Page 23 of 52  •  Prev 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 ... 52 Next
Switch to Forum Live View
Locked: Big Apple Soda Ban
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:11PM #221
Cesmom
Posts: 4,585

Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, CharikIeia wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:37PM, Girlchristian wrote:


Where does legislation like this end?



I think the question in the USA is rather, under what conditions would even you start to think that "legislation like this" could begin?


Do you approve of tobacco taxes? If so, how is this different?




It is different because it's not limiting a thing.  A smoker can buy cigarettes by the carton if they choose...heck they can buy them by the case if they want.  No one's telling them they have to buy them a pack at a time or not at all.

Our need to learn should always outweigh our need to be right

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

More people would learn from their mistakes if they weren't so busy denying them.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:16PM #222
teilhard
Posts: 49,996

But we greatly restrict and control and limit Access to Tobacco -- especially by YOUNG People -- and we now impose HEAVY Taxes on it ...


Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:11PM, Cesmom wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, CharikIeia wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:37PM, Girlchristian wrote:


Where does legislation like this end?



I think the question in the USA is rather, under what conditions would even you start to think that "legislation like this" could begin?


Do you approve of tobacco taxes? If so, how is this different?




It is different because it's not limiting a thing.  A smoker can buy cigarettes by the carton if they choose...heck they can buy them by the case if they want.  No one's telling them they have to buy them a pack at a time or not at all.





Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:43PM #223
Erey
Posts: 18,398

Jun 13, 2012 -- 4:53PM, rabello wrote:


More mischaracterizations and misrepresentations....and personal insults instead of legitimate rebuttals to legitimate challenges.


Jun 13, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Erey wrote:


You don't want to go sugar free, you just want to scream and foam at the mouth at how the "stupid people" need saving from themselves.  A long as they don't infringe on your sugar consumption, right?  hypocrite




You've been out of control on this thread for a long time, now, Erey.  I do regret that you just don't get it.   However, you are wasting your time and my time with your insults and your repeated mischaracterizations and misrepresentations of what I say and what I believe.  So don't waste more of your time responding anymore, unless you have a need to, because you and I are done, here.  It is rather puzzling that you could become so enraged with both fists clenched and flaying any which way because other people don't see the world in the harsh, punative way you do, all over something that doesn't even affect you !! 


ps...I haven't called people "stupid"....I DON'T call people "stupid"...those are YOUR words, not mine...oh, and GirlChristian's words.  Own them.   Your "mean girl" routines are amusing.




You don't call the people stupid but you are certainly implying they are stupid and can't be left to control themselves.  That certainly paints a stupid picture of incompetent people that need a nanny state to control calorie intake for them. 


And Rabello, you started the nastiness with your accusations that people who disagree with you don't care about others and are just uncaring.  dish it out, but can't take it

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 12:09AM #224
rabello
Posts: 20,400

Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:11PM, Cesmom wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, CharikIeia wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:37PM, Girlchristian wrote:


Where does legislation like this end?



I think the question in the USA is rather, under what conditions would even you start to think that "legislation like this" could begin?


Do you approve of tobacco taxes? If so, how is this different?




It is different because it's not limiting a thing.  A smoker can buy cigarettes by the carton if they choose...heck they can buy them by the case if they want.  No one's telling them they have to buy them a pack at a time or not at all.




I don't see the difference you're referring to.


If a smoker wants to buy a case of cigarettes, they can do it, and they're going to pay more for it than someone who buys a pack. Not only in increased price set by the seller, but in increased controlling, nanny-state, horrible-government taxes.


If a soda drinker wants to buy more than 16 ounce of a super-sugary drink, they can do it, they're just going to pay more than someone who buys it in a 16 ounce container, and that won't be in those controlling, nanny-state, horrible-government taxes, but in increased price set by the seller.


Same thing in each case.   It's not about telling people what they can buy and/or consume.  It's about mildly regulating what profiteers can sell, for the good of the many when what they're selling causes harm, and even then sellers are not prohibited in any way, shape or form from selling anything they want to sell.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 12:29AM #225
rabello
Posts: 20,400

Jun 13, 2012 -- 8:50PM, CharikIeia wrote:


So you don't believe in the Law of Demand?
In the midst of the Capitalist Nation?
And you believe in public education instead?
Excuse me, but that's really funny, in its naïveté!


If your parental socialising dictates to you that you must ideologically view it so negatively, so be it. It's a sorry state of affairs when a people structurally considers its own elected representatives incapacitated and as individuals either corrupt or evil.


I can only offer incentives to decide more freely and consider the option of "good government" as well, by providing good reasons and data to make you think twice.




A truly wonderful post, Charikleia.  Thank you!

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 1:50AM #226
Ebon
Posts: 10,113

Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:16PM, teilhard wrote:

But we greatly restrict and control and limit Access to Tobacco -- especially by YOUNG People -- and we now impose HEAVY Taxes on it ...



Your tobacco taxes aren't that heavy. Marlboros are $11.50 a pack here, 80% of which is tax.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 8:58AM #227
Nepenthe
Posts: 2,584

Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, rabello wrote:

I'm pretty much done here. I started out because there was so much knee-jerk reactionary-ism here, and since that ain't gonna change, I'm not wasting any more time.  




That is a shame, since while I may not agree with you, I always find that you present reasoned and intelligent arguements.

Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 9:04AM #228
Nepenthe
Posts: 2,584

Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, rabello wrote:

Nepenthe, I am sorry I did not respond to your post sooner, but I did want to address it.  First off, thank you for the measured and respectful way you responded to my post.   I guess what I don't understand is how what Bloomberg came up with is exerting more control over the city.  I could see it if he was scrubbing voter rolls the way the governor of Florida is doing, or establishing poll tax of voter tests for minorities, or establishing a curfew for blacks, hispanics and puerto ricans, or granting no bid contract to cronies, or establishing a veritiable police state like Giuliani did, but having businesses serve 16 ounces in one transaction just doesn't rise to the occasion of "gov't control" in my book



Yeah I can see your point here, especially when compared with what is occuring in other cities and states.


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, rabello wrote:

.....they'd have to reallow smoking and give drunk drivers their rights back to be consistent with the knee-jerk anti-government side.



On a side nore, there are libertarians who believe they should do away with DWI laws.  The justification is that no other person's rights or property is affected until the person actually causes an accident, at which point they should be punished/charged.  I must say that I do not agree with this position, although I do agree with the position that DWI check points are unconstitutional and should be banished.


 


Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 9:11AM #229
Nepenthe
Posts: 2,584

While I can certainly see and understand the viewpoint in support of this ban, I do not accept the analogy with tobacco.  Tobacco use creates second hand smoke, which in turn infringes on the health and rights of those in the vicinity.  Soda use does not produce this, and only infringes on the health of the person who voluntarily puts it into their body. 

Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 14, 2012 - 9:14AM #230
Cesmom
Posts: 4,585

Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:16PM, teilhard wrote:


But we greatly restrict and control and limit Access to Tobacco -- especially by YOUNG People -- and we now impose HEAVY Taxes on it ...


Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:11PM, Cesmom wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:48PM, CharikIeia wrote:


Jun 13, 2012 -- 5:37PM, Girlchristian wrote:


Where does legislation like this end?



I think the question in the USA is rather, under what conditions would even you start to think that "legislation like this" could begin?


Do you approve of tobacco taxes? If so, how is this different?




It is different because it's not limiting a thing.  A smoker can buy cigarettes by the carton if they choose...heck they can buy them by the case if they want.  No one's telling them they have to buy them a pack at a time or not at all.








I don't have any problem with limiting access to young people.  They took all the pop and candy machines out of my kids' high school.  I thought that was a great idea.  I take issue with the government trying to limit access to adults who should be allowed to exercise their own self control instead of relying on the state to do it for them.  As for taxes...tax away...tax sugar, tax cigarettes, tax whatever...it's not the same as removing buying options from the menu.  

Our need to learn should always outweigh our need to be right

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

More people would learn from their mistakes if they weren't so busy denying them.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 23 of 52  •  Prev 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 ... 52 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook