pan6467

I heard on the news the other night (haven't googled for a hard press release) that the government now wants to put warning labels on sodas.

They would read "This beverage may cause: diabetes, obesity, kidney disease and oral decay."

This is huge in that, 40 some years ago that's how the fight against cigarettes started.

It seems the government is willing to make choices for us. In Ohio, we just had the tax per pack go up 70 cents, while it is becoming more and more illegal to smoke in public.

It is just a matter of time now before they start looking for ways to control soda consumptions.

If a government is going to dictate what you can or cannot do for health purposes. IMHO, if the government wants to tell me what I may or may not consume then they better pay for my healthcare, otherwise they have no right in what I consume.

I understand the government is looking to find new tax revenue since jobs are shipped overseas and we have nothing but low paying jobs here. But where does this stop?

They'll hound Coke and Pepsi like they did RJR and Philip Morris until the soda companies forfeit big monies, then the government draining those companies dry will go after someone else. Where does it end? They refuse to even discuss any type of universal healthcare but yet they are willing to tax and sue and regulate companies out of business.

And then there's our friend the fruits and vegetables. Have you seen lately how many chemicals the government allows them to use for fertilzers, pesticides, and so on, not to mention hybrids? Or the meats and all the dyes, steroids and chemicals they inject our meats with legally?

You're going to tell me how dangerous my smoking is, ban me from doing it in public and then tell me how badly that tax money is needed?

You're going to put labels on sodas and tell me how dangerous they are as you let companies put unnatural, untested and who knows what they cause chemicals in my fruits and vegetables?

Where does it end? If you pay for my medical, then you have a right to tell me what to consume, however, you choose to allow healthcare companies continue to rape us, then you have no right to tell me what or how to consume anything.

And I just love the people who advocate these "warnings" and bannings....

"Well smoking is bad for you..... second hand smoke..... I don't want to pay your healthcare..... government has to protect us"

Same F'n people turn around and say "government is too strong and not sticking to what the founding fathers meant.... universal healthcare over my dead body...... government has no right to tell me this but has every right to keep your smoke out of my face in a privately owned restaurant/bar."

Which is it freaking hypocrites? Don't tell me government has a right to ban or regulate my smoking or soda then complain government is too big.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

pan6467

Here's one of the many articles dealing with the topic:

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Redlemon

Hmm, based on that article, that's an overstatement. The "Center for Science in the Public Interest" has submitted a request to the FDA, and this isn't the first time. Anyone can submit a petition. The FDA said "We will review their request", which sounds like government-speak for "fuck off".

(CSPI is the biggest no-fun group ever created.)

__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.

pan6467

I truly hope so. I truly hope they don't find the right lobbyists or the right money people to back them.

But then again look at it this way...... soda consumption is through the roof..... just think how many in government (FROM BOTH PARTIES) see tax dollar signs and eventual litigation monies from the sodas like they got/get from the tobacco companies.

Don't be too naive these days, government goes where the money is and if they see enough tax revenue and settlements from Soda they'll jump at it....

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

feelgood

I dunno, I kinda like the idea of putting warning labels on Soda. Drinking it comes with health risk, especially a large amount of them.

__________________
Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

Redlemon

Center for Science in the Public Interest. They are very good about getting press coverage (remember the newspaper hysterias about movie popcorn, chinese food, etc.?), but I don't know if they have accomplished anything from a regulatory standpoint.

__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.

Locobot

The major difference I see between cigarette and sugar water companies is that the former had an extensive campaign to cover up the adverse health effects of their products. I doubt any Pepsi exec or pr person would openly tell you that their product causes "diabetes, obesity, kidney disease and oral decay" but I see little evidence that they're actually trying to hide those facts from us.

As someone who doesn't ever smoke or drink pop I have no problem with a heavy tax being levied against people who choose to use these products. If this is what is clogging our hospitals with entirely-avoidable and expensive-to-treat illnesses, raising health costs for all of us, then yes, this seems fair.

The problem of course with going after the sugar water industry is that this isn't the only place where people getting their sugar fix from. A can of Campbell's tomato soup has 12 grams of sugar in it for instance. If we actually do want change how people eat in the U.S., and it's obviously in our best interest to do so, then every product with more than X grams of sugar per serving should have this label.

It won't happen any time soon I don't think. The food industry is extremely well organized and a powerful lobby in D.C. Every Senate and House office from a state with a M&M factory or Coca-cola plant always has tons of free samples on hand. Little perks and kickbacks like this go a long way.

roachboy

smoking--well i share the vice but occupy myself endlessly with thinking up ways to quit.
i am fine with paying more for them because sooner or later maybe the price will cross some line and i'll stop because of it.

soda is a strange thing--i suspect that part of the drive to place warnings--which sounds like it will go nowhere, but no matter--is prompted by the number of soda machines that you now find in public schools--direct marketing to kids of sugar water that is both kinda nasty and not so great for you. personally, i would think the pressure would be better brought to bear on trying to make illegal the deals school systems can cut with soda companies to get machines placed. i can't imagine anyone thinks that soda is actually good for you in nutritional terms...but i also dont think that anyone who likes to drink soda does it because they imagine that to be the case in any event. so it seems a goofy strategy, apart from the recent emphasis on selling to kids in elementary, middle and high schools.

soda is just another processed food-like product. coca cola is in many ways the paradigmatic processed food-like product, both in itself and in the enormous impact coca cola has had in developing branding as a marketing concept.
i dont think very much in the way of processed food is actually good for anyone...what i know about it is that i lost alot of weight over the past few years and initially the only things i was cut out all processed foods and back on beer.

the nutritional information about such industrial food product delights as transfats are kind of unnerving...i sometimes wonder how stuff like that makes it into the food supply at all. i think the production and marketing of foods that are obviously bad for consumers is a simple function of substituting the idea that consumers are elements in an abstract market for the fact that consumers are human beings. looking at food production in terms of abstract markets meant that anything people would buy and that increased profit margins was just dandy. whatever you had to say about these products to spur demand was just dandy as well. if in general terms this kind of product functions to create health problems and shorten lifespans. well...that would be a cost of doing business--and in the end would not really matter as consumers constantly die and others constantly take their place--but branding is eternal.

spending 4-6 hours a day sitting in front of a television, particularly if you get to that spot by sitting in a car then sitting in an office then sitting in a car again, then sitting at a table then sitting on a sofa before retiring after a long day of sitting is probably worse for folk than any number of sodas. the combination of that and processed food is certainly not good--my experience is that, after a number of years living more or less that way, and falling into the ways in which that mode of living can feedback into itself, there was about 250 pounds more of me than there is now.

but then again i smoke, so there is nothing righteous in all this--simply what i know about directly.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

kutulu

And that is exactly what is wrong with people today.

Is it an exaggeration, sure, but the point is true. Nobody gives a damn about an oppressive govt. unless they are oppressing them.

Athletes are more likely to need knee replacement surgery. It ain't cheap so it raises everyone else's premiums. Maybe we should but a tax on sporting goods. People who type all day can get carpal's tunnel, maybe we put a tax on keyboards too. Where does it end?

MSD

I say we put a skull and crossbones warning label on all food other than tofu and organic fruits/vegetables. The warning label on tobacco can be replaced with a picture of Charles Darwin.

roachboy

i think darwin smoked

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

That's the point I'm making.

People act like it's no BFD and act like they want everyone else to pay for them. It's BS. It's government control and what amazes me are some of these people who are "ok" with it are fricking right wingers who believe there is too much government in their lives. Yet, they are ok with this?????

How much more involved in your life can a government get when they start telling you what you can and cannot do with your body?

Hey, if the government pays for my healthcare I have should listen to them, BUT if they refuse universal healthcare then stay the fuck out of what I legally put into my body.

What happens if all the smokers stop? Where is the tax money going to come from then? ANSWER: the sodas, the coffees, the fast foods etc.

Look if I enjoy soda, or smoking or coffee or fast food or rock climbing or unprotected sex, or whatever and the government starts dictating to me where I can enjoy those, or how I can enjoy those or tax those to where I no longer can enjoy those........ WTF am I working for? WTF am I doing being a law abiding citizen trying to find happiness and fulfillment in my life.

Yet, this same government so fucking worried about what I put into my body allows semi-automatics to be sold to just about anyone, allows people to ride motorcycles with shorts and no helmets, allows companies to dump toxic waste into the ground waters, allows companies to put steroids into meat, allows farmers to turn natural omnivores into cannibals, allows carcinogenic herbicides and pesticides to be put on our fruits and vegetables, allows Pharmaceutical companies to put hazardous undertested drugs on the market and pay doctors to prescribe them and government doesn't say a God damned word to those who do it............ something is fucked up in the system.

You're telling me companies have more rights to put poisons into our bodies than we have say in what we can do with our own bodies?????

Where does this fucking madness end.

Let's just do away with everything we enjoy, live in little sterilized square places with plastic sterile hypoallergenic furniture that must be sterilized everyday, not have sex unless to procreate, not eat anything that government does not approve, not have cars that can go over 35MPH, not have any sharp objects, (but we can have guns because the NRA pays government big bucks to allow that), not be able to do anything where we may get hurt.

And when nature does eventually take its toll on you, and makes you sick .... FUCK YOU PAY THE HOSPITAL BILL .... or we'll take your all those things we deemed healthy for you away and throw you into a debtors prison.

I maybe going too far or...... this maybe the wave of the future and the way we live in 50 years.

Where does it end and every freedom they take, every label they give us, every time they tell us what is good for us...... they take away another RIGHT of choice.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

j8ear

I think your right...and you know what all smokers and non-smokers alike have in common?

We all freaking die!!!!

I read about this lunacy earlier in the week, and also was referred to Cato's counter press release here: (I have pasted the press release below.)

John Stossel had this to say in general about a 'nannyism,' which while not directly mentioning this soda labelling nonsense, is interesting in itself on the subject. Excerpt also included below

Good stuff.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

Seaver

I'm sorry, but I'm going to go on a little bit of a rant here.

I drink cokes, I enjoy them. However, why is it that people are not held accountable for their actions?

Why is it that obese people and others blame everything in the world for overweight people except the people themselves? How hard is it to say, "I'm not full, but that's all I need to eat"? I do it all the time, it's not hard.

How hard is it to stop by the grocery store after work and pick up some fruits instead of going to McDonalds? How hard is it to tell your kids no when that's all they want to eat?

Being overweight is genetic on only a VERY small percentage of people. For the vast majority it is a series of concious decisions of choosing the wrong thing. Instead of sitting infront of the TV go out and walk.

Anyone on the street will tell you that drinking cokes isnt nearly as healthy as water. I dont think we need more labels that no one reads. We already have the label that tells you a coke provides almost a quarter of your daily carbohydrate intake... why do we need another label that no one will read?

Yeah cause it worked preventing people from smoking right?

Mantus

Pan you keep saying "If the govenment pays for my healthcare" well it does, a good portion of it. If we had to pay the true price of any medical service, we wouldn't be able to afford anything. The costs keep rising.

guy44

I have no problem with any tax or warning on cigarrettes because they are dangerous and for years companies lied about their effects. Soda, on the other hand, is not inherently dangerous and there is no public need for such a label. Thus, we shouldn't (and won't) get one.

Lastly, try not to freak out because someone submitted a request to the FDA. It isn't like this is an actual likely event - in fact, I'd say there's probably a 0% chance it happens.

__________________
"You have reached Ritual Sacrifice. For goats press one, or say 'goats.'"

TM875

People today hold no accountibility for their own actions. Period.

I smoke, but only at work or other social situations. I enjoy it. It's a relaxing way to take a break from the action - and I know that it may lead to some health problems in the future. Oh well. I'll take the risk. I'll most likely die from something else, anyway.

I drink large quantities of liquor from time to time. I enjoy it. I like the experience, how it makes me feel, and the purification that comes the day after - and I know that it may lead to some health problems in the future. It's worth the risk.

I enjoy a soda occasionally. Carbonated beverages are tasty and a good way to relieve thirst. I realize that the sugar will eventually lead to tooth decay and weight gain, but I'm willing to take that risk.

Anything , if not used in moderation, can kill you. Using products that have limited harmful effects should be determined by the individual. Personally, I get pissed when I go to a restaurant and there's no smoking section (this even annoyed me when I was a young kid, before I smoked...total discrimination). I remember when bowling alleys, malls, and all places to eat had a smoking section. Now I'm amazed if I see one.

Smoking, drinking, eating cand, consuming soda, snorting salt (!) will all cause long-term health problems if done to excess. Deal with it people. Leave me alone.

__________________
"I've made only one mistake in my life. But I made it over and over and over. That was saying 'yes' when I meant 'no'. Forgive me."

Elphaba

There are a large number of bogus claims made against soft drinks, and snopes.com lists a number of them. One of them is that artificial sweeteners in diet soda causes diabetes, kidney disease, and a number of other afflictions, similar to Pan's post.

Why such a concerted effort is being made to "go after" the manufacturers of soft drinks puzzles me.

Ustwo

Having worked in public health care, this is very true and why the myth of the uninsured annoys the piss out of me.

Of course we could be going broke like Canada trying to fund our health care system, I'm sure that would be much better

But back to the original thread. While I think warning labels are stupid, so are a hell of a lot of people out there. Its one things if you make a choise to drink pepsi etc, its another when a dumb ass mother lets her kid only drink it. I don't know if warning labels would help but I think 'HEY MORON, THIS IS SUGAR WATER DO YOU REALLY THINK ITS HEALTHY?' would be about right.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Dbass

I know a person (an aunt by marriage) who consumes about 2 gallons of Tab soda a day. This is literally the only thing she drinks (besides coffee,_maybe_), and she's getting wider every year. She doesn't understand the soda factor and I doubt she would care. As someone said earlier, the people who are determined to drink soda aren't going to be deterred by a label.

In fact, most people probably won't read them anyway. How many people (not we informed individuals, but overall) know how many calories are in a 12oz can of Coke, or how much sugar? Even more importantly, how many people understand that a gram of sugar is a real, dissolved _gram_ of sugar sitting in a pretty small amount of water? The problem is that most people just can't grasp that and wouldn't care anyway, like my aunt, and these labels aren't going to change either camp.

highthief

I think all processed/prepared foods - soda, TV dinners, chips, cookies, bread - whatever, if it comes in a package basically - should have the breakdowns of calories, proteins, fats, carbs - listed. Then people can make their own choices. If they choose to be ignorant, so be it. If they choose to be informed, good for them.

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

j8ear

Dbass,

Just an FYI...TAB has zero calories and contains no sugar.

Here are the nutritional facts I was able to dig up:

TaB (US) Ingredient list:

Carbonated Water, Caramel Color, Natural Flavors, Phosphoric Acid, Calcium Saccharin, Potassium Benzoate (To Protect Taste), Caffeine, Aspartame.

TaB (US) Nutrition Facts:

Serving Size:................1 can (12 fl oz, 355ml)
Calories per serving........0
Total Fat.....................0g
Sodium.......................40mg (2% Daily Value)
Total Carb...................0g
Total Protien................0g

Again just and FYI...

I don't doubt your aunt's girth issues, but it's not because of TAB. Probably more likely a lack of exercise.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

j8ear

They've been doing this in the US for decades.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

The_wall

I'm gonna have to agree with Kutulu on this. Let me drink what I want to drink, smoke what I want to smoke, hell do what I want to do as long as I don't harm you. Hell when I go to the doctor I have to pay full price becase I'm not insured, at should at least be able to choose how I get sick. I just want to be left the fuck alone and to drink caffinated beverages and smoke lots of pot and ciggarettes, and drink till my liver dies, is that too much to ask for.

__________________
"We do what we like and we like what we do!"~andrew Wk

Procrastinate now, don't put off to the last minute.

Elphaba

We have the good fortune to have a number of dentists in the area that provide free dental care for the children of underemployed or uninsured parents. I suspect that many of them have not educated themselves in good nutrition. Kudo's to you, Ustwo, if you are serving the underserved.

meepa

One of the differences I see between smoking and soda at least is that I'm not getting fat from someone chugging down a Coke next to me while I am breathing in cancergas from someone smoking by me. I guess the issue here is taxation and not whether or not someone can drink in public, but a lot of you are making a direct comparison between the two, and I don't think it's quite fair. Unless, of course, we're going to worry about overweight people spilling their soda-induced gut into our personal space... In which case... The sky's the limit!

Locobot

Most atheletes are required to have insurance and or make millions of dollars in part because what they do often does have a chance of debilitating them for life. Being an offensive linemen in the NFL shortens your life expectancy by 10-15 years, but again they make millions. Apparently you live in that Grover Norquist bubble of relativization where taxation is comparable directly to the Holocaust. Also you choose to ignore the rest of my post where I problematize my own arguement. No one is "oppressed" by warning labels on cigarettes or food.

We simply don't have an epidemic of knee injuries or carpal tunnel the way we do with cancer and obesity. I surprised you're not more worried about injuries resulting from your kneejerk responses here

Also if you'd bother to look under your own nose you will most likely see a sticker on you keyboard reading, "WARNING: Some experts believe that the use of any keyboard may cause serious injury." and then a direction to flip your keyboard over for more detailed warnings. Oh my god, I'm so oppressed!

OFKU0

What surprises me is that the regular pop drinks are the target (Coke, Pepsi et al) all the while diet drinks are 10x worse for you given the use of Aspartame and Slenda. Just google the names I've give you and see the hypocrisy for yourself.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

djtestudo

I think we ought to send the Center for Science in the Public Interest a copy of this and see what they have to say...

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

pan6467

My point is, (and a lot of posts just seem to think I'm talking taxation here and missing):

First let's look at what happened to cigarettes:

Some 40-50 years ago some people decided to put warning labels on cigarettes to curb smoking.

That did not work, the rates went down but not greatly.

So local and state governments started taxing the hell out of it.

Again rates went down but not as much as government wanted, and people started smoking the less tax revenue generating generic cigarettes.

Finally, local and state governments started pass ing laws where you could and couldn't smoke.

The feds/states started suing and won billions upon billions from cigarette companies forcing 3 out of 5 into bankruptcy (American Tobacco, Brown and Williamson, Liggett Myers).

Settlements were made. However, in Ohio for example the money that was from the settlement to help smokers stop went other places. Taft finally felt pressure to do SOMETHING with some of the money (after all the purpose supposedly for suing was to help pay for the healthcare of the smokers).

So now Taft put into place free nicotine patches.... however, yuo have to have insurance.

So in the end all this hoopla over people's health did the government truly care? No, maybe at first but it's all about the money.

After all the laws where one can, after all the taxation, and after all the lawsuits smoking is still done by 20-33% of the population depending on what polls and what research you look at.
=========================================================

Now let's look at soda, fast food, potato chips and so on:

1. They want to put warning labels on it, "to reduce use".

It won't, but now they have a reason for #2.

2. Taxation will come.

Again use will not go down as much as they want so they have an excuse for #3.

3. Then they'll say the soda companies knew it led to obesity, kidney disease, tooth decay and so on and so forth and sue the Hell out of them, claiming it is for the public's good.

I see that Soda, fast food potato chips or anything really can go the way cigarettes did and probably will not for health reasons but for tax generating purposes.

My argument is plain and simple..... I DO NOT WANT A GOVERNMENT TELLING ME OR TAXING ME ON WHAT I CHOOSE TO PUT INTO MY BODY LEGALLY.

As for universal Healthcare all I am saying is if the government won't pay for my insurance then what the fuck right do they have to tell me how to use my body........ THEY DON'T.

For anyone to see labels and taxing and passing laws against any product that legally can be put into your body and be ok with...... is a person begging government to dictate to them and to everyone else how to live.

I shake my head at those who believe all this is ok...... because eventually it will strike them.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

highthief

Honestly, that's good enough. People therefore have the basic information to make their own decisions.

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

pan6467

Warning labels allow government to start regulating once they see that the labels don't have any effect.

(as an aside, were the personal attacks necessary????)

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

pan6467

Ah but obviously there are those on this board who believe government is within their right to "punish" (taxation, idiot labels, dictatating where, etc) those who abuse their bodies.

And some of those..... oddly enough are die hard gun rights supporters (don't regulate what guns I can own and how many), die hard tax reform people (who say we pay enough in taxes leave us alone) and people who just believe it won't affect them.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Locobot

Yeah that's fine as long as you keep your secondhand smoke out of my air and refuse to seek medical attention and organ transplant as a result of ruining your body. Maybe cigarettes should require upon purchase the signing of a medical waiver refusing you the right to seek medical care from resulting injury...problem solved!

Pan- you must not realize that virtually every product you buy is already regulated, often by several different government organizations, includes some type of warning, and in most states taxed upon purchase. You seem to be arguing for a 3rd-world-style non-government that has virtually no power to limit what can be bought and no concern for the health of its citizens. I personally recommend a move to Honduras, cigarettes are about $1 a pack, no warning labels, great climate, you'll love it!

Your history of tobacco regulation has multiple glaring omissions including most egregiously a campaign on the part of cigarette companies to hide health risks associated with their products. 40-50 years ago the line from Big Tobacco was that cigarettes were safe as milk despite warnings from doctors going back at least 100 years. Cigarettes were given with meals to hospital patients for chrissake! I've already made these points above, but apparently you chose to ignore them so here they are again.

Here's a handy stat.: percent of people who had smoked at least one cigarette in the past week in 1954-45% then in 1996-27%. This is certainly due in part to government regulation. Taking tobacco ads off of TV for instance had a huge effect on the pervasiveness of cigarettes in our culture.

(aside Pan-I reject your appraisal that I can be singled out in this thread for making "personal attacks." Kutulu addressed me personally so I treated him likewise. Or did you miss the part where he labelled me as an apologist for genocide?)

ObieX

I'm tired of all these automobiles. I think it's about time to get some legislation to get rid of them. I'm tired of breathing all the air pollution. I'm tired of all the noise pollution.. all "vroom vroom" when I'm tryin to sleep.. i mean fuck. And all those automobiles are a huge fucking hit on my wallet and this economy. Why should *i* have to pay taxes to pay for all these roads? and road repairs (more noise pollution) and of course those stop lights and traffic signs don't grow on trees. No automobiles would result in less war, no more having to invade some arab nation to get at that oil. Tired of all those drunk drivers, and reports of deaths from accidents? Me too, yet I still hear them every day, and it's only taking lives and jacking up the price of my health insurance AND auto insurance (which we won't need to pay for if my anti-auto legislation goes through). Sure there may be some loss to jobs in the auto industry.. but fuck em! All they want is our money! I can't turn on a tv or radio w/o being pounded with ad after ad for car dealerships, used car salesmen all yap yap yap I don't care about your 0% financing. I could imagine all you guys sitting in a board room somewhere thinking about ways you can increase your sales to the "african-american" community by adding a "pimped out" package with rims and chromies and a "kickin" sound system. In fact, we will be making commercials about stuff like that.. we're thinking about naming them "fair enough" or something like that....

Sure some people may complain, i mean, people gotta get around, right? Oh well, fuck em! It doesn't say you have the freedom to drive in the constitution anywhere, in fact lemme skim it again just to make sure.. reading.. reading... reading.. NOPE no cars, sorry! But look on the bright side. All the lives that will be saved that would have been lost to drunk drivers, or stoned drivers pulling out of a fast food drive-throughs, and all those people that would have hit that pothole wrong while going 70 and sail into on-coming traffic. Imagine all that money you'll save on things like taxes, and gas, and insurance, and repairs.. new shocks? new brakes? oil? windshield wiper fluid? Fuck that! No more wars for oil.. no more smog choking and poisoning everyone and everything... we can finally close that hole in the O-Zone layer. (well not really.. but i'll tell you that to get your vote!)

With your help, we can begin saving lives today!
Vote ObieX!

__________________
We Must Dissent.

Mantus

Pan, if this was all about the money they would probably encurage smoking as it was generating a decent amount of tax revenue. Revenue, that politicans can play with now, not future health care cost reductions that a politican won't even be able to use to one's advantage.

This has nothing to do with money as far as our govenment is concerned. Politicians are preasured into these decicions by people who wan't to put all of us in bubbles (oops I mean - personal spherical saftey devices) so we can never be hurt by the world.

Once enough momentum is gathered for any cause then the lawyers come in to make their money. So you are right in a sense, eventually it becomes about the money among other things.

Of course it's swell that we will get lower healthcare costs as a result of these measures and that's how all the sane people justify the acceptance of such actions. BUT, the issue of rising healthcare costs is a symptom of a broken healthcare system. If anything should regulate what a person eats or smokes it should be their insurance bill - well, their common sense would help too...

guthmund

You didn't direct this at me, but I just want to jump in here a bit..

Everything in Washington is about money. Congress has just decided to get their money elsewhere. Meet the new boss; same as the old boss. Instead of taking millions of dollars from corrupt tobacco lobbyists, they're taking their cues from the healthcare industry. Not only does the money seem to be better, but their public image is no longer tarnished by the likes of Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man. Forward thinking? Absolutely. Even if the healthcare industry doesn't have as much as money as Big Tobacco to throw around, think of the fringe benefits. Corporate jets charted on the cheap to politicians, nice, expensive trips for Congress all around the world hidden under the all-encompassing "fact-finding" umbrella, and access to the finest medical minds that money can buy in return for a little 'consideration' during the next session. All they had and more, PLUS they improve their standings in the public's eyes.

Big Tobacco is a big sinking ship and just like the rest of the rats, Congress abandoned them a long time ago.

I would argue that it is the politicians themselves putting us in the bubbles. Safe, warm, and, for all intents and purposes, numb. How much easier would it be for politicians to subvert the will of the People if the People are all sedated and smothered by an all-encompassing 'nanny-state?'

Nutcases are all over the place, but I really don't think they've got the footing you think they do.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

pan6467

Let's see, if this non-smoking push is working and secondhand smoke diseases are lowered as are smoking related diseases..... then why are healthcare costs still skyrocketing?

OOOO it's the freaking soda and fast foods and potato chips and Little Debbies and ....

So now let's tax the hell out of them.

But, we'll still allow companies to put carcinogenic fertilizers and pesticides on produce.

We'll allow meds that have very little research done.... In fact fuck the research we'll make the FDA a subsidy of the pharmaceuticals and fill the board full of their representatives.... after all those companies wouldn't want to give out any truly bad meds....

We'll cut the EPA and their standards so that Arsenic and 87 other carcinogenics can be allowed in drinking water... but they better be trace amounts.

That makes bottled water a problem..... so tax the hell out of it, no flouride in that water, kids teeth will rot.

Now let's see...... hmmm meat we have to keep allowing steroids to be put in. And cows God didn't make them lean enough, being omnivores and all, so let's start feeding them other cows. This will make them more meaty and better tasting.

We have to do something about pesky mosquitoes..... hmmmm lets fog with a pesticide that will kill them.... who knows what the true effects will be on the people but we'll not have those bloodsuckers around.

Let's put our kids on ritilin and other mind numbing drugs but tell them that marijuana and other drugs are evil and escapes that don't allow them to fully function.... they'll never get that we are being hypocritical.

Lewt's play fucking God and just tell the people what they can and cannot do. The great thing is as long as we're the party in charge we can blame the other party for NOT wanting these and claim how great they are for us.

But what of rising health costs?

We'll blame lawyers see, and say it was frivilous lawsuits. Sure the doctor left that sponge in during the operation, or made a wrong diagnosis or over prescribed drugs, but we're all human we make mistakes, they shouldn't be punished.

In the end we'll blame individuality for everything and force everyone to conform and if they don't we'll tax and pass laws against anything that may promote individuality in anyway.

We the government now proclaim these tenets as law and if you do not abide ..... we will find ways to punish.... we'll tax, make it illegal and or use every tool we have to make you feel bad for not conforming:

Sex should be with 1 partner and only

Movies may have non stop violence but any nudity or sex will be frowned upon

We will make it impossible for average families to survive on just 1 paycheck.... then when both parents work we'll tell them how bad they are for leaving their kids at home alone.

We will only recognize complaints that allow us to regulate and tax more and more companies that promote people to undertake a health risk........

We will blame big government on the other political party ..... and use anything we can to hide the fact we are being just as invasive.

============================================================

WTF did these people do before when you could smoke almost anywhere, eat whatever they wanted, in all had more freedoms? How the Hell did this nation survive?

Perhaps, just perhaps, people are so tired of hearing what is good for them and what is bad by an ever intrusive government that it is causing the civil unrest and the violence and over aggression we are seeing.

My grandparents could smoke, play till all hours of the night outside, eat whatever they wanted, and so on..... and they lived pretty healthy and happy lives.

What good is living to 70-80 years old if you cannot do what you enjoy.

I'd rather live to 50 and say I enjoyed my life and was able to be free then to live to 90 and under some freaking intrusive government.

Again..... if government is so fucking worried about my health then work out a plan for some form of universal healthcare.... otherwise fuck off and don't dictate to me what I can put into my body, or where I can or cannot partake.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

moosenose

I disagree. I don't give a shit if they pay for my health care, they still do not have a right to tell me what I can and cannot consume. The same holds true for you, IMHO.

There's more to freedom than who pays the bills.

Willravel

Cigatettes are unhealthy. Some people don't know how unhealthy cigaretts are.

Sodas are unhealthy. Some people don't know how unhealthy sodas are.

Some people are less likely to be healthy as a result of cigaretts. Some people are less likely to be healthy as a result of sodas. While I'll admit that cigaretts are seriously less healthy than sodas, sodas are still very unhealthy. Is it about money? Well, of course, most government stuff is either about money or power, but sodas are still unhealthy.