'It's not about French fries, it's about freedom'

[C0ckney]

What healthcare costs? Have a figure?

What is more costly, if you had to guess, sugar or weed?

If it is sugar:

Should neighborhood lemonade stands be taxed and regulated the same or more than marijuana?

not off the top of my head, but i expect there are some to do with lung conditions and mental health issues, especially among young people; there may be others too. there are also some costs involved with providing support to people who want to stop smoking weed. i doubt this would add to the cost; weed is very easy to grow and once prohibition ends i expect prices would come down fairly dramatically in the medium term.

i would have no problem with higher taxes on sugary and fatty foods.

[Thoth]

Smokers can stop:

True, but it sure as ****e isn't easy.

[Sava]

not off the top of my head, but i expect there are some to do with lung conditions and mental health issues, especially among young people; there may be others too. there are also some costs involved with providing support to people who want to stop smoking weed. i doubt this would add to the cost; weed is very easy to grow and once prohibition ends i expect prices would come down fairly dramatically in the medium term.

i would have no problem with higher taxes on sugary and fatty foods.

[kentonio]

If those foods are so bad as to justify blame, they should be banned.

Accepting the idiotic premise, if choice governs all and this is a problem, we are all responsible as a society for not doing something.

Why is it idiotic? We all know that eating too much and in particular eating high fat/sugar foods causes weight gain, so why should there be a total abdication of responsibility for people who give children large amounts of these types of foods? As I said there are certainly mitigating factors (in particular related to financial security) but where's the reasoning behind the complete free pass?

[Sava]

"Free pass" from what? Your blame?

**** that.

[kentonio]

"Free pass" from what? Your blame?

**** that.

It's nothing to do with 'my' blame. Do parents not carry any responsibility for the health and well-being of their children now?

[Sava]

It's nothing to do with 'my' blame. Do parents not carry any responsibility for the health and well-being of their children now?

This is 100% about your blame.

Assigning blame is, for all intents and purposes assigning "responsibility".

Responsibility is just blame. So after you blame them, do you wash your hands of the problem?

After all, its THEIR FAULT.

Wow. That feels so much better.

BTW, hating fat people isn't enough for you to be considered a conservative.

[Sava]

And the whole blaming children thing is monstrous. You deserve a "**** you" for that

[kentonio]

This is 100% about your blame.

Assigning blame is, for all intents and purposes assigning "responsibility".

Responsibility is just blame. So after you blame them, do you wash your hands of the problem?

After all, its THEIR FAULT.

Wow. That feels so much better.

BTW, hating fat people isn't enough for you to be considered a conservative.

That is incredibly idiotic. You basically just said that no-one should ever be blamed for anything they do. I also never said anything about washing my hands of the problem or indeed anything other than that removing all responsibility is stupid. Perhaps you should start by not assuming you're talking to Ben.

And the whole blaming children thing is monstrous. You deserve a "**** you" for that

Which is exactly what I didn't say. Well done, you deserve a 9/10 for strawman creation. I'd have given you a 10, but that really requires a mention of nazis.

[Sava]

Blame is absolutely useless, from a policy perspective, for everything but criminal punishment.

But it does help justify your inherent bias.

[kentonio]

Blame is absolutely useless, from a policy perspective, for everything but criminal punishment.

But it does help justify your inherent bias.

Blame is not absolutely useless, its a very useful way of steering social behaviour by letting people know that it's not ok to treat your children any way you please without any responsibility for harm you may be causing them. If you're bringing up your kids in a way that ensures they will suffer serious health problems and likely significantly decrease their lifespan then you're being a bad parent. Sometimes as I mentioned that responsibility can be mitigated, for instance if parents are trying to raise a family on low income and with little time outside work. If its just laziness, ignorance or stupidity however, that is behaviour that needs to be criticized to try and force change.

It's been said that this is the first generation of kids for a century who are expected to have a lower lifespan than their parents, and there's no good reason for that to be the case. Why should we just say 'oh well its a disease, its not any kind of choice' when the types of food parents give their kids largely is a choice. How is that not just a lie?

[Sava]

So your position is that shaming works and we should do it?

****.you

[kentonio]

No, we should stand and applaud as some parents fill their kids with huge amounts of fat and sugar, ensuring their children live difficult and pain filled lives. We should probably also subsidize their early funerals too, because that's clearly how caring works.

[Sava]

This has been a worthwhile discussion. You don't care about the problem of obesity at all and just want to call people names.

I'm glad we figured this out.

[kentonio]

You seem to be having some bizarre discussion with yourself where you don't actually reply to anything I've written but rather just make things up in your head. I'll leave you to it, as it's more than a little disconcerting.