Mike Bloomberg is going to take away your big gulp

[Ukrainia]

By the way, people do so many unhealthy things. They smoke, lead sedentary lifestyles, don't get enough sleep, eat too much processed meats, eat too much salt, get into emotionally abusive relationships, gamble away much of their money, value entertainment over education, don't work hard enough, or spend too much time on work. And so on and so forth ad infinitum. You could make government mandates regarding all types of lives. But you don't make happier, healthier, better adjusted people. You make people who are disgusted that they can't add some of their individuality to their lives. Individuals actually do gain something by being allowed to make mistakes, make changes to progress, and find satisfaction in becoming better citizens. Their have already been plenty of governments that try to control all aspects of their citizens' lives. They don't turn out well.

 

[contango]

I'm betting that most people don't know, which makes the practice deceptive.

How can "most people" go through however many years of education it takes and still not know that sugary drinks are, well, sugary?

This just smacks of covering up one spectacular failure with another. If the government's education system can keep people within it for over a decade but still fail to educate them on the most basic concepts of personal diet why do we want to trust the same government to then make basic life decisions for the same people?

Put another way, when the government has so spectacularly failed in one area why is giving them even more control the answer?

The difference is asking someone to fill their cup several times, or buy several cups. It's hardly that much of an imposition, but we all know it would decrease total sugar intake for exactly the reasons you speak of.

Filling their cup several times makes sense for those who are eating in. I suppose all this initiative will do is increase sales of jumbo sized cups so those wishing to take away can fill their cup however many times they want and simply empty it into a larger cup before leaving.

It's a city ordinance, if people in that city don't like it it'll be overturned, this is how our government works.

It would be better if the government were restricted from making stupid ordinances in the first place, rather than having an increasing intrusive rule by the majority over issues that are better deferred to the individual.

Using this argument if the government mandated that people showered daily and used a specific brand of soap you could say it was a perfectly acceptable law on the basis people would vote the officials responsible out. Which is an ironic way of looking at things, if the fundamental reasoning behind giving the government the power in the first place is that people are too stupid to make decisions.

 

[contango]

By the way, people do so many unhealthy things. They smoke, lead sedentary lifestyles, don't get enough sleep, eat too much processed meats, eat too much salt, get into emotionally abusive relationships, gamble away much of their money, value entertainment over education, don't work hard enough, or spend too much time on work. And so on and so forth ad infinitum. You could make government mandates regarding all types of lives. But you don't make happier, healthier, better adjusted people. You make people who are disgusted that they can't add some of their individuality to their lives. Individuals actually do gain something by being allowed to make mistakes, make changes to progress, and find satisfaction in becoming better citizens. Their have already been plenty of governments that try to control all aspects of their citizens' lives. They don't turn out well.

There's also the way different people define "success". To one "success" means a good career and lots of money. To another it means children and a happy family life. To another it means service to their community, and so on.

The government can't mandate any lifestyle that will make people happy without knowing what it is that will make any individual happy. Far better to just get out of the way, leave people to seek happiness however works for them, and simply provide a basic framework of laws to rein in those whose quest for happiness is likely to bulldoze others.