Example #1 of what is wrong in this country - We need a judge to tell us kids can eat a happy meal

Don't Take Away My Freedom Bro wrote:

Why is the burden placed on companies rather than parents? I'm not a right-winger but I find a lot of the arguments that place the blame on companies to be guided by the following principle:

we should keep people from making bad choices rather than educate and encourage people to make better ones.

Unfortunately I think many people with a microphone or a media outlet take that principle one step further: People are NOT capable of making good choices so we should make the choices for them.

I would wrote:People are NOT capable of making good choices so we should make the choices for them.

Exactly.

Don't Take Away My Freedom Bro wrote:

Queton C. wrote:

It is a shame that companies are allowed to lure children into a lifetime of obesity with toys. There should be laws against that just like there are laws against tobacco commercials on TV that will just make the youth more unhealthy. Obesity is a serious issue and must be dealt with.

Why is the burden placed on companies rather than parents? I'm not a right-winger but I find a lot of the arguments that place the blame on companies to be guided by the following principle:

we should keep people from making bad choices rather than educate and encourage people to make better ones.

Exactly. Why prevent a responsible parent from occasionally treating their child to a meal with a toy because a sub-set of parents can't say "no" to their child any time they ask for one?

Not a Suicide Pact wrote:

I would wrote:People are NOT capable of making good choices so we should make the choices for them.

Exactly.

Some people aren't. You'd rather penalize the ones who are capable of making good choices to protect the ones that can't from themselves?

I would wrote:

Unfortunately I think many people with a microphone or a media outlet take that principle one step further: People are NOT capable of making good choices so we should make the choices for them.

I agree. And, as much as I think that people do make the wrong choice, e.g. eating poorly or not exercising, I don't understand why the government (or anyone else) should make the choice for them. Making the choice for them is denigrating to them as human beings while educating (or encouraging) individuals to make good choices is not.

Now, I don't think any party has done a great job of the latter, but I'm always confused by why the go to poles in an argument over obesity are:

(1) Don't take away my freedom bro, let me eat my McDs. If I have a MacAttack, well, it is my choice and I take the responsibility for stuffing my face with that beefy goodness.

(2) Your MacAttack is close to being a crack addition. But don't worry. It's not your fault. It is McD's fault. They are modern day drug dealers and we need to stop them from hurting you.

Not a Suicide Pact wrote:

[quote]I would wrote:People are NOT capable of making good choices so we should make the choices for them.

asdfklj wrote:

Some people aren't. You'd rather penalize the ones who are capable of making good choices to protect the ones that can't from themselves?

I don't think you understood what Not a Suicide Pact meant. I think he meant that the prevailing assumption by some politicians, political pundits, or individuals with some kind of food agenda is this: people are dumb, stupid, slobs; we [the pundits, politicians, etc.] know better. Therefore, rather than encourage them to make the right choice, we shouldn't even give them the opportunity to choose.

I agree with the sentiment of letting people decide for themselves so as not to penalize responsible people. But, the flip side of that argument is that eventually even the responsible people will be negatively impacted. Just look at obesity and the cost of healthcare. I'm responsible and healthy but yet my healthcare premiums are high because of the great number of obese people.

I guess the sentiment works until the irresponsible start to out number the responsible and everyone is impacted.

Maybe they should only sell happy meals to kids that are at a healthy weight. Sorry fatties, but that is life.

It sounds really smart and self-righteous to say 'it is the parents' responsibility.'

Clearly none of you work directly with this problem of obesity.

After years of seeing obesity rates, diabetes rates going up, if you are trying to deal with the consequences of it every single day, you sort of get beyond the 'it's the parent's fault.' Of course it is the parents' fault. But saying that does not help to solve the problem. You guys must all live in well-educated little bubbles. The reality is that the parents of many of these young kids are not well educated, are obese themselves, whatever. It really doesn't matter if I yell at them and tell them it is their fault, though.

As long as the companies like McD's keep on marketing like this, people are going to keep on going. It is obviously an effective marketing strategy, since their stock price keeps going up and our society's health is going down the drain.

Someone is going to have to deal with it, sooner or later. Believe me, if you are a working taxpayer, you are going to be paying for this problem. You can either try and deal with it by regulating things like advertising, or you can smugly sit on your hands and be self-righteous and grin and say it is the parent's fault.

I can give you a few other arguments and you can see where you want to draw the line. How about a law saying that if you live within city limits, you have to put a fence around your swimming pool. Well, let's say I'm Mr. Libertarian and I don't like fences, so I protest and don't put up the fence. I also like toys, so I put lots of them around my pool. The neighbor's toddler sees them, comes over, falls in and dies. Sure, it is the kid's parent's fault, but the kid is still dead. Is this really all that different from luring kids repeatedly into your burger joint with toys to make a buck?

rojo, you really need to leave the commentary on public health policy to those of us qualified to provide it. Please refocus your efforts on what you do well: executing fourth grade level grammar, posting broken links, breaking non-news, and grating on your podcast subscribers ears with your incessant stammering "uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"s in place of the short silence used by the rest of use who have passed a community college level speech class with at least a C.

If you grant the premise that it is the fault of the parents (or at least they share some of the blame), then your complaint is the practical one of how to solve the obesity problem.

Are you saying that the only practical solution is one involving legislation about McD's advertising practices? If you are, then I would like to know why other practical alternatives are not available?

I think there are a number of ways that we could solve the problem without engaging in some kind of paternalism and without assuming that obese people are stupid, lazy, slobs (e.g. eliminate subsidies for corn, make nutrition a core component of K-12 education, etc.) You say that "The reality is that the parents of many of these young kids are not well educated, are obese themselves, whatever. It really doesn't matter if I yell at them and tell them it is their fault, though." Even if we assume this, this doesn't help your argument that legislation on McD's is the only way to solve the problem for it is not the case that any of these people lack the CAPACITY to make informed decisions. Unless you are saying that obese people are mentally deficient.

M.P.H. wrote:

rojo, you really need to leave the commentary on public health policy to those of us qualified to provide it.

My point exactly: Who will make better decisions about what children eat -- fat, ignorant slobs whose only qualification is that they managed to reproduce or nutritional experts?

And who will make better decisions about what people should learn -- huge media corporations whose only interest is in getting the most eyeballs through bread and circuses or qualified experts?

The simple fact is that if you give people a choice, most people will choose wrong. Either government regulation or imposing heavy legal liability for selling harmful food, promoting harmful ideas, and so on is the only way to avoid a race to the bottom.

Not a Suicide Pact wrote:

M.P.H. wrote:

rojo, you really need to leave the commentary on public health policy to those of us qualified to provide it.

My point exactly: Who will make better decisions about what children eat -- fat, ignorant slobs whose only qualification is that they managed to reproduce or nutritional experts?

And who will make better decisions about what people should learn -- huge media corporations whose only interest is in getting the most eyeballs through bread and circuses or qualified experts?

The simple fact is that if you give people a choice, most people will choose wrong. Either government regulation or imposing heavy legal liability for selling harmful food, promoting harmful ideas, and so on is the only way to avoid a race to the bottom.

I'm so glad there are good, kind, wise people like yourself to keep me from hurting myself!

Did it ever occur to the parents that they do not have to take their kids there

Sarcasm Detector: On wrote:

I'm so glad there are good, kind, wise people like yourself to keep me from hurting myself!

Sorry, I can't do it yet, but perhaps after modern society collapses from excessive freedom.

Oh, Roberto. Please stop presenting your engorged vagina to the little boys. It's unflattering and illegal.

Fat and lazy wrote:

jrm wrote:

.

.

.

I totally get the libertarian attitude that parents should be allowed to make these choice but which of the following more describes America? High Obesity rates or High Gov't interference in people's lives?

Are you suggesting that you can't have both conditions at the same time?

No, but this isn't the situation in America. America is a very free country and also very fat.

I would not say the #1 problem in this country is that we lack freedom, would you? Would anyone who wasn't hysterical?

I understand what you are saying - and I agree that it IS a big problem. I also agree that it is easy to label this as a parenting problem and that the label itself does not fix the problem. Regulating McD's marketing does NOT fix the parenting problem. It may address the issue in a minor (very minor) way, but then I have to ask - What is next? How many more products must be regulated, and will that curb the obesity problem? Then we must look at the other half of the weight gain equation: Calories In minus calories burned equals weight gain/loss. So do we then start to regulate the calories burned issue? Today's youth are much more sedentary than years ago - so do we start regulating XBox or Playstation gaming units? How about TV... should Disney and Nickelodean access be limited. Where do you stop and WHO decides when there is enough control over other's children? More and more regulation doesn't solve behavioral issues - just look at the amount of regulation on illegal drugs.