So you are for personal freedom to make your own health care decisions but people who need foodstamps don't get personal freedom in their choice of soft drinks?

Where does it stop? Foods with too much fat? No soup because there is too much sodium? No cereals with sugar? Cigarettes aren't food.

The mayor of NY should spend more time worrying about the fact that the number of people n food stamps in NYC is expanding than worrying about banning soda.

More thread pollution about slippery slope. SODA. 40% of public school kids are obese in NYC. Many of these kids get food stamps. We are helping people, not hurting people by banning soda for food stamps.

I didn't bring up butter or cigarettes. There is absolutely no reason in my mind why soda shouldn't be allowed to be purchased with food stamps. You are providing people with financial troubles with assistance not mandating that they eat or drink what the govt tells them can.

It is not up to the govt to dictate to us what we eat. Period. The list of things that are supposedly bad for us is a mile long. I ask again, what's next? The idea that people who are on food stamps can't get soda will somehow cure obesity or even decrease it 1/2 of 1% is ridiculously naive. Helping people by taking away personal choice is dangerous. Banning schools from selling candy or soda? No problem. Banning people from buying soda with the money they receive from the govt? That's your slippery slope.

Fat and happy is better than stupid any day. Of course the truly stupid actually think they are smart.

You are not taking away personal choice. You are keeping people from starving....When you are off the government tit, you will be allowed to kill yourself like everyone else...including you.

Yes, if calling me names makes you feel better so be it. This thread is not about "smart." It is about personal responsibility and accepting welfare. When you incentivize bad behavior of any kind, that's what you get.

You are absolutely taking away personal choice. The govt should not dictate what you choose to eat or drink. Mandating what we can and can't eat or drink is an insanely blatant violation of civil liberties. Like I said before, What's next? Too much fat? Too much salt?

Why you can't see the difference of what welfare is, what is designed to do, and what you are arguing is beyond me...We are not having the same conversation. :wf

Hey you called me obese and say that I should accept it. I call you stupid and believe that you should accept it.

The stance that you have taken is directly opposite of personal responsibility. Accepting welfare and dictating what foods or drinks one decides to use with that welfare are not inclusive of each other. You aren't "incentivizing bad behavior", you are trying to intrude into peoples lives. Drinking soda is not bad behavior regardless of how you spin it.

Chuck, you are considered obese? It is not a personal shot because we are discussing obesity here. You would be the first to admit it is a personal decision you have made....I see what you are saying but the fact is people are not being responsible. 30 years ago, the obesity problem was not an epidemic. Today it is. Therefore, and especially when kids are involved, we can and should mandate that something that contributes towards obesity shouldn't be allowed when it is tax payer funded.

The reason is that you believe what you think is an absolute when clearly it is not. You want to break it down into black and white. In your mind soda is bad so banning it is justified. The problem is that soda is not bad or good. It is just one one of many drinks available and even the circumstantial evidence about obecsity and sugar dont matter to me as much as the rights of the people that your decree tramples on.

No, no, no....This is so incorrect. Look at the Westboro thread et all. I am as consistent as you could ever be.

This is not a subtle difference when you are talking about government money. This is where you and I differ. This is the same argument you tried to use in the tracks being subsidized thread, b/c they do it for casinos. This is your MO. You try desperately to change the subject when the truth is right in your face....Tax money. This is nobody's personal piggy bank, nor should it be. Am I saying we should outlaw welfare? No...God forbid someone who should be thrilled to get a handout, has to avoid a sprite which at 20 ounces has 16 spoons of sugar. Really not asking much here.

You are right. I can always exercise more and eat healthier and become less obese. You on the other hand were seemingly born stupid and despite your best efforts remain that way.

And you are right, people are not being responsible so we should definitely have govt mandates that we be more responsible. Maybe we can publicly flog fat people and shame them into losing weight if banning everything doesn't work? Of course many of the people who would be on board with something like this are also supporters of the "2+2=5 is right" and "every kid gets a trophy" programs which foster everything BUT personal responsibility.

It isn't the gov't money once they hand it over to you. Don't you think that people who are in the foodstamp program have paid taxes at some point in their lives? This idea that I have an "MO" is well, stupid. You believe that the gov't should have the right to tell you how you spend YOUR money once they give it to you. I don't. The Tracks/casino thing? You just don't understand the issues and/or are just plain wrong.

Again, why you being obese makes me stupid is beyond me?...It hardly makes you a bad person or alone. But damn if you aren't touchy about it...if you were comfortable with that choice, you would think you wouldn't be.

My weight is not related to your stupidity. I am in fact completely comfortable with my weight. What I am not comfortable is allowing putz's like you to take free shots at me under the guise of discussing the topic.

It is not a shot. I love my fat relatives as much as my skinny ones. It's beyond me that fat people choose to play the victim. Again, someone who is obese is unsurprisingly not going to support this kind of thing....A better question since you have now polluted this thread beyond repair....Are you in favor of universal health care?

It is beyond me why you can't comprehend that this essentially isn't a health issue. You injecting assumptions about me into every discussion is not only tiresome but insulting. You think that because I am a horse trainer that I have a biased take on the NJ situation is laughable. That you would think I would argue against the banning of soda for food stamp recipients because I am in your words 'obese', is reprehnsible. You know for a fact that you wouldn't say that to my face if we ever were to discuss this in person. So why should you be allowed to take shots at me on a discussion forum? My profession and my weight have zero to do with my ability to discuss topics.

What you call 'polluted' is actually dissenting opinion.

I am not in favor of universal healthcare until I see a system that will not only provide quality care but be properly funded as well. As it stands neither will occur.

So calling someone stupid b/c you disagree with them is ok, but calling someone obese, in the context of a state trying to lower the obesity rate, is wrong? Interesting how that works....Your profession and weight do in fact have something to do with the threads you want to discuss. That is why you went into XYZ thread to begin with. Obviously, anyone of any profession is influenced by their life experiences. To think otherwise is naive....And since I practice what I preach I have actual experience with the largest food bank in the United States since I have volunteered there each of the last 5 years. And you know what? You can get soda there. You know why, b/c it was donated. The government isn't providing it, people are. I bring whatever I can bring when I go, but I can't understand wanting to donate something unhealthy to those in need. :wf

Or they go into a mini mart and buy a couple gallons of milk w their EBT card, walk out to the car and then come back in "my girlfriend says we have milk at home can I return these?" Return them for cash and then suddenly remember he needed to get a couple of powerball tickets and some scratch offs. I've seen it done more than once.

what a great id................that's disgusting.

I am not calling you stupid because you disagree with me. I'm calling you stupid because most of your responses are stupid.

I would prefer that I choose what life experiences that I wish to draw from as opposed to you making assumptions based on your version of my life experiences.

Hopefully you didn't get injured patting yourself on the back for your noble charity work.

And acting as though soda is heroin just makes your argument even weaker. Soda has been around for 100 years. The fact that kids get less exercise than ever probably has far more to do with the issues that we are experiencing than simply drinking soda. Since we are drawing on personal experience, I eat less than I did 10 years ago but since I am not doing as much physical work as I did then plus the effects of aging I am now considered obese. And I drink diet.

Peanut....no worry.You look fine to me.The unfortunates who resemble a massive tsunami of flesh--now that's bad.

Randall's ideal physique

Oh well.

Wrong on soda's history of course. Corn Syrup is not 100 years old. It is the fake sugars that are the bigger issue.

Ironically, sugar free products often raise blood sugar as well.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...e-blood-sugar/

And a nice NIH study about kidney disease and soda.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

You're GB!!

Thank God for you Clyde. This place would be the Sahara without you.

Thank you so much,my very good friend.

But I'm only here for the hotties so as to chase theem.


Franny,Gooey,Debbie,Sighty,Cat-Girl-Do,Honula,Pudery,Printheth Chlorine,Danny and Thebby.


I hope I didn't miss anyone.

The women of DT calendar should be quite the seller.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stevie!!


Listen to him!..He's smart...why not!??

really???? there are a lot of people who buy food stamps.

Its called having the person with the card go with you to the store.

or

Have the person give you the card and the pin #.

Its pretty simple.

you're an idiot...

ahh they are polluting my thread!!!

you're not stupid.

You're just a moron.

head/desk

No one is banning soda. NY is just saying you can't buy soda with government money. People can buy all the soda they want; they just may not be able to use government money to do so.

If this passes. The reason soda was not excluded before is that the corn industry has a lot of power. Far more than poor people. The corn industry will be the biggest opponent to this because poor people using government money to buy soda makes them money.

While we're on the subject, soda is already ridiculously inexpensive because of the vast subsidies the government gives to corn. So we're all drinking soda already on the taxpayers' dime. And those who don't drink it are subsidizing those who do.

I believe the proposed restriction applies to beverages with more than 10 calories per ounce. So diet soda is still purchasable with government money.

And Randall, I do enjoy your political posts, but saying you're opposed to universal health care because some people make poor lifestyle choices is a wee bit silly, don't you think? Please explain how childhood leukemia is due to poor lifestyle choices. Or MS. Or Type 1 diabetes. Or breast cancer. Or brain cancer or stomach cancer or most kinds of cancer. Or autism or cerebral palsy or getting hit by a drunk driver or catching pneumonia or falling on an icy street or...

I only disagree,because you are so pre-tee.



:{>:

While I don't hate them, or want any human being to starve, I do think we should pay poor people to not have children. Right now, we pay them after they have children. Pretty stupid. I guess the problem would be people remaining poor so they could get paid to not have kids. That's still a much easier problem to manage than the one we have. See, I believe in Gov't actually trying to make a better society for all. Seems like most Liberals just want to give out money, and not make sure it's well managed (to obtain important favorable results.) I want to spend money in a way that results in us having to spend less money in the future. Don't get me wrong, nobody should be kept from having kids, but there should be incentives encouraging poor people to refrain from having kids they'll struggle to provide for. Lets say a poor woman has a kid (even though she would have been paid not do.) You know what happens next? She needs help. Where should that come from? Her sister's check (for not having babies while poor.) Watch this video. Keep track of the guy's constant message: 2 for 1..2 for 1..incentivize..incentivize....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtYdDK1uTDI