The Best Story of the Day...
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
.jpg)
Perhaps one of the more encouraging stories of the day was the Court striking down Mayor Bloomberg's ban on large sugary drinks. Don't get me wrong here, I do not drink sugary beverages such as soda or energy drinks, and as a PFT (Personal Fitness Trainer) I advise against the consumption of such useless and potentially harmful calories. Think added weight and cavities to name just two.
You might find yourself asking why a PFT, one who does not partake of sugary drinks other than a highball, a glass of beer or wine with dinner, would not welcome the nanny state mentality of Mayor Bloomberg and the rest of the big brother nanny state advocates.
It's simple really, and those who understand the concepts of liberty and freedom understand why without anyone having to tell them.
For the big brother big sister nanny state advocates here it is... The choice of what each individual of their own free will and informed choice choose to feed their body (in the form of nutrients or garbage and useless calories) is THEIR decision and theirs alone. One can choose to be healthy or choose to be unhealthy, it is not the governments realm to force that choice upon any individual.
Sure society as a whole would be better off if every member of society trained as an elite professional athlete. Medical costs would drop like a lead balloon. Obesity and its associated health risks would be practically nonexistent Osteoarthritis would be much less prevalent. Heart attack, stroke, and hypertension would be something rarely heard of. The best news of all people would quite likely live longer and ENJOY a BETTER QUALITY of LIFE. Allowing them to enjoy family and loved ones perhaps a longer period of time.
In as much as the above is true (if you don't believe me check in with The Doctors and Doctor Oz on a regular basis) it is not the nanny state's place to dictate to free individuals what to consume in the form of sustenance. Having said this I will follow with it is the function of government to provide a well rounded and balanced education for the nation's youth,which INCLUDES a proper physical fitness program and proper instruction in nutrition.
Should anyone question why I (the ultimate individualist) would say the state should provide this education the answer is quite simple. IT IS IN EVERYONE'S BEST SELF INTEREST TO DO SO
.
From The Wall Street Journal...
The state providing a sensible educational and fitness program for youth right up to HS graduation makes sense. I fully support the need for this even if it means an uptick in taxes to provide such education.The long term benefits as related to reduction in health care costs likely would pay for itself overtime. Education is enlightening and properly administered is motivational. For the nanny state to dictate eating and beverage choices for adults is ill advised and wrong. Teach the children well and healthier future generations will be the everlasting reward. It is simply the RIGHT thing to do.
What I find so amazing is that more people aren't focused on the broader picture as to why the ban was wrong and whet the implications are should it be allowed to stand.
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
.jpg)
Perhaps one of the more encouraging stories of the day was the Court striking down Mayor Bloomberg's ban on large sugary drinks. Don't get me wrong here, I do not drink sugary beverages such as soda or energy drinks, and as a PFT (Personal Fitness Trainer) I advise against the consumption of such useless and potentially harmful calories. Think added weight and cavities to name just two.
You might find yourself asking why a PFT, one who does not partake of sugary drinks other than a highball, a glass of beer or wine with dinner, would not welcome the nanny state mentality of Mayor Bloomberg and the rest of the big brother nanny state advocates.
It's simple really, and those who understand the concepts of liberty and freedom understand why without anyone having to tell them.
For the big brother big sister nanny state advocates here it is... The choice of what each individual of their own free will and informed choice choose to feed their body (in the form of nutrients or garbage and useless calories) is THEIR decision and theirs alone. One can choose to be healthy or choose to be unhealthy, it is not the governments realm to force that choice upon any individual.
Sure society as a whole would be better off if every member of society trained as an elite professional athlete. Medical costs would drop like a lead balloon. Obesity and its associated health risks would be practically nonexistent Osteoarthritis would be much less prevalent. Heart attack, stroke, and hypertension would be something rarely heard of. The best news of all people would quite likely live longer and ENJOY a BETTER QUALITY of LIFE. Allowing them to enjoy family and loved ones perhaps a longer period of time.
In as much as the above is true (if you don't believe me check in with The Doctors and Doctor Oz on a regular basis) it is not the nanny state's place to dictate to free individuals what to consume in the form of sustenance. Having said this I will follow with it is the function of government to provide a well rounded and balanced education for the nation's youth,which INCLUDES a proper physical fitness program and proper instruction in nutrition.
Should anyone question why I (the ultimate individualist) would say the state should provide this education the answer is quite simple. IT IS IN EVERYONE'S BEST SELF INTEREST TO DO SO
.
From The Wall Street Journal...
A state judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at New York City restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for a mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure.
The city is "enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations," wrote New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling, blocking the rules one day before they would have taken effect. The city's chief counsel, Michael Cardozo, pledged to quickly appeal the ruling.
In halting the drink rules, Judge Tingling noted that the incoming sugary drink regulations were "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences" that would be difficult to enforce with consistency "even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole."
Skip
In his ruling, Judge Tingling found the Board of Health's mission is to protect New Yorkers by providing regulations that protect against diseases. Those powers, he argued, don't include the authority to "limit or ban a legal item under the guise of 'controlling chronic disease.' "
The board may supervise and regulate the city's food supply when it affects public health, but the City Charter clearly outlines when such steps may be taken: According to Judge Tingling, the city must face imminent danger due to disease.
"That has not been demonstrated," he wrote.
Judge Tingling also suggested that Mr. Bloomberg overstepped his powers by bringing the sugary drink rules before the Board of Health, which is solely appointed by him. The City Council, he wrote, is the legislative body "and it alone has the authority to legislate as the board seeks to do here."
City health officials, he wrote, aren't assigned the "sweeping and unbridled authority to define, create, authorize, mandate and enforce" the health code.
"It ridiculous to put this kind of money and legislation into something that people are going to find a way to bypass," said Mr. Nero, 46 years old, of Brooklyn.
When city health officials voted to approve the large-drink ban in the fall, they routinely pointed to statistics showing that 58% adults citywide are overweight or obese, and nearly 40% of public-school students in eighth grade or below are obese or overweight.
In the debate over the controversial rules, Bloomberg administration officials acknowledged many underlying causes of weight gain. {Read More}
The state providing a sensible educational and fitness program for youth right up to HS graduation makes sense. I fully support the need for this even if it means an uptick in taxes to provide such education.The long term benefits as related to reduction in health care costs likely would pay for itself overtime. Education is enlightening and properly administered is motivational. For the nanny state to dictate eating and beverage choices for adults is ill advised and wrong. Teach the children well and healthier future generations will be the everlasting reward. It is simply the RIGHT thing to do.
What I find so amazing is that more people aren't focused on the broader picture as to why the ban was wrong and whet the implications are should it be allowed to stand.
Via: Memeorandum
Well Kapital sure does give us plenty of choice.
ReplyDeleteGo into any supermarket and at least 20% of the floor space is potato chips and soda.
But you get so much choice. Hundreds of brands of crap. Supersized too.
And to top it all off you get skull f***ed by ad blitzes. But education will counter all that (LMFAO).
Ain't Kapital wonderful. Obesity, heart attacks and diabetes rampant and the Randoids start with the "nanny state" nonsense because the city of New York wants to limit you to a quart of that crap in fast food joints.
Ducky, if you don't like it, don't drink it. Problem entirely solved. Yes, isn't capital (the control of the economy by the people instead of the ruling elites) wonderful?
DeleteYour comment has been noted.
ReplyDeleteNow, If you understood the value of nutrion education and including physical education, I would give your comment serious consideration. However, being a proponent of Marx, Engels, and Das Kapital it is clear you belive human individuals are not capable of learning and making educated choices concerning their on welrare and self interests. OH NO! We simply must have the all knowing, all benevolent, government telling us what to eat, drink, and maybe before long when we need sleep and what meds need. " One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
Ducky, go back to reading Das Kapotal, place your faith in the big brother big sister nanny state. And by all means treat all intelligent adults as though they don't get it because they aren't enamored with the idea of the state controlling all aspects of their life.
Oh, I almost forgot. I must assume you prefer the state guiding you, your children, and grand children in life decisions rather than providing the education and example that grows their intelligence and equips them to make intelligent life choices.
Cheerio old sap.
PS: Are you prepared to tell the First Lady she is wasting her time? Why not support her efforts to increase physical fitness in our youth and take it to the next and obvious level.
DeleteOh, that's right. It's easier to just have Big Gov. tell us what to eat, drink, sleep, ad infinitum...
Are you even out of school yet?
ReplyDeletelike most egotistical people you misrepresent the extent of your knowledge. Very clear reading your blog. Your boasts about yourself are in your mind, not a fact.
So noted aNon the ignorant. And, duly filed in the circular file.
DeleteCheerio Ignoramus
aNon, I realize how difficult it must be for you when everywhere you look, all around you you see individuals of far superior intellect and reasoning ability. Hiding in the shadows, afraid to identify yourself must surely have affected you psyche and emotional well being.
DeleteI wish you well in all your lifes endeavors and encourage you to continue your trolling of blogs. It is obvious that you find great comfort as you display your wonderful talents for both left and right blogistan to behold.
Unfortunaly, as your visits here at RN USA rarely address the subject matter of any post, the management has instructed that your comments such as tonights not ne posted.
Good Day,
The Management
Is that the same Anon who lofted the huge whopper that Saddam had no WMD, and when I provided just some of the ample and accepted proof, he went totally silent?
DeleteAnon said of RN: "you misrepresent the extent of your knowledge". You might have a valid point here. It happens with you, Anon, in the same way a stopped clock is correct twice per day. RN is fairly humble, and I am sure he knows even more that he is telling us he knows. So this statement of yours might not be so far off.
DeleteI think there are two reasons most people aren't very worked up about this. First, governments regulate all sorts of things like this. Look at all the various state, county, and local liquor laws, for instance. Second, it seems so trivial. That second reason has two sides. Why did Bloomberg weigh into this in the first place? How would he regulate such a thing? Would it be worth it? I never understood this whole drink-size ban thing.
ReplyDeletedmarks, nobody believes there was any significant WMD in Iraq. Certainly nothing to go to war over, and nothing like the Bush administration claimed.
JMJ
Jersey: As Saddam had stockpiled hundreds of WMD, I would bet that the "nobody" description might best apply to those who might call this massive amount not "significant". You came across as careless and slap-dash in this part of your comment.
DeleteAs for the next part, you get worse. The "nobody" description applies to neither side of this divisive issue... whether or not Saddam's WMD stockpiles and other significant cease-fire violations warranted a major retaliation.
A survey of all the polls finds that from 30% to 40% supported the US retaliation. While not a majority of coursed, that is a very large proportion (not to mention raw numbers of scores of tens of millions of Americans. Basically, your claims are entirely unsupported.
Okay, let ot put it this way... No honest, serious, intelligent person believes Saddam had any significant stock pile of any any significant WMD. Iraq was utterly crippled and hobbled by 2003 after over a decade of isolation, degradation, and an war torn infrastructure that was never rebuilt after the first war. Honest, serious, intelligent people had always known this. The Iraq war was a scam from the beginning. Money for the neocons buddies in the MIC. You're just a mark, dmarks.
DeleteJMJ
I am not at all sure exactly WHAT Saddam and WMD have to do with the substance of this post jmj.
DeleteI get why dmarks made his reference to same, to discredit aNon.
Now that it's out of everybody's perhaps we can refocus on the subject matter?
Thank you... The Management
Actually, dmarks has been posting this distracting argument in a few places. I encouraged it, so shame on me.
ReplyDeleteJMJ
No problem jmj. Just trying to keep the focus on the substance of the post. I do realize these things happen from time to time. Appreciate your understanding.
DeleteRN: Perhaps I can take a little time to discredit Jersey. Or seems he did it himself with the claim that a stockpile of hundreds of WMD is not 'significant'
ReplyDeleteWell marks, it seems to me that the WMD tit for tat has about worn itself out. Whatever WMD may have existed before the Iraq war started the seem to have dematerialized, by whatever means it happened.
DeleteAlso, and this is equally as large issue from a global perspective, taking out Saddam actually destabilized the region on several levels. We have seen the results.
But enough of the old and tired. Hopefully we can stay on track with the substance of the post. I know it may be less interesting but in reality the meat of the article has great significance on a national level and affects all age groups. As well as the issue of liberty and the freedom to make decisions for ones own life.
Liberties often slide away because of the inability to look at issues in a different light or from a different perspective. One merely need read aNon's comments occasionally left here to realize th3e truth in my statement. IMNHO anyway.
And as we get back on subject, Ducky seems to have bowed out after a love letter to fascism which appealled to the rants of Stalin's ideological father Karl Marx as some sort of positive thing (as so often he favors such personal choices being made by the powerful and not the people), and aNon has been more recently present in name (but not in mind, as is typical). It seems that the soda nazi's have run out of allies here. Or is it more proper to refer to a soda-nazi Axis instead of allies?
ReplyDeleteBumbleberg is just following the administrations lead. Create a diversion of silly Sh-- so you don't have to deal with important Sh--. Bumbleberg should have proposed this law to reduce crime by limiting the size of soda drinks. If you have to hold two drinks to equal 32oz it makes it much harder to use your illegal firearm to shoot your opposing gang member. Bumbleberg just approached it from the wrong direction.
ReplyDeleteReally? Who woulda thunk?
Delete