Big Apple, small soda?
Pint-sized pops in Park Slope?
If New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has his way, that's what's coming next to your favorite five-borough restaurant, movie theater or street vendor.
The mayor plans to eliminate the sale of sugary drinks larger than 16 fluid ounces in each of those places in an "ambitious" effort to combat obesity, The New York Times reported today.
“New York City is not about wringing your hands; it’s about doing something,” Bloomberg told the paper.
Exemptions, such as for diet drinks and sales in supermarkets, are expected to be part of the new law, eyed for spring 2013, according to the Times.
It would mark the first such ban in the country, but follows the mayor's successful efforts to ban trans fats and curb public smoking.
The New York City Beverage Association is certainly not thrilled.
So nanny-state-gone-mad or nice job Bloomie?
What next Bloomy ,Weight limits to wear bathing suits at the beach?
Please except my sincerest apologies that my argument didn't meet your standards and you found it silly. Maybe next time, I can send you my comment first and if you would be so kind, you can review it so I don't embarass myself again making silly arguments here in a public forum.
As for most of you praising the Mayor, you are just following suit. You should put down 50 shades of grey and get out there and see the jobless / homeless people in this country (not just in Richchester) and stop worrying about intruding on people's rights to make a choice.
This is nanny state nonsense.
How about a mandatory excersize program. 20 minutes every morning to be done in front of your computer so you can be monitored by web cam at the ministry of health. Uncompliant people will be punished.
Remember that carbohydrates are just complex sugars (polysaccharides instead of monosaccharides and disaccharides), so why not ban rice, breads, cereals, grain, etc... It's all sugar. As for justifying these laws with the argument that tax payers have to pick up the resulting health care costs, that's an argument against government run health care (except for the very needy). We turn everybody into their neighbor's keeper if we are funding their expenses. Using that argument, should anybody receiving tax-payer subsidies (entitlements, etc...) be allowed to spend money on non-essentials (Cell Phones, Jewelry, entertainment, etc...) much less soda, since we've socialized the costs? I think we can agree on getting rid of all government subsidies :-)
I don't eat out much, and I brown bag it for the kids. It takes effort to prep meals, but it's way more economical and eating healthy isn't expensive. I can cook a good dinner for a family of 6 for under $15. Maybe even under $10.
It's poor choices and a lack of exercise that is making people fat...that and those poor choices are less expensive and quick...