Posted on 03/28/2015 10:47:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
Celebrate with me the recent lesson learned by the city council of Los Angeles after a 7-years-long experiment in nanny statism that ended in utter failure.
A public health report released in early 2007 showed that South Los Angeles residents were significantly more obese than those in the remainder of the city, including adults and children, and the data showed a dramatic increase from a similar report from a decade earlier. Furthermore, occurrence of obesity-related illness, such as diabetes, was more present in the area and also showed an increase.
The city council decided that something needed to be done.
The city council, having apparently been convinced they'd solved the consistent problems that have plagued the largely poor and minority-populated area of the city - such as economic stagnation, high occurrences of violence, and awful schools - had found a new bogey man to pursue: obesity. In the summer of 2008 they voted unanimously to forbid the opening of any new stand-alone fast food areas in a 32-square mile section of the city.
Jan Perry, the council member who proposed the ban, said this at the time:
The people don't want them, but when they don't have any other options, they may gravitate to what's there.
Almost 7 years later, the results are in. And they are not good.
The Rand Corporation just released its evaluation of what has happened over the last seven years and there were two significant findings:
1 Fast food consumption and obesity rates in South L.A. continued to outpace the rest of the city.
2 The number of fast-food stores increased by 10% despite the ban.
In other words, despite an attempt to reduce the growth of the quantity of the stores as a way to reduce consumption and obesity, they increased anyway. People that were eating a lot of fast food continued to eat a lot of fast food.
The ban, which specifically applied to stand-alone stores, didn't apply to those in strip malls or other similar locations and so that's where all the location increases occurred. In other words, the market responded by building more establishments where the ban did not apply.
Former police department chief and current councilman Bernard Parks said this in response:
We never believed it was going to be an overnight situation where all of a sudden the community was going to be healthy.
Overnight indeed. Initially, the ban was for one year and had been extended numerous times. Only in a progressive's mind would the goals of a program, with absolutely no results at all while it was in place, be so quickly redefined.
For the left, intentions and hoped-for results are the beginning and end of a discussion. Actual results and unintended consequences are mere footnotes, if mentioned at all. While health issues are certainly something to be concerned about, especially since with Obamacare the collective now has financial responsibility for one's poor life choices, it's now obvious that trying to affect them via real estate zoning is a failed idea.
As the issues mentioned above that confronted the area back then - economic difficulties, education failure, and violence - are still just as present and affecting residents, perhaps the council should consider focusing on those issues. Which is what they should have been doing in the first place.
When I read this stuff it always reminds me of how hard the Russians, Chinese and other Countries must be laughing at us.
Only a liberal could believe that (1) Big Government should act to keep people from eating too many burgers or drinking too large a soda, for their own health, but (2) Big Government should support euthanasia.
It’s very possible that it’s a part of the equation. Heredity is one of the most important issues, imho, as is age.
And occupation. People with sedentary desk jobs have a tendency to be less fit than manual laborers.
Yes, absolutely.
The post above was for you as well, but autocorrect changed it when I added blam.
These policies will never work out because they are imposed by people who are institutionally incapable of understanding the cause of the problem. It is the nationally accepted consensus as shown in the food pyramid of a diet of high carbs, low protein, and little fat. That model is exactly backwards. The great plains should swarming with cattle, not wheat fields. It’s carbs you morons!
People in those areas just need someone to teach them tasty ways to cook kale and tofu. Moochelle needs to get right on this!
They mean tyranny didnt work? Who knew? /s
Being a democrat CAN (and probably will) MAKE you Stupid..
Loser’s think Central Planning is the answer. These morons know only government. The real world is foreign to them.
Loser’s think Central Planning is the answer. These morons know only government. The real world is foreign to them.
True..... PEOPLE that want somebody ELSE to do something.. i.e. gov’t..
Doing something Themselves messes with their lifestyle.. i.e. drugs, some other CRIME..
Their gitalong is pointing AWAY from themselves..
Pretty well sums up what is wrong with the sheep following liberal leaders. They believe the elites, feel good about themselves, and then blame the inevitable failures on everyone else.
I would bet there is. No, not every fat person is stupid, but I’d bet there is some correlation. I’ll bet the correlation is even higher with low IQ and smoking.
When I see studies that whine about the correlation between poverty and poor health, I can’t help but think they are completely missing the root cause which is not the poverty but the low IQ. Low IQ contributes to poor health in so many ways: smoking, poor eating choices, early/unwed child-bearing, poor parenting, violence, .....
It’s the elephant in the room that everyone is afraid to mention.
Starbucks and donuts what could go wrong.
Seems to me the City Council was manipulated by loopholes and Malls. Someone made big bucks out of this zoning, just like in Red China
Yep that Churchill sure was dumb. And that healthy eating non-smoker....what was his name? Man, he sure was smart!
Loafing = sedentary = packs it on.
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.