Off-Topic

I generally agree with those who oppose this regulation, but I disagree with the sentiment contained in the latter part of fletch's post. I happen to think there are few things that are going to be bigger problems in the coming decades than our health issues. We are a really, really, really overweight and unhealthy society.

Bloomberg lost me when he forced a possible 3rd term onto NYC after voters rejected the idea. He really seems to think he's the only person capable of successfully running NYC. I think he's an impressive guy, but that's the kind of hubris you find in the Hugo Chavezes and Vladimir Putins of the world. Exactly the kind of people term limits were intended to protect us from. I'm not saying Bloomberg = Putin, but with entrenched power comes corruption. It always does. Though the voters of NYC promptly reversed the term limit extension, so all of the Bloomberg's successors will be limited to 2 terms.

NYC has been here for a long time and will be here long after Bloomberg is gone. And to paraphrase an old saying, after he leaves office, life will go on much the same as it did before.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/05/opinion/granderson-poverty-health/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7

At Giant this week, $5 will get you either 4 cans of Pringles or 3 lbs of squash.

Using calories per dollar as a unit of measurement in an article about obesity isn't the soundest of logic.

Without reading the article, good for Disney. They have the right to pick and choose which ads go up and which do not. Now if the government started telling companies not to run unhealthy food ads then I would have a problem.

LOL...who here thought it was going to stop at sodas?

I wish Bloomberg could have used his hubris to push through congestion pricing for automobiles. That's something that would have actually had a significant effect on people's lives for the positive.

why can't people understand this? it makes absolutely no sense when people bring that up.

I agree that obesity is an incredible health concern. A public health department official has told me it has already surpassed smoking as the nation's No. 1 preventable health problem.

My point is, however, is this should be a matter for the public health officers, doctors and other medical officials, not mayors. For one thing, I do believe municipal governments will have very full plates in the coming decades, especially in the areas of failing infrastructure and how it will be repaired, replaced and paid for. But, in a larger sense (no pun intended), the public health officials are better prepared to address the obesity crisis in a clinical way by going after the root cultural issues.

Part of the problem, as seen in the link I posted above, is that the mayor is picking "experts" for his panel, so ultimately the problem is the same...setting eating policy for the public.

IMO, we keep trying to find diet solutions to the problem of low physical activity, and it's not working. It's just easier to think of different ways/things to eat & drink rather than get off our asses and use our bodies. And as far as government bureaucrats are concerned, it's a lot easier to ban foods & drinks than it is to mandate physical activity for the citizens.

Exactly, and try as they might, government has never had much control over demand for something or the personal choices of individuals. The harder they try, the worse it gets for everyone.

Details emerging of the iron fist New Yorkers will live under beginning in March. No more two liters with pizza delivery, no more pitchers of soda for bowling alleys, and no more large mixers with bottle service at clubs.

This is a great point. I've got a plan to solve both problems.

Once we gather all of the fat people and they have spent all day doing manual labor and construction work on our failing infrastructure, they will have burned plenty of calories to enjoy a Super Super Big Gulp or whatever.