L.A. wants to clamp yearlong ban on fast food

[rmsharpe]

This is only going to lead to people driving further to get their fast food fix.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Sprayber
I wonder if Cracker Barrel would consider locating there?

Quit showing your ass.

Another classic knee-jerk liberal decision.

No, another stupid political decision aimed by the winds of public fancy. They had the right idea in trying to reduce obesity, but in reality har decisions would have to be made (wrt economic policies towards the poor) or point the finger at themselves (aka school lunches Oerdin cited). Fast food restaurants were just an easy target.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
This is only going to lead to people driving further to get their fast food fix.

That's based on the assumption that they can afford the gas to put into their Cadillac.

[rmsharpe]

Originally posted by Theben
They had the right idea in trying to reduce obesity,

No, they should have minded their own business and dealt with issues that related to the city; my weight is no more of their concern than my religion, my political views, my sexuality, my job, my TV-watching habits, or my internet usage.

[Jon Miller]

It is the states business if it effects health, which is a state problem. The state wants happy, productive, stable citizens...

JM

[Lord Avalon]

Well, what if they're happy with their fried chicken/cheeseburgers/pizza/ burritos, etc., etc., etc.?

[Jon Miller]

If their health is too bad, than they aren't productive.

JM

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Another classic knee-jerk liberal decision.

Sometimes it's just embarrassing to be a liberal.

This is a well meaning plan that has no chance of working.

[Theben]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
No, they should have minded their own business and dealt with issues that related to the city; my weight is no more of their concern than my religion, my political views, my sexuality, my job, my TV-watching habits, or my internet usage.

I'm glad to hear you're supporting gay marriage and church-state separation. But obesity affects health care costs of the city, not to mention the job of govt is the well-being of it's citizens. That said, suggestions and incentives should be the limit of intervention in this case. The 'gun-to-the-head' method is passe'.


p.s.- A pre-emptive "**** off *******s" to anyone posting racist jokes here. I bet none of you has the balls to crack these jokes in front of black people. Hey, I can show them to che's wife! I bet she'll find them funny.

And while you're at it you can throw in some chink jokes too. After all, my daughter is half-chinese. But, hey, it's all in fun, right?

[Ben Kenobi]

When I used to live on the east side in Vancouver, the thing I couldn't figure out is that there were NO grocery stores.

Two of them apparently packed up and moved on.

If you don't have a car your choices were basically the mickey d's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same in LA.

They should build more supermarkets, but the problem is the supermarkets don't want to locate there, because the neighbourhood isn't perceived as safe.

[rmsharpe]

Originally posted by Theben
I'm glad to hear you're supporting gay marriage and church-state separation.

Bareback and blaspheme with impunity! Just don't expect me to pay for your medication if you screw up and get a disease or some Westboro fundamentalist nut decides to blast ye cap in thy buttocks.

But obesity affects health care costs of the city, not to mention the job of govt is the well-being of it's citizens.

By that standard, however, I think the city government could regulate everything under the guise of protecting the city's budget.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
When I used to live on the east side in Vancouver, the thing I couldn't figure out is that there were NO grocery stores.

Two of them apparently packed up and moved on.

If you don't have a car your choices were basically the mickey d's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same in LA.

They should build more supermarkets, but the problem is the supermarkets don't want to locate there, because the neighbourhood isn't perceived as safe.

Once upon a time, I was a management trainee in a supermarket chain in Hawaii. Our stores in the lower-income areas had tigher profit-margins because of the shoplifting.

There are supermarkets in bad neighborhoods of L.A., but their prices are higher and their produce and fresh meat sections are either inferior or non existent.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Another classic knee-jerk liberal decision.

No I don't think so. Yes, it is bad politics of posturing but it has nothing to do with liberalism and everything to do with politicians facing a tough reelection who want to be pursieved as doing something without actually doing anything. A real solution, as I said earlier, would be to improve the quality of school lunches so they were nutritionally sound and to bring back phys-ed to schools so that those fatties have to work off some weight.

Of course that takes cash and LA doesn't have cash laying around so instead politicians opt for the stupid symbolic "victory" instead of doing something realistic. Also the LA city council all voted for this and the council is 50-50 split between the two parties so you're "classic knee jerk decision" to blame liberals doesn't mesh with reality.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Oerdin

Of course that takes cash and LA doesn't have cash laying around so instead politicians opt for the stupid symbolic "victory" ...

Right. It's much cheaper to ban something, than to say, provide healthy lunches and after-school sports at schools.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Theben


Quit showing your ass.

Another classic knee-jerk liberal decision.

No, another stupid political decision aimed by the winds of public fancy. They had the right idea in trying to reduce obesity, but in reality har decisions would have to be made (wrt economic policies towards the poor) or point the finger at themselves (aka school lunches Oerdin cited). Fast food restaurants were just an easy target.

Its much more than that. It's yet another attempt by a government to regulate what we do as private citizens. Both sides do it, but this particular form of government invasion of privacy, that I like to call "nurse-maiding", belongs almost exclusively to the liberals.