Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

N.Y. Mayor Bloomberg: 'Ban' on large sugary drinks 'in the country's interest'
Washington Times ^

Posted on 03/10/2013 9:32:50 AM PDT by SMGFan

New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg defended the city’s new law banning restaurants from serving large sugary drinks, saying that it’s “in the country’s interest.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/mar/10/ny-mayor-bloomberg-ban-large-sugary-drinks-country/#ixzz2N9gvQmjY Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last
Anyone ask him about how 80% recent of NYC High Schools grads cannot read?
1 posted on 03/10/2013 9:32:50 AM PDT by SMGFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

“We’re not banning anything,” he said. “It’s called portion control — it’s a typical [way] that companies use and governments use to explain to people what’s in their interest and what isn’t,” he said.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/mar/10/ny-mayor-bloomberg-ban-large-sugary-drinks-country/#ixzz2N9hQYRkE


2 posted on 03/10/2013 9:34:17 AM PDT by SMGFan (SMGfan is not "Sub Machine Gun" fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

‘Ban’ on large Bloombergs ‘in the country’s interest’

Fixed it...


3 posted on 03/10/2013 9:35:50 AM PDT by illiac (If we don't change directions soon, we'll get where we're going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
Bloomberg is messing with the sugar market.
He knows sugar is power.
4 posted on 03/10/2013 9:37:42 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
The Big Gulp is a national security issue. They need to be regulated by big sis and that organization she runs.

sarc/

5 posted on 03/10/2013 9:38:06 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Progressive, Marxist liberals do not evolve, they morph into fascists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan; All

I would like to point out it started out with the smoking ban...


6 posted on 03/10/2013 9:42:31 AM PDT by KevinDavis (Third Parties are for losers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: illiac

A sock in napoleon bloombergaparts pie hole would be in the country’s best interest. What a meddlesome old biddy.


7 posted on 03/10/2013 9:42:43 AM PDT by rktman (BACKGROUND CHECKS? YOU FIRST MR. PRESIDENT!(not that we'd get the truth!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

There is one rationale - and one rationale only - for the ban on large drinks, and that is clearly the exercise of Bloomberg’s enormous and demented ego.


8 posted on 03/10/2013 9:43:39 AM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Ban sugary drinks, legalize marijuana. Moral posturing in a decadent, declining America.


9 posted on 03/10/2013 9:44:17 AM PDT by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!

what business is it of Bloomberg OR ANYONE ELSE IN GOVERNMENT !! to tell someone that they can or can’t sell a legal product!!?!?!?!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I am about to explode!

and who wants to bet that this SAME freaking idiot would fight tooth and nail to allowed some poor person on food stamps to be able to buy ANYTHING that want at the grocery store!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ARG!


10 posted on 03/10/2013 9:44:47 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
Hey Bloomberg, FREEDOM is in our best interests, no well-meaning fascists like you.
11 posted on 03/10/2013 9:44:51 AM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Bloomberg is nothing but a little tyrant. Thank God he’s restricted by the borders of his city. Of course, the good liberals of New York City deserve whatever the hell they get out of what they vote into office....


12 posted on 03/10/2013 9:45:51 AM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

SMGFan~:” .. how 80% recent of NYC High Schools grads cannot read? “

Hey , we have priorities , ya know !!
Its not like you have a right to a quality education which is government funded and controlled.

See what Bloomie has done to pain medications in city hospitals
See what Bloomie has done to nutrition and sugary drinks
See how Bloomie wouldn’t even allow the State National Guard into the city without weapons despite looting
We have to expand government control since the public cannot be trusted with their own health issues.


13 posted on 03/10/2013 9:47:42 AM PDT by Tilted Irish Kilt (“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Why doesn’t the power hungry old fart ban Obama and his crew from coming into NYC and holding up traffic..

Why don’t the people of NYC see he doesn’t get reelected?


14 posted on 03/10/2013 9:49:58 AM PDT by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
it’s a typical [way] that companies use and governments use to explain to people what’s in their interest and what isn’t,

Oh, lordy, thank you, benevolent overlord!
15 posted on 03/10/2013 9:50:22 AM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

If sugary drinks are that pernicious, then just lobby the congress to outlaw them, using the interstate commerce clause. They’ve already set the precedence.


16 posted on 03/10/2013 9:53:20 AM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLD

The idiots of NY put him in for a third term, had to change to law to do it 2 terms as republican, 1 term as independant...they deserve him....


17 posted on 03/10/2013 9:55:54 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

“I would like to point out it started out with the smoking ban...”

As I am deathly allergic to nicotine, I was ever so grateful that smoking was banned in the workplace. But it upsets me to see the ban getting bigger and bigger. People have been ticketed for smoking in their trucks, by themselves, because that is their workplace. As this happened, my first thought was, okay, what will they ban next? The other disturbing thing is that so many people support this type of intrusion. Why? I’ve noticed that these people project. Case in point, Michelle Obama. Michelle is carrying a few extra pounds in the caboose. I’ve seen her pictured woofing down the very things she would ban from others. I looked up Bloomberg. He appears lightly built so he probably isn’t projecting. He is, however, attempting to control activities that should be well beyond the realm of politics.


18 posted on 03/10/2013 9:58:31 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
Portion control is up to your mommy and your common sense. Get your governments nose out of our personal lives.

This guy just won the grand prize for oppression. No level of government has any right to tell me what legal size any legal drink has to be. This is just the stupidity of political ego and arrogance. Take your nanny state and shove it way up there but be sure to leave room for your head.

19 posted on 03/10/2013 9:59:37 AM PDT by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
“It’s called portion control...

Fixed...

20 posted on 03/10/2013 9:59:51 AM PDT by Living Free in NH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

It may look crazy to the rest of us, but this is exactly the type of leadership the people of New York want. He would probably easily win a 4th term as mayor. He is probably getting close to being the most voted-for mayor in the history of any city in the country. The people are clearly telling him they like what he is doing, so from his point of view why should he change anything he is doing.


21 posted on 03/10/2013 10:02:14 AM PDT by Reddon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

He’s actually a bit wide for as short as he is.


22 posted on 03/10/2013 10:05:02 AM PDT by John W (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Anybody considered the possibility that the boy has gone insane... or slightly demented?


23 posted on 03/10/2013 10:05:45 AM PDT by Getready (Wisdom is more valuable than gold and diamonds, and harder to find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Why do I get the feeling these laws are targeting minorities?


24 posted on 03/10/2013 10:09:54 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

Since there are so many homeless, how about a ban on large apartments in NYC? Say over 1,000 sf. Nobody really needs more space than that.


25 posted on 03/10/2013 10:10:46 AM PDT by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

“portion control”.

Did they reduce the size of pizza’s? No. He singled out soft drinks for some moronic reason. Even then a person can go into a grocery store, buy a 2 litre coke and chug it. So they are not implementing portion control.


26 posted on 03/10/2013 10:36:12 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

A ban on Michael Bloomberg would be in the interest of the citizens of the USA, not that we really matter any more...

The guy has a Napoleon complex, and needs to meddle in ever bit of our lives, with the exception of the things that a city government is actually supposed to do...

Mark


27 posted on 03/10/2013 10:36:46 AM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KoRn
Thank God he’s restricted by the borders of his city.

I wish that were the case. He just dropped a chunk of $$$ into the campaign of a woman running for the Los Angeles school board, and I heard there were other campaigns he had funded. He's trying to meddle in places where he doesn't belong. California has enough problems without him. He needs to just STFU and go away.

28 posted on 03/10/2013 10:44:21 AM PDT by Fast Moving Angel (A moral wrong is not a civil right: No religious sanction of an irreligious act.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

The fool is actually driving up the cost of healthcare.


29 posted on 03/10/2013 10:50:05 AM PDT by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

How about banning homelessness, doofus?


30 posted on 03/10/2013 10:51:33 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

31 posted on 03/10/2013 10:53:27 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

This reminds me of the movie Demolition Man. Bloomberg is Dr. Cacto.


32 posted on 03/10/2013 10:53:58 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (If most people were more than keyboard warriors, we might have won the election)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan
Sugary drinks are not in the country's interest, but a ground zero victory mosque is? Bloomberg supports the erection of a ground zero victory mosque in the very city where about 2900 people died from the religion/death cult that wants to erect the mosque. Also, Walmart hss been banned from NYC, also. Tis a sick and evil city to keep voting these swine into office.


The Official Underzog website

33 posted on 03/10/2013 10:55:13 AM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

This meddling,plutocrat pissant has been around far too long. For Gods sake someone please shut him up!!


34 posted on 03/10/2013 11:03:16 AM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather; All

I’m for smoke free zones just as long it is done by private means and not the state..


35 posted on 03/10/2013 11:05:08 AM PDT by KevinDavis (Third Parties are for losers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

the next question is:
what will he do when this (outlawing large sizes) does nothing to slow obesity in NYC?

or is this a huge diversion?

just cuz I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get me.


36 posted on 03/10/2013 11:15:23 AM PDT by quagmier (There is no "common good" which minimizes or sacrifices the individual. Walter Scott Hudson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

The country’s interest? Excuse me, I don’t recall that Bloomberg was elected President of the country, let alone King. If the people of NYC really want to put up with his nonsense it’s their business, but I don’t live in NYC and I don’t answer to that a$$clown.


37 posted on 03/10/2013 11:19:10 AM PDT by hitkicker (The only thing worse than a politician is a child molester)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

If we adhere to the Aristotelian mean and moderation in all things, then sugary drink size creep is to be shunned.

A short visit into most any public place provides views of large and extremely large people. The term is obese. They have a BMI exceeding 30 and have or are destined for poor health. One result is type II diabetes, a difficult to define disease that can be manifest in a host of minor to very serious health problems. Sugar and other carbohydrate excess over time produce the problems.

In the big picture, the problem becomes freedom, liberty, the ability to make choices. Should one be free to guzzle Coke or Pepsi while consuming mass quantities of Do Nuts and Twinkies or should all that stuff be rationed? Should one be restricted from eating a whole cake in one setting or be free to eat and suffer?

Those who tend to actually worry about the concept take both positions. Conservatives say freedom, liberty. Progressives say ration.

Under the concept of govern mandated health care the penalty for a BMI > 30 is a very unhealthy population requiring care that becomes very expensive. Such care can be considered unnecessary if there were adherence to the Aristotelian eating mean in the first place. Regulating moderation is the conclusion. The inability to moderate eating requires regulation to insure the cost of the immoderate action is reduced.

As mayor of a city that taxes beyond the Aristotelian moderation mean and still struggles, the cost of fat asses demanding city health care provided in addition to the state and federal care is a problem. The moderation penalty is not fair in the sense it affects everyone. It affects only the immoderate. Sensible people that drink only 12 oz are not bothered.

Large sugary drinks make people fat
Fat people require more healthcare and associated costs
Eliminate sugary drinks and save the budget
QED


38 posted on 03/10/2013 11:27:05 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

No. A ban on Mike Bloomberg is in the country’s interest. This billionaire bozo needs to STFU and go away.


39 posted on 03/10/2013 12:59:19 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

Only a liberal idiot would consider citizens too dumb to make food choices but smart enough to vote in elections.


40 posted on 03/10/2013 1:03:39 PM PDT by nascarnation (Baraq's economic policy: trickle up poverty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SMGFan

“We’re not banning anything...It’s called portion control...”

Yes, portion *control*. Big Government portion control. You, sir, are powermad.


41 posted on 03/10/2013 1:30:58 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

At least they tried to make smoking a “public health” issue, incantation of which words unlocks the police powers, even though they lied about secondhand smoke. But there is no such thing as secondhand large, sugary drinking. Why is it they feel no need to justify themselves anymore? Is the personal finally truly political, as the Marxist always wanted, and everything you do as an individual is now subject to regulation for the good of the whole? When did that happen?


42 posted on 03/10/2013 1:37:28 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bert

You are in the twilight zone. How a person moderates his food and beverage intake only affects him. People try to make it out as a disease, which it isn’t, even though it can lead to diseases. Neither is drug addiction. It can’t be a disease, in my opinion, if the “cure” is simply to choose to do something less.

But let’s say fattiness is a disease. It still isn’t a public health issue. It still only affects the individual, and as such is cut off from the state’s police powers. Ah, but as you point out, we now have socialized medicine. Meaning everyone’s healthcare is everyone’s else’s business because everyone’s healthcare is a financial burden to the rest of us.

However, someone’s still paying for it. The money gots to come from somewhere. Mainly we decide who pays based on how much more they have than others (from each according to his abilities), or whether you buy unpopular things (sin tax), or how stupid you are (lottery). Why not make fat people lay for themselves? Or is that too much like the old system and common sense?

Here’s a perfect argument for why healthcare shouldn’t be socialized. Not only do undesirables cost us, we in fact encourage more fattiness, as there’s less incentive not to be fat. Yet you’re perfectly fine with socialism. It’s the immoderate who are at fault. But I don’t see why. You ought to embrace crackheads, sloths, sluts and satyrs, gluttons, and daredevils. You’ve guaranteed there’ll be more of them.

The only apparent alternative is to come at them with theaw from the other side. If socialism has removed consequences, then prohibition can remove opportunity. And we all know how well that works.

You may be comforted by fatties getting the business. They’ve abandoned Aristotlean truth and the Protestant ethic, committed one of the sevenly deadly sins, or whatever. But of course we won’t always go after the obviously socially unworthy. If what constitutes public health—and therefore the police powers—within a society with socialized medicine is whatever costs money to treat, or whatever can conceivably lead to costly medical consumption, then the government has power over every conceivable aspect of human life. Life is a disease for which death is the cure, as they say.


43 posted on 03/10/2013 2:04:07 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: bert

Next, we just eliminate fat people. /s


44 posted on 03/10/2013 3:04:08 PM PDT by SMGFan (SMGfan is not "Sub Machine Gun" fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

I don’t disagree with you but there two thoughts expressed by my post.

The progressive thought is responsible for the conclusion one way to reduce healthcare cost is to forbid big gulps.


45 posted on 03/10/2013 4:42:21 PM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

You are right..


46 posted on 03/11/2013 6:14:48 AM PDT by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: allendale
Ban sugary drinks, legalize marijuana.

What an adult puts in their body is nobody else's business, be it sugar or marijuana.

47 posted on 03/11/2013 9:15:25 AM PDT by JustSayNoToNannies ("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bert

Uh oh. A liberal nanny-stater hijacked bert’s account. Anyone know how to get in touch with the original FReeper ‘bert’?


48 posted on 03/11/2013 9:19:12 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

To function on Free Republic, you need to be able to read.

There is a conservative thought and a progressive thought. The progressive reasoning was outlined for those who have difficulty understanding the liberal mind.


49 posted on 03/11/2013 11:05:18 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: bert
To function on Free Republic, you need to be able to read.

Untrue!

50 posted on 03/11/2013 11:21:20 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson