Posted on 09/23/2009 3:00:35 PM PDT by Lorianne
My real interest is in the authors' third basis for regulation: market failure that
... results from time-inconsistent preferences (i.e., decisions that provide short-term gratification but long-term harm). This problem is exacerbated in the case of children and adolescents, who place a higher value on present satisfaction while more heavily discounting future consequences.
Wow. This isn't socialism. It's sheer paternalism. This, according to the authors, is a market failure that justifies taxation to alter your behavior, totally apart from its impact on public health costs.
This is what worries me about the crackdown on death sticks and edible crap. There's no end to its ambitions. We'd better start applying some brakes.
If you think I'm overreacting, I call your attention to this paragraph in the NEJM article:
No adverse health effects of noncaloric sweeteners have been consistently demonstrated, but there are concerns that diet beverages may increase calorie consumption by justifying consumption of other caloric foods or by promoting a preference for sweet tastes. At present, we do not propose taxing beverages with noncaloric sweeteners, but we recommend close tracking of studies to determine whether taxing might be justified in the future.
I'm sitting here looking at a can of Fresca. The nutrition label says it has no calories. The ingredients label lists only aspartame as a sweetener. If studies show that drinks like this one indirectly increase calorie consumption "by promoting a preference for sweet tastes," the food police are explicitly prepared to tax them. And the crusade won't end with soda. Anything sweet is a target.
I warn you people now. You can ban the Marlboros, tax the Cokes, and zone the Whoppers. But you'll get Plotz's Fresca when you pry it from his cold, dead hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
I love Fresca.
DITTO
Fresca and OJ. About 50/50.
Seriously, any kind of lemon-lime soda that is diet, and is in an aluminum can, is probably the most toxic thing you could legally buy as food anywhere.
I don’t need to ban them but I would like people to know the truth about what they are drinking.
Toxic Benzene in sodas:
http://www.brighthub.com/health/diet-nutrition/articles/27333.aspx
Aspartame (in diet sodas) - neurotoxic carcinogen
http://www.safefood.org.nz/aspartaddict.html
Aluminum toxicity and Alzheimer’s, etc:
http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston/alzheimers_and_aluminum_toxicity.html
These effects are all cumulative when you drink a diet lemon-lime soda in an aluminum can.
This kind of thing might anger the American people more than the health bill.
And yet, conservatives are branded “authoritarian”
Thanks for the information.
This is the way to combat unhealthy products ... arm people with info, not drag them down with laws.
0bummerCare is about control of your body.
Slavery reinstituted by the black guy.
IIRC, after watching shows on how aluminum can are amde, the aluminum is sealed before filling. The drink doesn't come in contact with aluminum.
it doesn’t help that there are some conservatives who go for this kind of thinking
Welcome to Soft Tyranny.
Beer, in glass bottles. Mmmmm
I’d just be happy if they made Taco Bell lower the sodium content of their burritos!!
I’ve had to give them up because just one jacks my blood pressure up 20 points.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.