Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Prohibiting new fast food restaurants in poor neighborhoods

Cynthetiq · 08-05-2008, 10:19 AM

Because subway is healthier????

"SUBWAY is a registered trademark of Doctor's Associates Inc" It is owned by doctors and associates! It must be healthy!

Take a better look at their nutritional specs and you'll find they are not healtier by any stretch of the means for a majority of their food.

As far as them zoning, cities are free to do so. It doesn't matter, people do what they do because that's what they want. So they'll drive further out for McDonald's. I drove FAR to go to Carl's Jr. when I lived in LA because that's what I wanted when I could have easily gotten a McD, BK, or Jack in the Box.

This also doesn't address the small strip mall eateries that may also have "bad" food. So they penalize the large corporation.

Yep, when the cities and states don't get the taxes from the businesses, they'll scrambe to raise taxes on the individuals directly.
-----Added 5/8/2008 at 02 : 20 : 38-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by kutulu

It is not LA's business to enforce dietary restrictions on their populace.

From the article:

This is such crap. A sit-down restaurant is not a healthy alternative to fast food. Escpecially when we are talking about the chain restaurants that would be looking at this area as a potential market. If you compare the calorie, sodium, fat contents, etc. in a typical meal from a sit-down restaurant to a meal from a fast food joint, the fast food joint wins easily.

yep. The Olive Garden, Chili's, TGIFriday's all them corporate restaurants are not better than McDs especially when the upsell the appetizers and deserts.