McD's Contribution to a Heathier You

[JayB]

Trying desperately to find "big brother" in the work of groups actually working towards greater food security, health and nutrition such as this one, but I'm having trouble. Maybe endlessly invoking big, bad government helps you "win" in the Friedmanite mobius strip you bore us with, but it's pretty irrelevant to anybody with boots on the ground.

 

A society in which people can't govern their own appetites can't be governed.

 

Repeating all of this retarded nonsense about obesity being anything other than a consequence of choosing to consume more calories than you expend will result in a massive and costly raft of regulations that have absolutely zero effect on obesity - because it will do absolutely nothing to alter the fundamental problem, which is people choosing to consume more calories than they expend. Which they will continue to do - irrespective of any idiotic labeling campaigns or bureaucratic programs to try to make them stop. It will cost a ton of money and provide a jobs program for people with useless degrees to sit around and run statistical regressions, etc - which may be the point.

 

Ditto for any other centrally planned experiment against reality.

 

Start with a national chastity campaign, see how that works, then move on to efforts to circumvent other fundamental drives that are hard wired into every mammal.

 

 

[prole]

Trying desperately to find "big brother" in the work of groups actually working towards greater food security, health and nutrition such as this one, but I'm having trouble. Maybe endlessly invoking big, bad government helps you "win" in the Friedmanite mobius strip you bore us with, but it's pretty irrelevant to anybody with boots on the ground.

 

A society in which people can't govern their own appetites can't be governed.

 

Repeating all of this retarded nonsense about obesity being anything other than a consequence of choosing to consume more calories than you expend will result in a massive and costly raft of regulations that have absolutely zero effect on obesity - because it will do absolutely nothing to alter the fundamental problem, which is people choosing to consume more calories than they expend. Which they will continue to do - irrespective of any idiotic labeling campaigns or bureaucratic programs to try to make them stop. It will cost a ton of money and provide a jobs program for people with useless degrees to sit around and run statistical regressions, etc - which may be the point.

 

Ditto for any other centrally planned experiment against reality.

 

Start with a national chastity campaign, see how that works, then move on to efforts to circumvent other fundamental drives that are hard wired into every mammal.

 

 

Way over your head. Sorry about that.

 

 

"IT'S THE CALORIES! DO THE MATH!!" LOL

[j_b]

Funny how so many people stopped controlling their appetite in the 80's. Was it a virus or the flourishing economy under Reagan? ROTFL

[prole]

Yes and because eating is a fundamental biological drive, it follows that without a centrally planned draconian nightmare gulag state, we're consuming like ticks. Whatever.

 

 

[Kimmo]

Repeating all of this retarded nonsense about obesity being anything other than a consequence of choosing to consume more calories than you expend ...

 

you live in a very simple world for which god blesses your soul with the gift of happiness amen.

[JayB]

Yes and because eating is a fundamental biological drive, it follows that without a centrally planned draconian nightmare gulag state, we're consuming like ticks. Whatever.

 

 

After the roaring success with zero downsides or unintended consequences that has characterized the governments efforts to curb people's appetites for drugs - your confidence in the government's capacity to curb people's appetites for fats and sugars is certainly well founded.

 

Makes the "abstinence only" people look like flinty-eyed realists.

 

 

 

[rob]

Clearly, there must be some option between "draconian, nazi-ish control" of people's personal diets, and complete and utter libertarian abandonment. Obesity is a problem that affects all of us, and I don't think saying, "oh well, it's all their fault" is an really effective solution.

 

I don't think anybody is arguing that it's not their fault, by the way. Just that something needs to be done. Don't you think?

 

What do you suggest, Jay?

[Kimmo]

actually, i'm arguing that it's not their "fault". this sophomoric morality shit is driving me nuts.

[j_b]

After the roaring success with zero downsides or unintended consequences that has characterized the governments efforts to curb people's appetites for drugs - your confidence in the government's capacity to curb people's appetites for fats and sugars is certainly well founded.

 

Makes the "abstinence only" people look like flinty-eyed realists.

 

and Don Quixote keeps fighting the ferocious giants of prohibition ...

[j_b]

Clearly, there must be some option between "draconian, nazi-ish control" of people's personal diets, and complete and utter libertarian abandonment.

 

they claim that you want to coerce people because they are perfectly happy with the current state of laissez faire.

[j_b]

I don't think anybody is arguing that it's not their fault, by the way.

 

people didn't suddenly become fat slobs in the 80's all of their own

[billcoe]

I don't think anybody is arguing that it's not their fault, by the way. Just that something needs to be done. Don't you think?

 

What do you suggest, Jay?

 

You seem to be suggesting that the gov't step in and do something....That would be par for the course for progressives, "oppressives". Once we are fully a police state you can rest easy. We're heading there, probably to your joy. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2725204/posts

 

They already are mandated to put the ingredients and other information out there, what's wrong with people choosing to eat it or not?

[j_b]

I don't think anybody is arguing that it's not their fault, by the way. Just that something needs to be done. Don't you think?

 

What do you suggest, Jay?

 

You seem to be suggesting that the gov't step in and do something

 

yes, he is suggesting that government as the instrument of the people step in to protect the public interest, including the content of your wallet that you seem always so concerned about when you call for tax cuts or oppose fair tax increases.

[j_b]

That would be par for the course for progressives, "oppressives". Once we are fully a police state you can rest easy.

 

that's rich coming from someone who elected the administration responsible for the patriot act, torture, the unitary executive, multiple unnecessary wars, etc ..

[billcoe]

Typical oppressive bullshit. Attack anyone that doesn't stand behind them going "rah rah".

 

[j_b]

typical wingnut non-response: big on ad-hom, nonexistent on relevant content.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

typical wingnut non-response.

 

Billcoe voted for 'your guy' last time around j_bot. Oops!

[j_b]

here comes the thug

[rob]

How about, next to the dietary info, a giant letter grade. Ho-ho's or donuts might have a giant F-. A bag of rice might have an A. This would be based off the proportions of the RDA that the food meets, per serving.

 

I don't know. I'm just throwing ideas out there. I'm pretty sure, though, that I haven't thrown out any ideas that result in a "police state" or anything like that.

 

There is clearly a problem, yet any suggestion *I* make to solve it is met with shrill, panicked screams about "nazis" and "police states."

 

I've asked politely several times what other people propose to solve the problem, but all I get back is a bunch of nonsense about alcohol prohibition, nanny states, and "it's all their own fault anyway." Or, shockingly, that there is actually no problem at all.

 

[billcoe]

I've asked politely several times what other people propose to solve the problem, but all I get back is a bunch of nonsense about alcohol prohibition, nanny states, and "it's all their own fault anyway." Or, shockingly, that there is actually no problem at all.

 

 

You are framing the questions as if SOMETHING MUST be done Rob. Why do that?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

here comes the thug

 

That's funny, 'cos you sure look like a thug in just about every "response" you crap out at your "interlocutors". Billcoe is hardly a spray and run guy. He'll engage you in a conversation if you try, but all you got is your tired, hackneyed, trademark insults (e.g. "wingnut").

 

BTW, challenging someones purported voting record does not win you an argument. Just an FYI.

 

[j_b]

the only solution they offered was to put an insurance premium on all obese patients, a significant fraction of which do not have a food abuse problem. FREEDUMB!

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I've asked politely several times what other people propose to solve the problem,

 

Forced excursions up Mt Si with water and rice cakes as nourishment?

 

 

[j_b]

He'll engage you in a conversation if you try, but all you got is your tired, hackneyed, trademark insults (e.g. "wingnut").

 

I called him a wingnut after he came out blowing steam about the gulag and "Big Government" as he is accustomed to doing. He is a wingnut.

 

 

BTW, challenging someones purported voting record does not win you an argument. Just an FYI.

 

it's an indication of their reliability.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

He'll engage you in a conversation if you try, but all you got is your tired, hackneyed, trademark insults (e.g. "wingnut").

 

I called him a wingnut after he came out blowing steam about the goulag. He is a wingnut.

 

 

BTW, challenging someones purported voting record does not win you an argument. Just an FYI.

 

it's an indication of their reliability.

 

Is this your excuse?

 

FAIL