l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Soda Ban
Government union bosses are really overdue to get a lashing from voters. And
there are some hopeful signs, such as the recent defeat of a union-backed
recall election of a pro-reform governor in Wisconsin.
From children's lemonade stands to sneaky new speed traps, bureaucrats are
getting in our faces, big-time.
Enter New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed soda ban on servings
larger than 16 oz. at restaurants, fast food joints, and street vendors. It'
s nanny-state government on steroids.
The political cover Bloomberg and his self-anointed do-gooders are using to
push for this additional power is: Our constituents are obese and they can't
help themselves, only we bureaucrats know what's best and can rescue them
from sugary soda.
This move is beyond patronizing. It's insulting. If they get away with this,
there is no logical stopping point. The city's famed pizza joints will be
limited to selling one slice per customer. Patrons at the city's acclaimed
steakhouses will be permitted to have the petite filet only – no more 22 oz
. ribeyes. They will – literally – start taking candy from babies.
Lifestyle Tyrants Start Locally
and Eventually Take Their Schemes National
Don't be lulled into thinking that this is "just a local issue." Places like
New York and San Francisco are well known as the nurseries of social
engineering experiments that eventually get adopted coast-to-coast. The fact
that politicians feel justified to even conceive of such a plan to control
what you eat shows the total disregard for individual liberty. It's a
sickness that permeates our country at every level of government.
It's one more reminder of the need to stay vigilant and defend your
independence and self-reliance. Look at these related eating trends (all
done for your own "protection"):
Armed FDA agents raid dairy farms and shut them down to prevent you from
buying unpasteurized milk;
As recently discovered by a Michigan housewife who faces 93 days in jail
, local laws can even prohibit you from growing vegetables on your own
property;
All-knowing school health officials inspect your child's sack lunch
brought from home – if they disapprove, your child is forbidden from eating
it and forced to buy and eat the cafeteria food;
Feds fine a Utah high school $15,000 because it accidentally violated a
federal law, failing to power off a soda vending machine during lunch period
. Now the school will have less money for enrichment programs;
To one-up New York City, Illinois is proposing a "Fat Tax" to protect
adults from the ravages of eating too many calories, hamburgers, and fast
food;
This Law Is a Sick Joke!
What makes New York's soda ban comical is that you can still buy a big
bottle of soda of any size at any supermarket or convenience store; you can
buy a 40-oz beer; and you can buy and eat as much junk food and candy as you
wish, and no one is encouraged to exercise!
Empire State of Donuts
The argument to save people from getting fat is nothing but hot air. Two
days after proposing the soda ban, mayor Bloomberg publicly celebrated
National Donut Day!
When asked by a reporter if this sounds ridiculous due to his recent soda
ban, Bloomberg replied, "It doesn't sound ridiculous. One doughnut is not
going to hurt you. In moderation, most things are OK."
The reporter followed up, "If anything in moderation works for doughnuts –
why not with soft drinks?"
Bloomberg: "That is exactly what we're trying to do with soft drinks – is
get you to drink in moderation."
For the record, a disapproved 20-oz bottle of Coca-Cola has 240 calories;
Dunkin Donut's highly popular Boston Kreme Donut has 310 calories. Even the
ultra-liberal New York Times pointed out Bloomberg's hypocrisy.
This Isn't New York's First Attempt to Wage War on Soda
In 2009, there was a move to levy special taxes on soda;
In 2010, they tried to blacklist soda purchases with food stamps. This
is not a totally offensive idea since food stamps are funded with other
people's money, and it is not beyond the pale for there to be strings
attached. But, disrupting the trade between legally consenting adults, using
their own money in a free market, is not the same.
If this law passes, it can go into effect as early as March 2013. A NY1 and
Marist poll shows city residents oppose it by only 53% - 42%. Nationwide, a
Rasmussen Reports survey shows just 65% of Americans oppose it.
It's surprising that the opposition is terribly low. This shows that too
many of our neighbors, friends, media, and workmates are not familiar with
the cause of liberty. It should be closer to 100%.
The "sheeple" are accustomed to allowing legislators to mandate their life.
They don't understand the underlying danger and message laws like these
spread. And more importantly, this indirectly threatens your right to be
left alone when you're online, when you travel, when you educate your
children, and with what you decide to put inside your body.
Smoking Legislation vs. Eating Legislation
On the opposite end of these United States, Californians voted on
Proposition 29 during the June primaries.
Proposition 29 seeks to impose an additional $1-a-pack cigarette tax; and
part of the money will be used for cancer research.
The Los Angeles Times urged voters to vote against the bill for numerous
reasons. In an editorial opinion piece it stated:
A lack of oversight;
The creation of a new agency;
The creation of a new state function;
Concerns over how this new agency would function;
"A board made up mostly of representatives of the same institutions that
would be in line for its research grants." [Cronyism]
After starting out so well, the editorial tripped and fumbled with this
stinker, "But our objections to the specifics of Proposition 29 do not mean
that we don't support a new cigarette tax. We do..."
It goes on to pontificate how taxes reduce smoking rates and this is good
because then there will be fewer smoking-related diseases placing demand on
Medicare and Medi-Cal (California's version of Medicare)...
"... the reformers, the legislators, and the writers on public affairs – do
not desire to impose direct despotism upon mankind... Instead, they turn to
the law for this despotism, this absolutism, this omnipotence. They desire
only to make the laws." – Frederic Bastiat
Smoking and eating poorly are bad for your health; and poor health and
illness almost always lead to LESS self-reliance.
Sure, you should choose healthier living. But, allowing legislators to
mandate what you can and cannot put in your body definitely leads to less
freedom and liberty. Keep watch for these ever-expanding and encroaching
laws. |
|
