wants to put up a sign with the nutritional information for items on the menu, let him.  If the customers want this information and the owner won't supply it, let them to to a competitor that will.

Some restaurants already supply this information.  Here's a chart of their menu items and information for each.
Here it gives you the same information in the pdf file, but it lets you select what you want and gives you the total.

giving the consumer information about  what they're eating is a good thing.  I'm just tired of every time I turn around the government is trying to impose more rules, regulations and restrictions on people.


Are you Mitt "Corporations are people my friend" Romney?  Requiring calorie counts on menus is a regulation on businesses, not people.  This is not about personal freedoms, this is about industrial regulation, so your "won't someone think of the poor companies" schtick isn't going to get much traction around here.
 
2013-03-14 09:17:05 AM  

occamswrist:Take some responsibility for your actions. You want me to take responsibility for my actions while actively limiting the amount of knowledge available about said actions. Are you aware of how much that doesn't make sense? You must be trolling at this point.

I lost 35 pounds. My diet change was centered around counting calories. After I started paying attention it was surprising how many calories some foods have. No, you can't always get a reasonable estimate of how many calories most foods have just by looking. Maybe an autistic person sorta can, but that isn't the norm. I'm left brained, with a high attention to detail (sometimes to a forest for the trees point), with a ~140 IQ (for whatever that's worth) and I was still surprised by caloric values.

No. No you can't tell just by looking. No one can with good enough accuracy to be viable. You need information. Just like with those rolls. If you knew what they were called, vegan roll or butter rolls, you'd have a better idea. See? More information = better informed guess. There's only one reason to actively want to keep your customers uninformed about your product. Deception.

madgonad: Since nobody knows the actual reason for the ban on calorie numbers, I will chime in. Getting actual calorie counts for each menu item is NOT FREE.


Much like keeping up with health codes, it's the cost of doing business. And, much like health codes, it's a reasonable thing to hold someone to. Are you going to biatch about restaurants needing to keep roaches out of the kitchen, too? That shiat isn't free either.
 
2013-03-14 09:59:38 AM  

LiberalConservative: Theaetetus: pacified: Bloomberg is right, too.  There is no reason to sell large sodas.  I don't care if it is your farking right.  Is it my "right" to have to pay for your fat ass diabetus?!?!?!  No, Mr. Brimley, it is not.  So STFU, get a small coke, and worry about an actual problem.

And what if I want 64 ounces of  diet coke? Or 64 ounces of seltzer? Or 64 ounces of black iced coffee? Some of us have manly thirst requirements.

Er... just order an extra drink?


Why should I have to order an extra one when I can just get the 64oz container to start?
 
2013-03-14 10:49:39 AM  

occamswrist: How many people who count calories eat shiat fast food often enough that this matters? My guess is few.



I like knowing the counts because I sometimes go to lunch with coworkers.

I know that I can do alright at Wendy's if I get the Ultimate Chicken Grill with a side salad and a Minute Maid light lemonade.

I would expect the Turkey burger at Burger King to be alright, but in fact it has 30 grams of fat.

The nutrition facts are the only reason I know this.
 
2013-03-14 12:59:54 PM  
Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm
 
2013-03-14 01:21:36 PM  

occamswrist: Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm


OH DEAR GOD LET IT GO. But by your logic, that child should just look at his belly to see that since he's not overweight, he must be eating a healthy diet, right?

By the way, learn how HTML image hosting and posting works. YOU'RE WELCOME.
 
2013-03-14 01:26:24 PM  

occamswrist: Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm



You're so right.  As a way to show solidarity with the third world, we should also stop caring about access to clean water, electricity, shelter, jobs, money, and anything and everything that some people in the world don't have.  After all, if someone somewhere doesn't have it, then it can't be that important.
 
2013-03-14 01:31:30 PM  

kiwimoogle84: occamswrist: Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm

OH DEAR GOD LET IT GO. But by your logic, that child should just look at his belly to see that since he's not overweight, he must be eating a healthy diet, right?

By the way, learn how HTML image hosting and posting works. YOU'RE WELCOME.


Well, once their stomach becomes distended, that means they're eating too much and need to cut back.
 
2013-03-14 02:19:33 PM  

occamswrist: Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm


Good ... I shiat more calories before lunch than that kid eats in a week ... :-D
 
2013-03-14 03:29:12 PM  

Teufelaffe: kiwimoogle84: occamswrist: Complaining about too many calories in your food is a first world problem.

http://mukto-mona.net/Articles/kevin_carter/sudan_child.htm

OH DEAR GOD LET IT GO. But by your logic, that child should just look at his belly to see that since he's not overweight, he must be eating a healthy diet, right?

By the way, learn how HTML image hosting and posting works. YOU'RE WELCOME.

Well, once their stomach becomes distended, that means they're eating too much and need to cut back.


Oh you're right on the money. They should just look at their bellies to see if they're eating too much. Failsafe plan. Thanks. OccamsWrist! YOU'VE SAVED THE WORLD.
 
2013-03-14 03:35:22 PM  
Mandatory calorie counts will cause bullying.

Setting:  The counter of your local ice cream parlor.

Teen  #1: "i'll have a small slushie, please."

Teen #2: "I'll have a vanilla ice cream cone and a cookie."

Teen  #1: "Like you need 450 calories, you fat skank?  I'm texting everybody, oh my god look at your face, I can hear it getting fatter! (texts Madison and Breighlynne, offstage, a picture of Teen #2 and the calorie count)"

Madison: <posts images to facebook>

Breighlynne: <texting to Teen #2> "oink oink, sweaty betty lol"

Teen #2: <suicide>

All because of calorie counts.  The left's war on women continues.
 
2013-03-14 03:44:30 PM  

another cultural observer: Mandatory calorie counts will cause bullying.

Setting:  The counter of your local ice cream parlor.

Teen  #1: "i'll have a small slushie, please."

Teen #2: "I'll have a vanilla ice cream cone and a cookie."

Teen  #1: "Like you need 450 calories, you fat skank?  I'm texting everybody, oh my god look at your face, I can hear it getting fatter! (texts Madison and Breighlynne, offstage, a picture of Teen #2 and the calorie count)"

Madison: <posts images to facebook>

Breighlynne: <texting to Teen #2> "oink oink, sweaty betty lol"

Teen #2: <suicide>

All because of calorie counts.  The left's war on women continues.


*facepalm* sweet baby jesus please be trolling, and terribly at that. They'll do that anyway with or without the calorie counts. Ice cream is ice cream whether it's 300 cals or 1000. Shoot, a bully will find a way to tease a girl about the name Mary Smith if they really wanted to.
 
2013-03-14 03:48:02 PM  

kiwimoogle84: another cultural observer: Mandatory calorie counts will cause bullying.

Setting:  The counter of your local ice cream parlor.

Teen  #1: "i'll have a small slushie, please."

Teen #2: "I'll have a vanilla ice cream cone and a cookie."

Teen  #1: "Like you need 450 calories, you fat skank?  I'm texting everybody, oh my god look at your face, I can hear it getting fatter! (texts Madison and Breighlynne, offstage, a picture of Teen #2 and the calorie count)"

Madison: <posts images to facebook>

Breighlynne: <texting to Teen #2> "oink oink, sweaty betty lol"

Teen #2: <suicide>

All because of calorie counts.  The left's war on women continues.

*facepalm* sweet baby jesus please be trolling, and terribly at that. They'll do that anyway with or without the calorie counts. Ice cream is ice cream whether it's 300 cals or 1000. Shoot, a bully will find a way to tease a girl about the name Mary Smith if they really wanted to.


It wasn't that terrible.
 
2013-03-14 04:25:22 PM  

another cultural observer: kiwimoogle84: another cultural observer: Mandatory calorie counts will cause bullying.

Setting:  The counter of your local ice cream parlor.

Teen  #1: "i'll have a small slushie, please."

Teen #2: "I'll have a vanilla ice cream cone and a cookie."

Teen  #1: "Like you need 450 calories, you fat skank?  I'm texting everybody, oh my god look at your face, I can hear it getting fatter! (texts Madison and Breighlynne, offstage, a picture of Teen #2 and the calorie count)"

Madison: <posts images to facebook>

Breighlynne: <texting to Teen #2> "oink oink, sweaty betty lol"

Teen #2: <suicide>

All because of calorie counts.  The left's war on women continues.

*facepalm* sweet baby jesus please be trolling, and terribly at that. They'll do that anyway with or without the calorie counts. Ice cream is ice cream whether it's 300 cals or 1000. Shoot, a bully will find a way to tease a girl about the name Mary Smith if they really wanted to.

It wasn't that terrible.


Eye of the beholder, darling.
 
2013-03-14 04:37:42 PM  
I remember when Fark wasn't overrun with liberal smug.

Hell, I remember when liberals weren't overrun with liberal smug.

It's an unattractive quality.
 
2013-03-14 08:50:11 PM  

Theaetetus: Banning limiting portion size, I can understand. From a libertarian perspective, it's "hey, if you want to eat yourself stupid, it's not the government's place to stop you."
But banning requiring calorie counts? What's the theory there? "Freedom requires ignorance"?


And finally we agree on something.

There should be no food restrictions on non-poisonous edibles, but if you can't or won't tell your customers what they are eating, including at least an approximate calorie count, you shouldn't be selling food in the first place, and if a population wants to require that knowledge, it isn't hurting anyone.

But hey, when did southern conservatives shy away from a chance to openly promote ignorance?
 
2013-03-15 05:03:19 AM  

pedrop357: LiberalConservative: Theaetetus: pacified: Bloomberg is right, too.  There is no reason to sell large sodas.  I don't care if it is your farking right.  Is it my "right" to have to pay for your fat ass diabetus?!?!?!  No, Mr. Brimley, it is not.  So STFU, get a small coke, and worry about an actual problem.

And what if I want 64 ounces of  diet coke? Or 64 ounces of seltzer? Or 64 ounces of black iced coffee? Some of us have manly thirst requirements.

Er... just order an extra drink?

Why should I have to order an extra one when I can just get the 64oz container to start?


To help other people that don't have good control over their own soda consumption (those that will get a huge size just because they can).
Am in Australia where such large cup sizes were banned before they were made available. Have never heard anyone complain drinks are not large enough. Not come accross anyone ordering an extra drink either. Some places offer a free refill but most do not take advantage. Kind of understand how restricting a product that already is available would upset people. But am pretty sure all people would survive the downsize and most would soon get over it. And in the end you can always order that extra drink.
 
Displayed 45 of 295 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report