Now if he'll just ban running with scissors, we'll be completely safe.  Good to see him cracking down on REAL threats to society and not drug lords or thieves!
 

Sadly enough, some people need to protected from themselves.  I work in healthcare and it pains me to see the children who suffer from this kind of crap and it's not their fault, it's the fault of crappy parenting.  I had a 13 year old diagnosed with type 2 diabetes the other day. Thirteen?!  Hypertension is getting more common in younger and younger kids.  These used to be disease of older people.  You never had to worry about your 13 year old having diabetes before recently.

I'm sure you've heard this debate but when you talk to their parents about these issues, they don't care. They say they do but "Jr. won't eat healthy foods" as they fill their baskets with junkfoods and then take the kids to McDonalds.  These kids are going to have life-long problems that you and I have to spend our tax dollars paying for.  I don't trust them to make the decision on what to feed their kids.  It's sad when half of the top 300 sold in America are high blood pressure or diabetes medications. Somethings gotta give.

Is banning food the answer? I don't know.  I wish an option was beating the crap out of the parents and making them actually attempt to the raise their children instead of placating them and shoving Big Macs down their throats while they play Playstation.  I wish we could make people stop watching TV for 30 minutes a day to walk or do something.  Until then, I don't know what the answer is but at least they're trying something in NewYork.

Our governor is a psycho health nut too.

 

"I wish we could make people stop watching TV for 30 minutes a day to walk or do something."

The function of government is not to be nanny to its populace, it's to kep the trains running, the trash hauled away and foreign enemies from taking us over. Now I know that they've outsourced all of these things to private corporations, but you see my point, yes?

Now I agree that healthy eating and exercise are important for all people, regardless of age, but when you start passing laws like this, you start slowly stripping away free choice and will, something that I think we can all agree is more important than anything else. The idea of "protecting people from themselves" is a very slippery slope logically and functionally in a government. It can easily go from banning smoking and trans fats to banning concepts and ideas that the government deems offensive or harmful.

 

BTW, sorry to ruin a pretty funny rant by bringing the room, or a small segment thereof into a serious discussion of overbearing legislation Mr. Nelson. I really enjoy your work, keep it up and we'll keep tuning in (or whatever the term is on this newfangled internet)

 

"Slowly stripping away free choice and will, something that I think we can all agree is more important than anything else."

Like I said, I don't know that banning foods is the answer but I don't think the children that are going up obese who will have coronaries before they're 23 have free choice and will.  They're the McDonald's generation and again, we're going to be paying for their health care in the future against my free choice and free will.

Governments already take away some of public food's free choice.  That why there are health inspectors and such.  There's lots of rules about how food must be served and what can and can't be in it.  This law isn't saying you can't have all the transfats you want in your own home, which I think would be a huge violation.  It's just saying the kids who live on takeout might get something else.  What that something else is probably going to be just as bad but imho, if the law makes people think about what they eat before they shove it in their mouths, it's a good thing.

Unfortunately, it'll probably end up preaching to the choir and the ones who are already intelligent enough to eat right are the only ones who will listen but it's a start anyway.  A lousy start but at least people are finally trying to fix the problem in the lousy way that most politicians attempt to fix problems.

And I'm sure Mike knows he's funny and his rant was funny as well    I seriously doubt he even reads these insane comments anyway although most of them would make his ego swell 100 times it's size.  Heck, if I were him I'd read them and sit back and think, "I totally rock!"

 

I agree with you on most of it, but as far as the kids with coronaries go, a simpler solution would be to try these parents for endangerment when their kids are morbidly obese with diabetes and heart stints at 13 years old. It would be a good start and set an example that we as a society will not tolerate this subtle from of malnourishment any more than we would someone starving thier child.

I think a more rational approach would me to more closely monitor and control the advertising and promotion of junk/snack/fast foods on a federal level (now you KNOW I'm a Democrat, I want MORE Government, hahah). The fact of the matter is that Mcdonald's, Nabisco, Mars, et al portray their products as healthy, fun, great tasting, exciting, etc. And I agree, a Big Mac is delicious to me, Oreos are awesome. Are they a good nutritional chouice? No, hell no. They're "reward food", something to have once in a while when you want to treat yourself nice. The problem arises when people see it as something to eat all day every day. And the companies who make these products make them appear to be "everyday" foods.

Also, education is key to this fight as well. Public school health classes are a good start, but they tend to start late in a child's development. Mine started in middle school, with occasional lip service toe the "food pyramid" and such before then. Teaching children how to make thier own nutritional choices at an early age I think is key to the fight against bad eating habits. When a child learns next to nothing about nutrition ecept that mommy or daddy cook and when I'm good I get Mcdonalds, they start to associate Mcdonalds (or other junk foods) with good times and happiness. Then as they grow older, they subconsciously still make these associations to the point where they crave these foods as validation.

Now, obviously I was overstating things slightly to make a point when I used the example of food rights compared to intellectual freedom. But it concerns me that laws like these are passed in the first place. Just as it concerns me that all sorts of laws are passed every year banning smoking everywhere but in your home, with the blinds drawn and the lights out. It is a dishonest tactic and it doesn't deal with the root problems. If you don't want someone to use a product, prove it is unsafe in any regard (smoking is unsafe, even a smoker like myself would agree), and work to ban its sale and manufacture. But don't allow it to be bought and sold freely, tax the hell out of it to fill your budget gaps and then proceed to decide for the people where is and is not a good place to use the product. Leave that up to the businesss owners to listen to thier customer's concerns and decide what is best for thier business. Even before I picked up smoking, I understood that smoking was a social activity that was acceptable in some places and not in others. I don't really see the point in saying that you can go to a bar, drink until you vomit, kill your liver and brain with fermented wheat, but you cannot smoke a cigarette while there.

Anyways, I feel that I should point out that I wasn't jumping on you by responding. I just found your argument interesting and I thought I would add to the conversation. No flamey flame war starter am I, I just enjoy good debate

And yes, Mike does sit back and thinks "Damn, I rock" every day. Or at least I would, were I he!

 

I pretty much agree with you too.  There are lots of other ways and I do think education is the key.  I work by trying to educate parents but it's frustrating when they don't listen.

I don't mind banning smoking in family restaurants so much (even though families do have a choice as rather to eat there or not) but we banned smoking in all public places here...including bars and clubs if they also serve food.  Which, personally, I think is retarded.  If you're going to a bar or club you're old enough to make the choice on your own (I would hope) as to rather you want to be exposed to smoke.  So yeah, I do agree that it can be taken too far but, again, at least it's a start.

I knew you weren't flaming me and you're right, Mike Nelson's blog isn't really the place for political debate.  I think I had been freebasing Crisco when I posted originally.  Generally I would just have a good laugh and not post a comment at all.  I did have a Krispy Kreme earlier yesterday.

 

We just started today on a law here where you cannot smoke ANYWHERE indoors or covered at all, except at home. No bars, no workplaces, no Cigar shops even!

Don't get me started on t he donuts, I had one this morning (It's the boss's Bday so donuts are plentiful) and I'm still bouncing of the wall from deep fried sugary dough!

 

by "half of the top 300 sold" I mean half of the top 300 drugs, I need to proof read.
 

No Crisco? Think of the hard hit this is going to be to the NY adult entertainment industry.
 

OMG, amazing!!!
 

I suggest a ban on rainy days and Mondays.  They always get me down. 

How about music in the subways?  Nothing but Foghat 24x7 would make the whole scene a bit Doogier.

As Patrick Henry once said, "Give me liberty or give me death.  Wait a minute!  Liberty involves risk?  Occasional disappointments?  Exposure to ideas that I don't like? Well, screw it all, lets do tyranny."

 

I agree with ya! Its one thing to get people for victimless crimes like possessing "reefers" in the privacy of their own home Then it started to spread. They got everyone with cigarettes. I hate cig smoke, but feel sorry for all those poor bastiches standing out in 10 inches of snow in Milwaukee, having to light up. Now they're banning crisco oil. Also, a couple of months ago on the local news, I heard they're pushing for a special tax on SODA, because its bad for you.

I'm tellin' ya... I'm one more law away from going on a bean bagging spree from the clocktower.

 

"I'm tellin' ya... I'm one more law away from going on a bean bagging spree from the clocktower."

Hahhaha! Great line!

 

You know, W. C. Fields was a master of cigar box juggling.

 

Yes, but will there Crisco Temperance groups be forming? Will the Crisco bootleggers be stopped at the border? Will there someday be smug, ridiculous ads, like those irritating ones for Dewar’s, declaring an anniversary of the day Crisco Prohibition came to an end? And what of those segments of society that use Crisco for…um…well, not for cooking, anyway? What of them?

I've got to say, as a New Yorker, I find Bloomberg's health-conscious crusades a tad annoying.

 

"Yes, but will there Crisco Temperance groups be forming?" Damned lack of edit feature! I speak not in Olde English, this I swear. Nor pirate speak, this I vow.

I meant, "Yes, but will Crisco Temperance groups be forming?"

Verily, 'nuff said. 
 

See, this is why St. Louis was named the most dangerous city in the nation. We need someone to come in and take charge and give us laws like this!
 

Speaking of restrictive pants, I suppose New York City will hence forth be a tighty-whitey free zone!

Terri

 

I heard in addtion to the wave of banned items - services - attitudes - and thoughts - he was also going to inforce a mandatory 2 inch armpit hair length for all women.
Calling it the "Pit-stache Initative", it will aid in the overall reduction of attactivness of all women - which apparently aids the environment in some way.

 

    While he is at it, could Bloomberg outlaw those really creepy (and quite deadly) credit card commercials? Those mini-horror flicks, in which thousands of scissors are covering the ground, and leaping at unsuspecting passersby, blades upward, simply in hope of multilating their plastic debt!!  I'm now afraid to sleep with my wallet anymore, afraid I'll lose a toe should I step onto the floor without looking for those hellish scissors first!!

 

you forgot about the dangers of people who think they know things about stuff