MORE mandates

[mfish]

Recent TV ads have extolled the "virtues" of soda companies "removing full flavored soft drinks from the schools."
Cities like NYC are planning to ban salt.
Many companies - like PepsiCo - are planning to use more whole grains and reduce the sugar and salt content in their products (they also own Frito-Lay).
Cereal companies are reducing the sugar content in their boxes of cereal ...

And on it goes...

All of this under pressure from the current administration to create a "healthier lifestyle" for our children (when it's "for the children" they rarely get much of an argument ... who wants to be perceived as a child hater, after all ...??)

First of all, parents who do not want to expose their children to artificial sweeteners (or cancer-causing POSIONS in my opinion) need to start taking some parental responsibility and monitor your child's diet, but please - don't get all goofy about it. Kids require a large number of calories every day - if they're active and normal ... if your kid sits in front the TV all day long, that's another issue I'm sure the government will address soon enough ...

Pack a REAL Coke in their lunch bag every day, just to voice some civil disobedience - my kids always got plenty of exercise and have never had weight problems, because HEY! I figured out how to avoid that!!! And if I want my kiddos to drink a 'real" soda that's MY business - if my kids don't want to drink sugared sodas, I suspect they wouldn't.

Secondly, restaurants in NYC need to have some civil disobedience of their own by IGNORING those silly salt laws.

Secondly, since WHEN has it gotten away from us using our own common sense and accepting some personal responsibility when it comes to eating healthier, using less salt and less sugar???

Once again - the GOVERNMENT steps in to control our lives ...

Ain't it great?

[mfish]

And when facts don't work, use scare tactics:

http://bigjournalism.com/lmeyers/2010/03/23/media-boogeyman-if-activists-scare-you-away-from-fish-oil-they-save-the-fishes/

[kimmyp]

Scare tactics, something conservatives have used often in the past 10 years.

[mfish]

kimmyp, care to share your personal experiences regarding "conservative scare tactics" ... or is that just a phrase out of the handbook?
I think there have been times when information is distorted (on both sides of the political fence) but we must always remember:

Never confuse "scare tactics" with the truth.

[kimmyp]

I did not mean to imply that only the conservatives use scare tactics, we should all be aware that scare tactics do not always state the truth even if they are repeatetedly stated.

[mfish]

Wow ... I started this thread with examples of how the government is intruding on our lifestyle choices with more and more mandates on what we eat or consume ... how did we get so far off the topic...?

If you want to discuss the pros and cons of foodstamps, go find or start a thread on that topic. If you want to discuss TANF or other entitlement programs, go find or start a thread on that, and if you want to discuss drug policy and how it doesn't work - either with our entitlement programs or just in general, go find or start a thread on that topic.

I'll be happy to close this thread if you can't stay on the topic of government mandates relating to what we eat and consume as private citizens ... let me know.

[mfish]

ANOTHER proposed government mandate is that thing they like to call "The Fairness Doctrine," which is anything but fair.

"They" (that would be the Progressive-minded Leftists currently in charge) are jealous of the success of certain conservative talk show hosts and feel they need to "level the playing field" (GAWD I"m really starting to hate that phrase) so a more "balanced" view can be presented (obviously they forgot about that fiasco called Air America, which went off the air after a few bleak years, because it couldn't garner more than a handful listeners at any given time ....). They forget all about the free market system - you know, the one that allows people to CHOOSE what they want to listen to, or eat, or drive, or watch ... and think once again, "they" know what's best for everyone else, and by golly they'll force it down our throats if we don't (or won't) tune in voluntarily ... And more importantly, they forget that commerical radio - just like commercial TV and commercial newsprint - is driven by sponsorship dollars - advertisers who want to reach a certain demographic so they choose a certain radio program on which to spend their advertising dollars - as of yet, this is still a free enterprise exchange of money - but of course, the government has yet to get the "fairness doctrine" passed (key word: YET).

This type of "governance" smacks of facism, by the way.

Here's an article (complete with a clip if you so choose to watch) on Ed Shultz, a mediocre wannabe radio talk show host who somehow convinced MSNBC that he could attract viewers to a TV show (testiment to MSNBC's desperate attempts to maintain a semblance of viablility) and what he had to say about the "fairness doctrine" recently:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2010/03/25/ed-schultz-calls-socialism-airwaves-return-censorship-doctrine

[Daisy]

Wow ... I started this thread with examples of how the government is intruding on our lifestyle choices with more and more mandates on what we eat or consume ... how did we get so far off the topic...?

Neil started it........I just had to tattle. :nasty: And then we all just jumped on his wagon. I will do my best to stay on topic here and will open a new thread and move those posts about welfare to that thread.

Wow, that damn near wiped out the whole MORE mandates thread - I didn't realize there were so many off topic posts in here.

Thanks for pointing it out, mfish.

[oladcock]

"This type of "governance" smacks of facism, by the way."

It doesn't smack at it, it IS...Might be Marxist...You'd have to ask pdc...Both stink so the definition doesn't matter to me....O.L.

[Scott]

Fish,

Have you ever seen that episode of the simpsons when they outlawed trans fats, etc.?

CLASSIC!!

Pretty soon they'll tell you you can't smoke if you want their free health care.

Wait, maybe not while Obama is in office.....:smk1:

[Neil]

Neil started it........I just had to tattle. :nasty: And then we all just jumped on his wagon.

Typical. Blame the immigrant:msn-cry:

[oladcock]

"Typical. Blame the immigrant" **laugh**

Neil, like we told you months ago at the range, it's sad we have to import people that love this country. We need an exchange program. I have a list I'd like to see deported! :)...O.L.

[Daisy]

Typical. Blame the immigrant :msn-cry:

Oh, quit yer cryin'.........:p

I only blamed you cuz it was your fault..........:hypocrite:

We better get back on topic now, or mfish will :bottom: us again.

[oladcock]

A mandate not mentioned yet, minimum wage. This is a bad one for society. Teenagers and young adults are not prepared to go into the work force in or out of high school and "starter jobs" is how they learn to be good employees. Minimum wages set too high means employers have to pay more than their services and skills are worth. We/they'd be better off if minimum wages were cut in half or eliminated all together. What's going to happen when employers are forced to provide health care or pay the fine? Even less opportunities for employment....O.L.

[mfish]

That's a good one, O.L. - People argue that minimum wage laws protect the workers, when in fact, they limit the workers more often than not. I know very few employers who pay "minimum wage" - most start their employees at a higher rate and an employee can earn his way up the scale through job performance.

The employers who pay minimum wage ("fast feeders" for the most part) get what they pay for - and don't expect much more. If they find a diamond in the rough, that person gets a raise, or moves on to a better job.

Minimum wage laws have hurt the workforce, instead of helped it.

[oladcock]

"If they find a diamond in the rough, that person gets a raise, or moves on to a better job."

Exactly...Hire 2 at $4/hr vice 1 at $8...Gives you more cards to draw from to let the cream rise to the top. At $7-$8 bucks an hour, what is the true cost per hour to the employer? What will it be if they have to provide health care to even part time employees or pay fines? One thing that will happen, is they'll make darned sure they hire the best bang for the buck. No experience? Not a high school grad?...Take a hike. Can't affort to provide training on my dime for a 22 year old that probably has piss poor work ethic to start with. There is no other explaination for the progressive line of thinking, the poorer they are, the more dependant they'll be on their government. But lets tell them we are on their side and trying to help while we tighten the chains in the dark. Another thing that'll happen the more mandates they impose, the more folks that'll get hired "off the books". Good on them and go for it...Cut off the $$$ the beast feeds on...........O.L.