satire that isn't really that unrealistic

[PepperElf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=RNJl9EEcsoE

satire video about ordering pizza. with health plan surcharges for ordering "unhealthy" options.


although it's satire, i don't think it's entirely unrealistic. at least not the parts about the government trying to micromanage "healthy" choices.

[Gravekeeper]

Sigh, really? -.-

[Greenday]

Most of it is pretty unrealistic. And government taxes will not be that high.

[PepperElf]

which part? to the extent that the video went? or the notion that the government would ever try to stick it's paws into what we can and cannot eat?

they already levy taxes on drinks they feel we shouldn't have. and nyc had that "supersize ban". do you honestly think it will just end there?

[Greenday]

which part? to the extent that the video went? or the notion that the government would ever try to stick it's paws into what we can and cannot eat?

they already levy taxes on drinks they feel we shouldn't have. and nyc had that "supersize ban". do you honestly think it will just end there?

I don't think it will ever get to the extent the video went. Pizza companies and such having access to all that information? They'll only ever have the information you give them.

And I don't think the government will ever create such absurd taxes as the ones in the video.

[PepperElf]

to the extent of the satire? hopefully not
but the point it makes is valid - more and more our freedom to do what we want, eat what we want, is being eroded at. new sin-taxes, specific food items or choices being banned.

So sure, the satire may never be reality but ... perhaps it's not a bad time to start asking, "When will it be enough?"

[Nekojin]

So sure, the satire may never be reality but ... perhaps it's not a bad time to start asking, "When will it be enough?"

When there's enough social pressure to actually enact sin taxes on fatty foods as a whole (not just adding taxes to fast food, cigarettes, and so on), then you may have a point. Until then, it's just paranoia.

[jackfaire]

Honestly I think the thing people freaking out about the Bloomberg thing as if it were a national trend are forgetting one very important thing.

Most people talking about it are doing so from a "Dude that guy is Nuts!!!!" POV

Except in the cases of school age children I haven't heard anyone talking about trying to improve the health of the nation by denying Adults anything. Rather with Adults it has been about insisting that places like fast food restaurants offer healthy options.

The funny thing about Super Size is that it only ever existed due to customer demand.

I worked at a McDonald's in high school where you could order a Bucket of Fries. However it was not on the menu at all. You had to specially ask for it. We had the "buckets" for it but we didn't display them and we didn't advertise them.


A lot of people asked for bucket of fries so many in fact that soon McDonald's got rid of the bucket of Fries and announced the super size.

That's what gets me is I am sure that's not the only thing that existed because customers were clamoring for it and Corporate listened and then later customers turn around and are like, "Well I didn't really want (x) but they tricked me into wanting it and stuff uhm yeah that's it"

Why is it that this argument resulted in "Stop lying" If I tried to blame my brother for something but it's totally true when blaming some corporation that makes it's money by giving the customers exactly what they said they wanted and then is turned into their whipping boy for it.

[HYHYBT]

McDonald's once upon a time only sold what is now the small fries, in the bag... but people kept buying two of them.

[crashhelmet]

This isn't satire. It's propaganda. It's lies with the sole purpose of instilling fear in the ignorant.

[PepperElf]

When there's enough social pressure to actually enact sin taxes on fatty foods as a whole (not just adding taxes to fast food, cigarettes, and so on), then you may have a point. Until then, it's just paranoia.

it's already not just adding taxes. It's not just NYC's ban.

San fran banned the toys from children's meals, claiming it encourages childhood obesity. link
Transfat bans
LA bans the creation of new fast food resaurants link


Hell other countries have already started implementing higher taxes for fattier foods too - like denmark


Why is it paranoia to recognize that this is already happening? - people are being financially penalized for not picking the foods the government wants them to pick. I didn't just pull those links out of my arsehole.


All the video did was exaggerate what's already happening.

[Rapscallion]

The flip side of "We should be allowed to eat what we want" is the slew of misinformation out there.

HFCS is currently being eyed cautiously by several people for possibly causing ill health, though being at work means I cannot search for it. It's far cheaper than cane sugar, but there are health alerts being raised.

However, there are industry bodies set up to promote it as acceptable, and they only do this because it's far cheaper. If the claims about it affecting the health of consumers are correct, don't you deserve some protection, information, education, and options? When lobbyists are controlling campaign funds for electoral candidates, I take the view that something needs to be done. Preferably by a neutral group.

Rapscallion

Rapscallion

[PepperElf]

"protection, information, education, and options"

1) We don't need protection because we can already chose other foods if we went them. What are we protecting ourselves from? Our own choices?

2) Information and education are already out there. Some chose to ignore it but it's their choice. Like any sign ... you cannot force someone to read a sign they don't want to read.

3) Options. We already have options. Regulating removes options because there is no choice if you remove all other choices.


Do we really need a government that patronizes us as if we're children incapable of deciding?

[Rapscallion]

Do we really need a government that patronizes us as if we're children incapable of deciding?

When you have people wanting to make extra profit on their products persuading you to die younger and want to do so, then yes.

The much-vaunted ideals of the US are fine in principle, but they're espoused by intelligent people. There's an average intelligence level, and quite frankly there are a substantial number of people of lower intellect in every country.

It's a bit hard to protect only based on IQ levels.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

Do we really need a government that patronizes us as if we're children incapable of deciding?

I'm as socially libertarian as the next individual, but I don't operate under the illusion that corporations have any interest in my health; they just want my money. After all, there's plenty more where I came from.

And most people aren't nearly as educated as they like to think they are.

Regulation is necessary. Where the line falls over which it becomes nannying, however, is difficult to determine.

The law restricting how large your schooner of cola is definitely falls into nannying territory.

The law restricting corporations from selling botulism-tainted eggs (which continues to kill people because corporations care about profits, not people, and if you shop around, you can get any lab result you want, eventually) is absolutely a necessity. Just slapping on a label that says "These eggs may or may not be tainted" is completely unacceptable.

^-.-^