New York City wants to ban Large Sodas

[BE Mike]

All this reminds me of a quote from Red Dawn that goes something like this, "Well he!! boys, you are in occupied territory!" If I were in New York, I'd be trying to find my way back to "Free America". Freedom is definitely not a fair system. If it were so, everyone would have to serve in some capacity, not just a small percentage. Everyone would have to pay an equal percentage of taxes. Everyone would get what they need, not what they want and can afford. Although not fair and equitable, I think that our flawed system is superior to any on earth. If you buy into Bloomberg's philosophy you'd easily buy into the Marxist philosophy, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." I thought this was laid to rest when the Berlin Wall came down.

 

[repeter1977]

Rest assured that if we start down this path of controlling lifestyle choices because of medical costs, gun ownership will be right there on the list. So be really careful about supporting such policies when it isn't your ox being gored.

Agreed. In fact, I had posted that as well. Cause Im sure they can come up with some "study" to show that owning firearms if bad for your health. So, they will use that to say that for your own health that you should not be allowed to own firearms, as it would cost too much medically.

Well, their excuse could be, if i pay into it, why shouldnt i get to use it to its fullest as well. And, you can say that overweight people place a heavier burden, but so do so many others. What about the elderly? They place a heavier burden on the system. Newborns? They also have to get all sorts of medical, all those first appointments and vaccinations. What about various races? Some races have different medical problems then others. I know you could say that some of them do not have choices to those, other then the elderly, but this is America. You should have the FREEDOM to pick and chose what you want to eat and drink. If you want the health problems along with it, that should be your choice as well. Just because you go to the doc and have something done, does not mean everything will be back to perfect. Just some points to think about. I dont think that the government should be able to say that I should be able to decide what i should and should not be able to eat anymore then they should decide what kind of firearm I should be allowed to purchase. Or how many firearms I chose to purchase. What if they came out with a study that said the more firearms that you own, the more medical you will need in a lifetime, so for the governments sake, they are going to limit what guns and what types you own?????

here is my argument from earlier, so I don't have to retype it all again. But essentially the same thing. They can say for the greater medical good, you need to turn in your firearms, cause they are unhealthy for you. Or, they will say, only black powder rifles are healthy for you, so you can still have the "right to bear arms", as long as its only those, since they are the only healthy ones.

 

[cobber]

The real problem with the ban is that it doesn't target only those folks who are overweight as a result of poor diet, but casts a wide net and affects everyone's choices.

The rational way to deal with problems of overweight and other lifestyle choices is for those people to pay higher insurance premiums related to medical costs resulting from the choice.

If they're willing to pay the consequences of their choices, then good for them.

But simply restricting everyone's choices because some people make bad decisions is just another bit of our personal liberty being infringed upon by the government. What is it with Bloomberg, wasn't he once a capitalist? Hasn't he heard of Milton Friedman?

Tsk...

 

[rambone]

Bloomberg is pro-beverage-rights, but supports common-sense restrictions.