Judge Blocks NYC Cup Ban

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57573654/judge-shoots-down-nyc-ban-of-sugary-drinks-larger-than-16-ounces-day-before-law-set-to-take-effect/

And fat people rejoiced.

[rjv]

"It is arbitrary and capricious..."

i would have to agree with that much

[rjv]

gotta love 'merica !

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4955654416236811&pid=1.7&w=103&h=140&c=7&rs=1

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you want to curb a behavior you tax it. It generates revenue and curbs the behavior. Banning it just increases cost and criminalizes reasonable behavior. People buy cokes at 7-11 because you can buy them for 99c or whatever they cost nowadays. Triple the price and you will have people looking elsewhere.

[DarrinS]

If you want to curb a behavior you tax it. It generates revenue and curbs the behavior. Banning it just increases cost and criminalizes reasonable behavior. People buy cokes at 7-11 because you can buy them for 99c or whatever they cost nowadays. Triple the price and you will have people looking elsewhere.


Or, govt can focus on important problems.

[spursncowboys]

If you want to curb a behavior you tax it. It generates revenue and curbs the behavior. Banning it just increases cost and criminalizes reasonable behavior. People buy cokes at 7-11 because you can buy them for 99c or whatever they cost nowadays. Triple the price and you will have people looking elsewhere.
And then when coke (I haven't been in TX for a while, but assume you mean all kinds of soda) companies have to downsize, throw them on govt subsidized living wages.
I do think this is not what our tax system should be pushing. I do not want your values pushed on me, but that is exactly what would happen. I also doubt you would want my values pushed on you.

[spursncowboys]

legalize drugs and ban 21 oz drinks!?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'd say legalize and tax both.

All I am saying is that if you want to curb behavior because you believe it is for the public good then a ban that criminalizes is expensive while a tax makes money and is effective as well.

If you are saying that curbing sugar consumption is not for societal good then so be it but if you do....

[rjv]

curbing sugar consumption would be good but taxation would also be dangerous territory. first, not everyone who purchases a saturated sweet is unhealthy and they may not purchase said product on a regular basis. secondly, why not tax fatty foods, red meat, salty foods and such (since heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US) ? and last, it may lead to the construction of yet another pariah (fat people are the reason we have such out of control health care costs).

[Th'Pusher]

fat people are the reason we have such out of control health care costs).
Really? I strongly recommend you read this Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2136864,00.html#ixzz2NHArRsC5

[ElNono]

And then when coke (I haven't been in TX for a while, but assume you mean all kinds of soda) companies have to downsize, throw them on govt subsidized living wages.
I do think this is not what our tax system should be pushing. I do not want your values pushed on me, but that is exactly what would happen. I also doubt you would want my values pushed on you.

Under that criteria, you oppose smoking bans too?

[ElNono]

Obesity and Obesity-related death is the #2 cause of death in New York, right after smoking.

This is obviously a personal responsibility issue where most New Yorkers feel they should be irresponsible. So how you address it?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Obesity and Obesity-related death is the #2 cause of death in New York, right after smoking.

This is obviously a personal responsibility issue where most New Yorkers feel they should be irresponsible. So how you address it?

Sure and NYC is also wrangling about school funding cuts. Having more stuff that various agencies have to enforce doesn't help. A tax OTOH.... 2 birds with one stone.

[spursncowboys]

Obesity and Obesity-related death is the #2 cause of death in New York, right after smoking.

This is obviously a personal responsibility issue where most New Yorkers feel they should be irresponsible. So how you address it?
If you are saying how would I address if if I were a new yorker or mayor? Nothing. It wouldn't be my place. But what is the outcome? What is the time and goal for if this works or not?

[spursncowboys]

Sure and NYC is also wrangling about school funding cuts. Having more stuff that various agencies have to enforce doesn't help. A tax OTOH.... 2 birds with one stone.
Do you ever have a solution that doesn't involve more taxes?

[ElNono]

If you are saying how would I address if if I were a new yorker or mayor? Nothing. It wouldn't be my place. But what is the outcome? What is the time and goal for if this works or not?

What do you mean it's not your place? State spends an exorbitant amount of money on healthcare every year. That's your constituents money. It falls squarely on your shoulders.

[spursncowboys]

What do you mean it's not your place? State spends an exorbitant amount of money on healthcare every year. That's your constituents money. It falls squarely on your shoulders.
So state spends money of healthcare. People are not living healthy which creates a higher cost to the government for supplying their healthcare. You want to ban 21 oz sodas?

[Jacob1983]

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/i/2012/09/28/parks-and-recreation-react.jpg

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Do you ever have a solution that doesn't involve more taxes?

Yeah cutting worthless agency enforcements. What idea do you have to curb consumption of something. A ban doesn't exactly help industry either but it costs nonetheless.


And you know what? Don't be a boomer. We need to pay for our shit and part of that is that we need to pay for our SS and medicare. We need to pay for kids education and other worthwhile programs. That means taxes. I look to a time when our country was great and now ain't it. 1945-1965 should be a model for sound fiscal policy. Not what the boomers have done since then.

[spursncowboys]

Yeah cutting worthless agency enforcements. What idea do you have to curb consumption of something. A ban doesn't exactly help industry either but it costs nonetheless.


And you know what? Don't be a boomer. We need to pay for our shit and part of that is that we need to pay for our SS and medicare. We need to pay for kids education and other worthwhile programs. That means taxes. I look to a time when our country was great and now ain't it. 1945-1965 should be a model for sound fiscal policy. Not what the boomers have done since then.
What's a boomer?

So your answer to everything is a top tax rate of 91%?

[ElNono]

So state spends money of healthcare. People are not living healthy which creates a higher cost to the government for supplying their healthcare. You want to ban 21 oz sodas?

Good, now that we've established that the State does have an interest in reducing their top health costs (which includes smoking and obesity), how do you address it?

Apparently, just telling people not to do it hasn't worked. I'm not saying bans are the solution, but ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. So what you do about it? Any ideas?

[spursncowboys]

Good, now that we've established that the State does have an interest in reducing their top health costs (which includes smoking and obesity), how do you address it?

Apparently, just telling people not to do it hasn't worked. I'm not saying bans are the solution, but ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. So what you do about it? Any ideas?

Are you stating that outlawing 21 oz or more will help? Or is this symbolic?

[Th'Pusher]

Are you stating that outlawing 21 oz or more will help? Or is this symbolic?
So, no ideas? Free market will figure it out right? At least throw out some bullshit like the government should get out of the business of providing healthcare.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What's a boomer?

So your answer to everything is a top tax rate of 91%?

Baby boomers. The generation that has had around 40% of the electorate from 1965 to today. The generation that slashed the tax system that their parents put together to take us out of the massive debt that we accrued in WW2 while at the same time rebuilding Europe and Japan. We're in massive debt right now.

The answer to everything is not a 'tax' but the problem has been the answer for the past 48 years has been 'cut taxes.' I am saying let's go back to actually worked.

[ElNono]

Are you stating that outlawing 21 oz or more will help? Or is this symbolic?

I'm saying the State can't keep looking the other way. If they want to try out a ban and see how it works, then it's up to them. It's not like it's novel or some other bans haven't worked (see smoking in public areas bans).

IMO, this is entirely a health/cost concern, which is in no way different than smoking bans.

But, again, if bans are not a solution, what is? How do you address this problem which for NY is very real.

ie: You could go DOK's way, and remove medicare/medcaid for those extremely obese...

[spursncowboys]

incentives towards positive physicals/low blood pressure/. As I'm thinking honestly about your question I'm wondering what business is it of a city mayor to decide what to do to keep me healthy... Once again attack my freedoms to push what's best for people as if the govt are our parents. I cannot believe smart people are honestly arguing for this. I don't want to waste a second thought on this. IMO taxes should only be taken if it is taken from everyone and will benefit everyone. Just my opinion.

[spursncowboys]

Baby boomers. The generation that has had around 40% of the electorate from 1965 to today. The generation that slashed the tax system that their parents put together to take us out of the massive debt that we accrued in WW2 while at the same time rebuilding Europe and Japan. We're in massive debt right now.

The answer to everything is not a 'tax' but the problem has been the answer for the past 48 years has been 'cut taxes.' I am saying let's go back to actually worked.
If you don't mind me asking what is your tax bracket?

[ElNono]

incentives towards positive physicals/low blood pressure/. As I'm thinking honestly about your question I'm wondering what business is it of a city mayor to decide what to do to keep me healthy... Once again attack my freedoms to push what's best for people as if the govt are our parents. I cannot believe smart people are honestly arguing for this. I don't want to waste a second thought on this. IMO taxes should only be taken if it is taken from everyone and will benefit everyone. Just my opinion.

What kind of incentives?

As long as all taxpayers are paying for your health bill when you get old and get dumped from the for-profit insurance to the government-run healthcare because you're "high risk", it will be the government (especially governor) responsibility to make sure that bill doesn't get out of hand. Arguably, prevention is actually the *smart* thing to do here.

I mean, give me something here. Perhaps sign an affidavit renouncing to government healthcare and then get issued an all-you-can-eat card?

[spursncowboys]

What kind of incentives?

As long as all taxpayers are paying for your health bill when you get old and get dumped from the for-profit insurance to the government-run healthcare because you're "high risk", it will be the government (especially governor) responsibility to make sure that bill doesn't get out of hand. Arguably, prevention is actually the *smart* thing to do here.

I mean, give me something here. Perhaps sign an affidavit renouncing to government healthcare and then get issued an all-you-can-eat card?
Well technically the government is taking money from me every month. So any SS and medicare I use will be paid and full. Especially if you count the compound interest they should be making. In a realistic idea, putting into account the morons in office right now I think making incentives for anyone living a healthier life. Incentives like tax rebates for having a gym membership. No fees for parks. More hiking trails.
And if you are living a unhealthy lifestyle you shouldn't get the same healthcare fees as myself. I think it says alot about our society that there is such a combined problem of poor and unhealthy/overweight.
What about you ElNono...

[Trainwreck2100]

This was a good law but it's blatant corporate favoritism was stupid

[ElNono]

Well technically the government is taking money from me every month. So any SS and medicare I use will be paid and full. Especially if you count the compound interest they should be making. In a realistic idea, putting into account the morons in office right now I think making incentives for anyone living a healthier life. Incentives like tax rebates for having a gym membership. No fees for parks. More hiking trails.
And if you are living a unhealthy lifestyle you shouldn't get the same healthcare fees as myself. I think it says alot about our society that there is such a combined problem of poor and unhealthy/overweight.
What about you ElNono...

Technically, the government is taking money off you now that pay for Medicare/SS now, with the promise future generations will do the same for you when you're old. But that's mostly the *federal* government, a whole different ballgame, since, as we know, they cannot go bankrupt.

State governments, however, are in no such position since they cannot create their own money, and they're on the hook at least with their portion of Medicaid, which isn't chump change.

Personally I don't think such incentives work, but I appreciate you taking the time to come up with them. I mean, Central Park is open and full of activities all year round, and if you ever lived near the big Apple, you know it's a great city to walk.

I would agree some stuff works against it though. Traffic is killer and everything is severely overpriced. I live 40 minutes away from Manhattan, and driving means at least $20 toll on the bridge + parking. If I take the train, that's $25 a pop for a roundtrip ticket. It's just difficult to justify such expense for leisure on any regular basis.

Overall, I don't think it's a topic with an easy solution. But I do think sooner rather than later it needs to be addressed. People seemingly don't want any part of personal responsibility when it comes to extra large sugary drinks. At least in NY.

[Wild Cobra]

So....

How many of you are sorry that this authoritarian act, was struck down?

[rjv]

Really? I strongly recommend you read this Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2136864,00.html#ixzz2NHArRsC5


well that was precisely my point; that try as we may to make a scapegoat out of the obese demographic, they are not the reason we have spiraling out of control health costs. placing a tax or ban on products that are targeted to the former just lends more ammo to those who would argue what i was sarcastically referencing.

[LnGrrrR]

incentives towards positive physicals/low blood pressure/. As I'm thinking honestly about your question I'm wondering what business is it of a city mayor to decide what to do to keep me healthy... Once again attack my freedoms to push what's best for people as if the govt are our parents. I cannot believe smart people are honestly arguing for this. I don't want to waste a second thought on this. IMO taxes should only be taken if it is taken from everyone and will benefit everyone. Just my opinion.

Because unhealthy people have emergency complications more often, which they then go to the emergency room for. Unless you're going to start turning people away at the ER doors if they don't have the cash.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

If it's true this law only banned sodas in restaurants and not convenience stores, then I'm glad it got struck down as that's favoritism and convenience stores probably even more to blame than restaurants. If people only drank soda when they were eating it wouldn't be an issue, the real issue is how many people stop at circle-k twice a day in the morning and during lunch to get a big gulp because their body has developed a constant need for soda and they can't be productive at work without it.

IMO, the solution is to not restrict the sizes of soda at all, but ban the usage of hugh fructose corn syrup so soda companies have to use real sugar as the sweetener. If that were the case people wouldn't be able to drink high quantities like we can now and no one would develop the crazy soda addiction a lot of people have. High fructose corn syrup is the problem, not the soda. The fact marijuana is illegal but high fructose corn syrup isn't is a total joke.

[rjv]

IMO, the solution is to not restrict the sizes of soda at all, but ban the usage of hugh fructose corn syrup so soda companies have to use real sugar as the sweetener.


i have to agree with that entirely. HFCS is deadly. there are other components to sodas that are unhealthy but it really is the corn syrup that is so terrible.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

i have to agree with that entirely. HFCS is deadly. there are other components to sodas that are unhealthy but it really is the corn syrup that is so terrible.
Unfortunately the FDA is maybe the most corrupt federal agency in America (which is saying a lot) and they're in the corn industry's back pocket. Otherwise lobbying groups like the Corn Refiners Association wouldn't be able to publish completely dishonest and flat out false information that "corn sugar" is chemically identical to cane sugar on bullshit sites like sweetsurprise.com, and the FDA might have actually done something when it found out HFCS actually has mercury in it.

As much as Bloomberg would like to do about this, nothing he does will matter as long as corporate agriculture lobbying controls the people who are supposed to regulate corporate agriculture.

[rjv]

Unfortunately the FDA is maybe the most corrupt federal agency in America (which is saying a lot) and they're in the corn industry's back pocket. Otherwise lobbying groups like the Corn Refiners Association wouldn't be able to publish completely dishonest and flat out false information that "corn sugar" is chemically identical to cane sugar on bullshit sites like sweetsurprise.com, and the FDA might have actually done something when it found out HFCS actually has mercury in it.

As much as Bloomberg would like to do about this, nothing he does will matter as long as corporate agriculture lobbying controls the people who are supposed to regulate corporate agriculture.


i remember the first time i saw the CRA's commercial on how HCFS is the same as sugar. it was such a blatant attempt at propaganda it was almost surreal.

[ElNono]

If it's true this law only banned sodas in restaurants and not convenience stores, then I'm glad it got struck down as that's favoritism and convenience stores probably even more to blame than restaurants. If people only drank soda when they were eating it wouldn't be an issue, the real issue is how many people stop at circle-k twice a day in the morning and during lunch to get a big gulp because their body has developed a constant need for soda and they can't be productive at work without it.

IMO, the solution is to not restrict the sizes of soda at all, but ban the usage of hugh fructose corn syrup so soda companies have to use real sugar as the sweetener. If that were the case people wouldn't be able to drink high quantities like we can now and no one would develop the crazy soda addiction a lot of people have. High fructose corn syrup is the problem, not the soda. The fact marijuana is illegal but high fructose corn syrup isn't is a total joke.

I try to avoid it like the plague, tbh, which is difficult since it's imbued into almost seemingly everything these days.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I try to avoid it like the plague, tbh, which is difficult since it's imbued into almost seemingly everything these days.
Yeah I've gone the last few months eating virtually no HFCS, but grocery shopping for stuff that doesn't have any of it is tough.

Even M:lolxican soda doesn't use HFCS because of how bad it is.

[Useruser666]

http://news.yahoo.com/americas-love-water-171119808--finance.html

NEW YORK (AP) — It wasn't too long ago that America had a love affair with soda. Now, an old flame has the country's heart.

As New York City grapples with the legality of a ban on the sale of large cups of soda and other sugary drinks at some businesses, one thing is clear: soda's run as the nation's beverage of choice has fizzled.

In its place? A favorite for much of history: Plain old H2O.

For more than two decades, soda was the No. 1 drink in the U.S. with per capita consumption peaking in 1998 at 54 gallons a year, according industry tracker Beverage Digest. Americans drank just 42 gallons a year of water at the time.

But over the years, as soda increasingly came under fire for fueling the nation's rising obesity rates, water quietly rose to knock it off the top spot.

Americans now drink an average of 44 gallons of soda a year, a 17 percent drop from the peak in 1998. Over the same time, the average amount of water people drink has increased 38 percent to about 58 gallons a year. Bottled water has led that growth, with consumption nearly doubling to 21 gallons a year.

Maybe I am a little more optimistic about health trends. I do think the market can be used to guide people to make good choices, but I do not want this to be legislated to us. I am glad this was overturned.

[DarrinS]

I try to avoid it like the plague, tbh, which is difficult since it's imbued into almost seemingly everything these days.

If you take one sip, you instantly become morbidly obese. True story.

[DarrinS]

What's worse for you? A 32 oz Big Gulp with Coca Cola? Or a 24 oz Starbucks Mocha Chip Frappuccino?

[ElNono]

If you take one sip, you instantly become morbidly obese. True story.

I only have an anecdote. I drank Coca Cola made with sugar cane all my life growing up. Never gained weight.

After a few years in the US, my weight started to balloon like crazy. Eventually, I decided to just try switching from regular Coke to Coke Zero, which has no HFCS... lost nearly 30 pounds in a matter of months. Still losing weight right now as I keep on trying to avoid that crap. Since the wife went on a carb-counting diet and we started reading all the labels on everything, it's just crazy what they put that shit on. Literally almost everything.

[ElNono]

What's worse for you? A 32 oz Big Gulp with Coca Cola? Or a 24 oz Starbucks Mocha Chip Frappuccino?

They're both bad if not consumed with moderation. And that's seemingly the problem, the average New Yorker doesn't give a crap about moderation.

[spursncowboys]

Technically, the government is taking money off you now that pay for Medicare/SS now, with the promise future generations will do the same for you when you're old. But that's mostly the *federal* government, a whole different ballgame, since, as we know, they cannot go bankrupt.

State governments, however, are in no such position since they cannot create their own money, and they're on the hook at least with their portion of Medicaid, which isn't chump change.

Personally I don't think such incentives work, but I appreciate you taking the time to come up with them. I mean, Central Park is open and full of activities all year round, and if you ever lived near the big Apple, you know it's a great city to walk.

I would agree some stuff works against it though. Traffic is killer and everything is severely overpriced. I live 40 minutes away from Manhattan, and driving means at least $20 toll on the bridge + parking. If I take the train, that's $25 a pop for a roundtrip ticket. It's just difficult to justify such expense for leisure on any regular basis.

Overall, I don't think it's a topic with an easy solution. But I do think sooner rather than later it needs to be addressed. People seemingly don't want any part of personal responsibility when it comes to extra large sugary drinks. At least in NY.
Well the medicare is distributed throughout the states. I think those incentives work for people who want to get healthier. But yeah as a society I don't think it will be the end all fix. But it would do a much better job than making a law against buying a 21 oz drink. Colorado has alot of public transportation. Most of Col SPrings uses it. There are also trails all over as well as bike lanes. From what I can tell, not based on facts, there seems to be alot more healthier living. There's a cemented lit trail from Colorado Springs to Denver and it is used. I think there needs to be a grown up look at where you live. Every area has their own culture and I think that should be where you start. But I don't see the govt, in any capacity, has any real answers except to diminish my rights in the name of helping.

Restating what I said earlier, it is a big problem that there is a large amount of people who are on welfare and excessively overweight. I also think it is a form of child abuse to allow your child to be overweight.

[spursncowboys]

Disclaimer: when I state overweight, I mean excessively. I don't mean a beer belly or anything like that. But where it is lowering your life expectancy.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

What's worse for you? A 32 oz Big Gulp with Coca Cola? Or a 24 oz Starbucks Mocha Chip Frappuccino?
Neither one is as bad for you as bleach or laundry detergent. Surprised no one is talking about those.

[Latarian Milton]

i see the logic behind banning cokes. cokes contain cocaine and you don't need much advanced technology to extract the cocaine out of it so shit's more like a cheap source of drug material in this regard. the government has every reason to ban or denature that shit imho

[spursncowboys]

Neither one is as bad for you as bleach or laundry detergent. Surprised no one is talking about those.
Now you want to take away my right to drink laundry detergent? You fucking liberals never stop!

[spursncowboys]

i see the logic behind banning cokes. cokes contain cocaine and you don't need much advanced technology to extract the cocaine out of it so shit's more like a cheap source of drug material in this regard. the government has every reason to ban or denature that shit imho
This reminds me of a news story a few years back that kids were drinking hand sanitizer to get drunk. I mean come on...Does any of your friends have an older brother?

[mavs>spurs]

that nazi should be imprisoned for trying to undermine the concept of free will, now i don't even drink cokes but if i did i'd carry around a 2 gallon bucket and slurp it through a water hose tbh fuck bloomberg

[ElNono]

Well the medicare is distributed throughout the states. I think those incentives work for people who want to get healthier. But yeah as a society I don't think it will be the end all fix. But it would do a much better job than making a law against buying a 21 oz drink. Colorado has alot of public transportation. Most of Col SPrings uses it. There are also trails all over as well as bike lanes. From what I can tell, not based on facts, there seems to be alot more healthier living. There's a cemented lit trail from Colorado Springs to Denver and it is used. I think there needs to be a grown up look at where you live. Every area has their own culture and I think that should be where you start. But I don't see the govt, in any capacity, has any real answers except to diminish my rights in the name of helping.

Restating what I said earlier, it is a big problem that there is a large amount of people who are on welfare and excessively overweight. I also think it is a form of child abuse to allow your child to be overweight.

Fair enough.

Unfortunately, the 'grown up look' isn't working and hasn't worked in a long time, in the meantime, obesity-related illnesses (diabetes being one that keeps on growing and requires constant treatment as it's chronic) and deaths keep on rising. And the cost of treating those people keeps growing as well, much faster than the inflation rate. Again, I don't think there's a silver bullet solution here, nor I necessarily agree the ban is the be-all, cure-all solution. From strictly a cost-reduction angle, it needs to be addressed, IMO.

[spursncowboys]

Fair enough.

Unfortunately, the 'grown up look' isn't working and hasn't worked in a long time, in the meantime, obesity-related illnesses (diabetes being one that keeps on growing and requires constant treatment as it's chronic) and deaths keep on rising. And the cost of treating those people keeps growing as well, much faster than the inflation rate. Again, I don't think there's a silver bullet solution here, nor I necessarily agree the ban is the be-all, cure-all solution. From strictly a cost-reduction angle, it needs to be addressed, IMO.
Then when does the slippery slope stop? Would you be ok with the govt only allowing you a regulated amount of time on the tv and internet? I think if you are going to tell anyone that they can get medical coverage no matter what they do to their body, you're going to get this kind of thing.

It made me laugh today thinking about the stereotypical pot head. If they legalized weed and criminalized sin foods. How he/she couldn't get to the promise land. So close...So close. :lol

[ElNono]

Then when does the slippery slope stop? Would you be ok with the govt only allowing you a regulated amount of time on the tv and internet? I think if you are going to tell anyone that they can get medical coverage no matter what they do to their body, you're going to get this kind of thing.

Well, you don't get diabetes from watching TV or being on the interwebs. I don't really see a slippery slope there. Just like with abusing alcohol, abusing sugar intake has a direct impact on type II diabetes diagnosis.
And frankly, this is a fairly new development. The use of HFCS as the main sweetner exploded in the early 80s.


It made me laugh today thinking about the stereotypical pot head. If they legalized weed and criminalized sin foods. How he/she couldn't get to the promise land. So close...So close. :lol

:lol I guess Doritos still work

[Wild Cobra]

Why do people think this authoritarian attitude to protect us from ourselves if acceptable?

[ElNono]

^ capt straw to the rescue

[Wild Cobra]

^ capt straw to the rescue
Mr. Big government El I know-it-all to the rescue.


I agree with these dictated authoritarian policies, for your own good!

[ElNono]

:lol having to make up quotes because you can't quote me directly stating that

[Wild Cobra]

:lol having to make up quotes because you can't quote me directly stating that
You do it to me all the time. Why not return the favor?

[ElNono]

You do it to me all the time. Why not return the favor?

Link?

[Wild Cobra]

Link?
LOL...

Seriously?

Your forget how you paraphrase my words to mean what you want them to mean?

[ElNono]

LOL...

Seriously?

Your forget how you paraphrase my words to mean what you want them to mean?

:lol so I didn't make up a quote with you saying something you didn't? Okay

[Wild Cobra]

:lol so I didn't make up a quote with you saying something you didn't? Okay
No, you changed my words enough for them to be changed in meaning, and you do that all the time.

Stop with the cop-outs, and man up to your actions.

[ElNono]

No, you changed my words enough for them to be changed in meaning, and you do that all the time.

Stop with the cop-outs, and man up to your actions.

I take that means no link? That's what I thought.

[TeyshaBlue]

lol...WC is your boutons.:lol

[Wild Cobra]

I have no integrity.
Yes, that is clear. I call you on it over and over in threads, and you act as if I am wrong.

[ElNono]

lol...WC is your boutons.:lol

pretty much :lol

[ChumpDumper]

You do it to me all the time.No, that's me.
GFY.See?

[Winehole23]

http://dailycurrant.com/2013/05/02/bloomberg-refused-second-slice-of-pizza-at-local-restaurant/

[ElNono]

http://dailycurrant.com/2013/05/02/bloomberg-refused-second-slice-of-pizza-at-local-restaurant/

:lmao that's awesome trolling, tbh

[Winehole23]

Welcome news from New York: a unanimous four-judge appeals court has confirmed a trial court order striking down the New York Department of Health’s attempt to ban large soda portions. The decision is here (http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_05505.htm), Newsday coverage here (http://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/appeals-court-nyc-s-big-soda-ban-unconstitutional-1.5795637), and our earlier coverage here (http://www.cato.org/search/results/bloomberg%20soda).


The appeals court ruled that in enacting the ban the NYC department of health had overstepped its legally granted powers. As I observed in this Commentary article in March (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/03/13/bloombergs-soda-grab-and-the-administrative-state/), New York has its own distinctive body of law by which courts step in to prevent administrative agencies from claiming quasi-legislative powers not clearly delegated to them, the rules laid out in a 1987 case called Boreali v. Axelrod. The appeals court agreed with trial court judge Milton Tingling that Boreali was directly controlling, and that the department had clearly overstepped Boreali’s ban on essentially legislative action by an administrative agency. (Why, you ask, don’t federal courts apply as tough a standard to keep administrative agencies in Washington, D.C. from arrogating to themselves essentially legislative functions? Good question…)


Although the appeals court did not reach the issue of whether the Bloomberg rules were “arbitrary and capricious,” and although neither it nor Judge Tingling reached the underlying issues of individual consumer choice that are at stake, this was far more than just a “win on a technicality.” The rule that government agencies cannot overstep their lawfully granted powers is a vital one in protecting the liberty of the citizen. On this issue, and not this alone, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has acted more as a Napoleon issuing peremptory dictates than as an elected executive carrying out the will of legislators on the City Council and in Albany.

http://www.cato.org/blog/send-napoleon-back-waiter-appeals-court-flunks-nyc-soda-ban?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Cato-at-liberty+%28Cato+at+Liberty%29

[boutons_deux]

cato! :lol

[Winehole23]

appeals court upheld the order striking down the ban. the CATO posting includes links to the decision and the Newsday coverage, for those inclined to read.

[TeyshaBlue]

lol thinkprogress

[SnakeBoy]

Apparently, just telling people not to do it hasn't worked. I'm not saying bans are the solution, but ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. So what you do about it? Any ideas?

Just stop subsidizing it.

[boutons_deux]

lol thinkprogress

TB :lol