Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Dudes, don't destroy what you can exploit. Institute a universal healthcare system, then calculate the cost of unhealthy shit and tax it accordingly. There's MONEY to be made, c'mon!
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.It's sort of like other attempts to upset a long-standing status quo — you have to swing pretty far in the other direction to make the point. Just educating people, just giving them more money — those things won't solve the problem by themselves. You have to address the availability of healthy food.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I don't think that people get what Bloomberg's law does. The law ban the the selling of certain sizes at carts or stands plus etc. Not the complete ban of such product. The only difference is now I have to the grocery or corner store to get a bigger size. The sizes ban from carts and etc. are anything bigger than 16 oz. Starship, he is only make it easier to make the healthier choice.
The Reaper Games starts anew.Thank you for going in-depth Kiddokun. But understand, it's not that I don't see what he's attempting.
My big objections are two-fold. First, there are many other methods who could've chosen that wouldn't piss all over civil liberties and would have higher, more lasting impact. Second, as the dialogue with Fighteer shows, if we allow this, then the government can easily cook up all sorts of reasons to butt into the lives of its citizens.
Yes, this is a smidge off topic.
edited 14th Mar '13 1:51:57 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor@Silas: Yes
There's a thread for what Bloomberg's law actually does. The availability of healthy foods and a promotion of a healthier lifestyle and all that.
I think we're better off talking there about what the law does, and stick with the legal and political aspects here. Such as whether it's alright for another state to prevent such a law by being prohibited by state law (as opposed to a city law).
Edit: Ninja'd again.
edited 14th Mar '13 1:52:46 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!"a rich politician oversteps their bounds"
According to you. You disagree with him, I get it. But to make it seem as if he's doing something draconian and/or monstrous is to ignore those people who agree with him. Even if they don't necessarily agree with the way he's going about it.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Come now 'Teer. Judges don't say "the Mayor's office and the Board of Health didn't follow proper channels" because it rolls off the tongue.
Bloomberg has a reputation for deeming himself above the rules, much like Giuliani before him. I've lived in the Bronx my whole life, I can tell you, NYC mayors are like that.
The fact that this one has stated openly he's out to see 'his vision' implemented in other parts of the country marks him as a serious threat.
It was an honor![]()
Best of said that part of this topic doesn't fit the other thread.
![]()
![]()
That was only because he was moving on to corner stores. Other states can't do this on a wide scale at a city level would be better. Mississippi going just a far, but in the oppisite direction.
edited 14th Mar '13 2:37:40 PM by theweirdKiddokun
The Reaper Games starts anew.
From what I got Best Of said that we should keep the "Such as whether it's alright for another state to prevent such a law by being prohibited by state law (as opposed to a city law)" bit here, which doesn't appear to be what Starship and Fighter are talking about.
Sorry, I should have included the arrow from the start. I realised you were kidding about the Easter Egg bit, after I broke my toe (those things are tough).
edited 14th Mar '13 2:43:24 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
You'll break the Easter Egg!
@ Fighteer:
Knowing you, presumably tied into that is giving people the time to prepare and educating them of the need to eat healthily, right? And if they don't you'll legislate to make sure they will right?
And how many cookery shows do you get over there? Over here, television seems to be full of them...
edited 14th Mar '13 3:30:51 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnHow, in this scenario in which I am a Food Nazi, would I make them do it? Throw them in jail for being fat? No, the point is to guide and persuade, not compel. Also, we're doing this in the other thread now.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"...make them attend compulsory health and cooking classes, put them on compulsory fitness programs, give them the food and tell them how to prepare/cook it, just plain lecture them in a condescending tone until they do something. And if they don't?
Let them Die.
I'm thinking of it being done in the most condescending way, like some of "New" Labour was in the Blair/Brown years, by the way.
edited 14th Mar '13 3:48:00 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On

Starship, if you think I'm talking about police state tactics to enforce healthy eating, then I can't stop you, but you are wrong. I support Bloomberg's legislation on the principle of trying to prevent consumption of unhealthy foods, but I feel that its implementation is terribly lacking.
You can agree with the principle without agreeing on the methods. I've already stated what measures I think would work best at dealing with obesity and related problems; I don't feel like repeating them in detail here. What I want is food manufacturers mandated to package healthy portion sizes with limits on sugar, fat, and salt. I want health education for the public. I want funding for minimum living standards so that people can afford to eat good food. I want the temptation of oversized, underpriced junk food taken off of store shelves.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"