Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
New York Soda Law
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chris81" data-source="post: 61401360" data-attributes="member: 263543"><p>Alright, I see where you are coming from. Sickness due to obesity leads to loss of productivity and increased medical costs. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The original intent of the commerce clause was to prevent States from imposing any kind of burden upon commerce that is interstate, meaning commerce that moves from one state to another. This all with the intent to insure regular free flow of commerce between states without burdens of tolling, irregular taxing schemes, or irregular highway width or rail systems.</p><p></p><p>As for States or municipalities regulating commerce within their own jurisdiction, you're right, they can regulate economic commerce as directed by their laws and via consent of the people. However, I never made the argument that this law was unconstitutional, merely unreasonable. </p><p></p><p>This is one of those laws that will have little effect in reducing obesity, will be burdensome to business and the consumer, and will be difficult to enforce. I can just imagine New York City creating the Municipal Regulatory Soda Enforcement Agency. This law wouldn't seem so bad if the people of New York had voted yes to restrict the size of soda beverages. Instead Major Bloomberg just made an executive order to enforce the law.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay that is true. I guess my main point is that healthcare costs are managed primarily through insurance companies. They take the risk related to the expense of increased obesity-related illnesses and I would say that it is the insurance company that have a vested interest in establishing health requirements and set premium charges for coverage. The government does provide coverage in the form of Medicare and Medicaid but as a libertarian I don't believe the government should be in that business or assume that risk. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The whole intent of the law is to regulate one's diet indirectly through the regulation of soda size requirements. Of course it won't work, because people are not easily manipulated.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, each individuals decisions effects the overall economy of a society. However, historically there have always been negative societal costs due to health issues. Some have been resolved through government intervention and others through free enterprise. </p><p></p><p>There are somethings that should be left alone. Consider prohibition, it was meant to solve a real problem related to health hazards caused by the consumption of alcohol. Unfortunately it lead to a huge organized crime problem in America. We repealed prohibition but the health problems related to alcohol still exists. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really, the law does not cover convenience stores. He can still get his 64 oz. Big Gulp if he pleases. </p><p></p><p>In any case, are people just captive to their own temptations or do you think we are capable of making rational decisions for our own sake. If the 64 oz. Big Gulp is such a great temptation why am I not buying one every time I buy gas? Why are you not drinking one everyday yourself? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Why would people change their habits do to a law? People hate being told what to do by the government. More than likely people will consume more drinks to spite the government.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I tend to throw away food and drink after my appetite is satisfied.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I guess I have no more capacity to make a decision for myself than a plant. Thank god, I have the government to tell me what to do?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, I can always turn off the TV if I don't want to see a commercial. I can't necessarily ignore the government when it enforces new laws.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chris81, post: 61401360, member: 263543"] Alright, I see where you are coming from. Sickness due to obesity leads to loss of productivity and increased medical costs. The original intent of the commerce clause was to prevent States from imposing any kind of burden upon commerce that is interstate, meaning commerce that moves from one state to another. This all with the intent to insure regular free flow of commerce between states without burdens of tolling, irregular taxing schemes, or irregular highway width or rail systems. As for States or municipalities regulating commerce within their own jurisdiction, you're right, they can regulate economic commerce as directed by their laws and via consent of the people. However, I never made the argument that this law was unconstitutional, merely unreasonable. This is one of those laws that will have little effect in reducing obesity, will be burdensome to business and the consumer, and will be difficult to enforce. I can just imagine New York City creating the Municipal Regulatory Soda Enforcement Agency. This law wouldn't seem so bad if the people of New York had voted yes to restrict the size of soda beverages. Instead Major Bloomberg just made an executive order to enforce the law. Okay that is true. I guess my main point is that healthcare costs are managed primarily through insurance companies. They take the risk related to the expense of increased obesity-related illnesses and I would say that it is the insurance company that have a vested interest in establishing health requirements and set premium charges for coverage. The government does provide coverage in the form of Medicare and Medicaid but as a libertarian I don't believe the government should be in that business or assume that risk. The whole intent of the law is to regulate one's diet indirectly through the regulation of soda size requirements. Of course it won't work, because people are not easily manipulated. Yes, each individuals decisions effects the overall economy of a society. However, historically there have always been negative societal costs due to health issues. Some have been resolved through government intervention and others through free enterprise. There are somethings that should be left alone. Consider prohibition, it was meant to solve a real problem related to health hazards caused by the consumption of alcohol. Unfortunately it lead to a huge organized crime problem in America. We repealed prohibition but the health problems related to alcohol still exists. Not really, the law does not cover convenience stores. He can still get his 64 oz. Big Gulp if he pleases. In any case, are people just captive to their own temptations or do you think we are capable of making rational decisions for our own sake. If the 64 oz. Big Gulp is such a great temptation why am I not buying one every time I buy gas? Why are you not drinking one everyday yourself? Why would people change their habits do to a law? People hate being told what to do by the government. More than likely people will consume more drinks to spite the government. No, I tend to throw away food and drink after my appetite is satisfied. I guess I have no more capacity to make a decision for myself than a plant. Thank god, I have the government to tell me what to do? Sure, I can always turn off the TV if I don't want to see a commercial. I can't necessarily ignore the government when it enforces new laws. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
New York Soda Law
Top
Bottom