I just saw a commercial for an activist group trying to convince me it's a good thing to put a tax on soda in New York State.
A pox on thee, Food Nazis!
You know what would save our health care system money? If all the busybodies who are so concerned with what I do with my life would drop freaking dead. Seriously, the world would be a better place if these self-appointed nannies were breeding maggots.
Pestilence, ruin, and destruction. I know of no curse adequate for the likes of these smarmy clownholes.
Haha, people like that plague my country as well. They actually forced all unhealthy food to be removed from the canteens at school, and had the schools enforce rules that they're not aloud to bring it from home. This happened in 2007, I graduated in 2006; I couldn't have graduated if I didn't have caffeine.
| |
We all know Patterson is retarded and can't wait until the election. Expect some crazy shit in the meantime.
| |
Tiberath wrote:
Haha, people like that plague my country as well. They actually forced all unhealthy food to be removed from the canteens at school, and had the schools enforce rules that they're not aloud to bring it from home. This happened in 2007, I graduated in 2006; I couldn't have graduated if I didn't have caffeine. They did the same in some parts of the states too. My school got affected, but they had the unhealthy machine and then the healthy machine, the healthy machine was full of sunchips and fruit snacks. And the other one didn't suck. | |
IcewarriorX wrote:
Tiberath wrote: I like fruit snacks >.> | |
I don't mind the schools not offering sodas and snacks. In fact, I prefer the school not try to make money off things that are bad for kids. I don't believe they should dictate what you bring from home, though. I understand, however, that my opinion has changed since I graduated, so I understand if people disagree with me.
| |
The school makes just as much money offering "healthy" foods in their cafeteria, so I believe they should always have the option of sodas and snacks.
Bringing your own from home can sometimes be a hassle, and carrying a lunchbox to school past the 6th grade really isn't going to help your social life any. | |
I am not talking about cafeteria food but rather the vending machines located in the halls. Those were a rather large source of extra cash for our school, which just seems wrong to me. I also didn't like the fact that our school had pizza, fried chicken, and fries every day of the week for kids.
I didn't like the fried food line even when I was a student. It promoted unhealthy eating habits for kids who were too stupid to think about the whole fatty foods=fatty kid thing. It was more expensive, so not every kid could afford it(thankfully) but for those that could there was no way for parents of younger highschool kids to tell the school to refuse them the high fat foods. If parents where trying to help their kids form a healthy diet the schools just didn't care. | |
but danial, why should we baby the retards who are too incompetent to think for themselves? all those efforts will be for naught when they see a "don't cross" street sign and go "f dat man imma cross dis street neways" and lose the bottom half of their body to an SUV
the whole "don't let schools make a profit by selling unhealthy foods" thing smells of the same stink as "no child left behind" the schools should do what makes them a profit (within reason) in order to benefit those in school who actually care about their education. man we strayed from the original topic quite a bit | |
I see this as a very good thing. People who buy less soda will in turn be more healthy. The revenue generated would also help costly things such as universal healthcare.
I'm still waiting on pot legalization. It's only a matter of time. | |
Universal health care is a dumb idea precisely because it gives other people a stake in how you live your life. If I want to drink soda it's on my own head, and I live with the consequences for it. I'm not asking anyone else to pay for it.
Aside from being a stupid revenue grab and more ridiculous nanny crap, in the end this is just another highly recessive tax. But the nannyism alone makes it wrong. | |
Would you oppose a bottled water tax?
| |
Yes, I would oppose a bottled water tax.
I do not, however, oppose that the state of New York recently added deposits to bottled water. I've never understood why the deposit--which is meant to encourage recycling--applied to soda but not water. Base it on the type of container, not the type of beverage. | |
Look at history. History proves that the nation always thrives when there's less spending and less taxing. Look at the roaring 20s for example. Right after that, we start spending and taxing again, it all goes down hill. All this is, is another reason to suck the money right out of your free will to buy what you please.
As far as health care system saving money, how about allowing you to buy health insurance plans across state lines? I don't understand what's so wrong about that, in fact it seems like the perfect solution. You'd be able to choose any plan that would work for you at the price you want, -and- it would create competition for all of the insurers. But no, instead these morons want to control every aspect of our lives with more unions and more bureaus . | |
Indeed, lowering the interstate barriers to buying health insurance, and hamstringing regulations that make it nearly impossible to buy individual health insurance on your own, are great ideas. Decoupling health insurance from your employer would be a great thing as well, so you don't have to worry about losing your insurance if you lose your job--that would also force companies to treat their workers better.
But these ideas aren't popular with the folks who want more control over every aspect of our lives. Neither is tort reform, but that's because trial lawyers donate so heavily to their campaigns. | |
Lummox JR wrote:
Universal health care is a dumb idea precisely because it gives other people a stake in how you live your life. If I want to drink soda it's on my own head, and I live with the consequences for it. I'm not asking anyone else to pay for it. On the other hand, my father didn't die because we couldn't afford open heart surgery. I'm calling that a win for universal health care. | |
Lummox JR wrote:
But these ideas aren't popular with the folks who want more control over every aspect of our lives. Neither is tort reform, but that's because trial lawyers donate so heavily to their campaigns. If you want more control over your life, you shouldn't live in America. America was founded on freedom and libery. Sure, there always must be rules set in place. I'm sure we'd all agree that anarchy will always fail. However, more control and anarchy are both extremes. America is meant to be the medium. We have libery and freedom but still have restrictions, instead of having no restrictions or no freedom. If you want either, I think something is wrong with you. If you want more control, you're leaning to the no freedom. | |
The number of uninsured people in the US is consistently inflated by politicians talking up the benefits of universal health care. It's certainly nowhere near 30 million or even 47, and many of those that are uninsured are uninsured by choice or are illegal aliens. Most of the people needing open heart surgery already qualify for the (crappy) government health care system we already have: Medicare.
Besides, under government health care there's always the risk of dying or suffering while waiting too long to get surgery. There's actually a burgeoning market in the US for cash-only hospitals that accept clients from Canada who can't wait for treatment they need right away. I'm glad your dad is all right, but it's known that this kind of system doesn't work very well and it certainly won't be cheaper than a free-market system. The system the US already has is pretty decent; it needs sensible improvements, not a complete overhaul into a system we know to be flawed. Plus that would empower the freakin' nannies. | |
Lummox wrote:
There's actually a burgeoning market in the US for cash-only hospitals that accept clients from Canada who can't wait for treatment they need right away. Care to source that, Lummox? In my own anecdotal readings on international community sites like reddit, this couldn't be further from the truth. I'm interested in where you're getting that info from. | |
He wanted to tax fishing more, and soda and whatnot.
It didn't go through as far as I last knew.