Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should junk food be taxed?
Replies
-
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
This is rather ignorant about nutrition. Macro percentages is about the least important aspect of nutrition.If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
Doctors don't know that much about nutrition, usually, and you can find a doctor to approve any diet. This is silly.It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Seems unlikely.Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.
Setting aside the freedom issue (not that its unimportant), you haven't addressed my privacy concern.0 -
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.
I want a detailed example of this. As a 5'5", 125 lb, 27yo woman who prefers balanced nutrition but doesn't adhere to a specific diet, what would the rules be for me? How many lbs of meat would I get to purchase per week, and how much of it would be red? How many vegetables? How much starch? What about olive oil - am I limited to a bottle every 2 months? What's my "junk" allowance? Oh, and I work out for an hour 5-6 times a week.
Also, please explain how people like me who buy in bulk or during big sales and freeze/store things would be able to shop without blowing out the limits on my card.3 -
If you're eating healthy, then nothing changes and you're getting upset over nothing.Carlos_421 wrote: »
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
You've gotta be kidding me...
Lady, if one of us needs help from the other I can assure you I'm not the needy one. And I sure don't need help from a government bureaucracy.
I eat deliberately and toward my goals. I get a solid balance of macronutrients and also ensure proper intake of micronutrients as well.
All my health markers are fantastic. My blood work is great. My blood pressure is excellent. I'm the picture of health.
I've run a 5k in under 23 minutes. I've deadlifted 2.5 times my bodyweight. I'm also currently cutting weight shooting for single digit body fat.
Educate me. Please tell me where I need help from the government.
Resistance to government encroachment on my life is not proof for its necessity!
And why do you keep saying the tax is a done deal? I'm pretty sure it would have made the news by now and I sure haven't seen anything about it (I even looked).
Done deal = going to happen. Sorry if that was confusing, I didn't mean that it had already happened. It will, though. Cannot stop that.
Don't we already tax pop? I don't hear anyone complain about that.
0 -
How does alcohol fit into this?0
-
So who's going to pay to train all the doctors in nutrition since most don't have much training in it? Will the government take into consideration those of us with food restrictions for medical reasons (I'm low fiber, not much fruits and vegetables, no whole grains, nuts, seeds, legumes). How would your communist system work for us?2
-
mskessler89 wrote: »
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.
I want a detailed example of this. As a 5'5", 125 lb, 27yo woman who prefers balanced nutrition but doesn't adhere to a specific diet, what would the rules be for me? How many lbs of meat would I get to purchase per week, and how much of it would be red? How many vegetables? How much starch? What about olive oil - am I limited to a bottle every 2 months? What's my "junk" allowance? Oh, and I work out for an hour 5-6 times a week.
Also, please explain how people like me who buy in bulk or during big sales and freeze/store things would be able to shop without blowing out the limits on my card.
Hey, back of the line lady. I asked for my customized list of preapproved healthy foods first!1 -
That's a good question. I didn't think of that. They should probably figure that out, too.lemurcat12 wrote: »How does alcohol fit into this?
0 -
That's a good question. I didn't think of that. They should probably figure that out, too.lemurcat12 wrote: »How does alcohol fit into this?
This is your idea. You figure it out.4 -
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
yup. Full potato.
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »How does alcohol fit into this?
Alchol and tobacco priducts already have a punitive tax over and above regular sales taxes.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »mskessler89 wrote: »
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.
I want a detailed example of this. As a 5'5", 125 lb, 27yo woman who prefers balanced nutrition but doesn't adhere to a specific diet, what would the rules be for me? How many lbs of meat would I get to purchase per week, and how much of it would be red? How many vegetables? How much starch? What about olive oil - am I limited to a bottle every 2 months? What's my "junk" allowance? Oh, and I work out for an hour 5-6 times a week.
Also, please explain how people like me who buy in bulk or during big sales and freeze/store things would be able to shop without blowing out the limits on my card.
Hey, back of the line lady. I asked for my customized list of preapproved healthy foods first!
Hahaha sorry! ...Pretty sure based on other posts I've seen by you our plans are going to be identical, right down to our wine and gelato limits
2 -
Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »How does alcohol fit into this?
Alchol and tobacco priducts already have a punitive tax over and above regular sales taxes.
I know. (Restaurants do too, where I live, and prepared foods in stores, and so on, and yet she's after McD's et al.).
My question was how does it fit into the card scheme?0 -
You all realize this almost certainly nothing but flamebait, right?
And if by some remote chance it isn't, that this person is not going to come around to any kind of realistic thought process, yes? They're locked too tightly in their ivory tower.1 -
mskessler89 wrote: »
That's a good question. I didn't think of that. They should probably figure that out, too.lemurcat12 wrote: »How does alcohol fit into this?
This is your idea. You figure it out.
As much as I'd like to take credit for it this wasn't my idea. I heard someone talking about it.
They do already tax alcohol, so that is done. Alcoholics are already dying younger so they're not as big a burden on healthcare. There is no healthy amount if vodka but if you took it away people would go crazy.
I don't know. Someone else would have to figure out the alcohol thing. Come up with a good solution and I will agree.0 -
If you're eating healthy, then nothing changes and you're getting upset over nothing.Carlos_421 wrote: »
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
You've gotta be kidding me...
Lady, if one of us needs help from the other I can assure you I'm not the needy one. And I sure don't need help from a government bureaucracy.
I eat deliberately and toward my goals. I get a solid balance of macronutrients and also ensure proper intake of micronutrients as well.
All my health markers are fantastic. My blood work is great. My blood pressure is excellent. I'm the picture of health.
I've run a 5k in under 23 minutes. I've deadlifted 2.5 times my bodyweight. I'm also currently cutting weight shooting for single digit body fat.
Educate me. Please tell me where I need help from the government.
Resistance to government encroachment on my life is not proof for its necessity!
And why do you keep saying the tax is a done deal? I'm pretty sure it would have made the news by now and I sure haven't seen anything about it (I even looked).
Done deal = going to happen. Sorry if that was confusing, I didn't mean that it had already happened. It will, though. Cannot stop that.
Don't we already tax pop? I don't hear anyone complain about that.
In the US there are only two cities that currently have an additional tax on soda - Berkeley, CA & Philadelphia, PA. Berkeley taxes only sugar-sweetened soda (and other sugar-sweetened drinks), while Philadelphia taxes both regular and diet soda. Also, if I lived in Philadelphia, you would absolutely hear me complain about that tax. Happily, I do not live there and can drink my moderate amount of Diet Dr. Pepper without having to pay more for it just because it's soda.
*edited for clarity0 -
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
Even they have plenty to worry about. Its like taking sand paper to a block of wood. Little by little stripping it away. You don't notice at first but eventually a lot is gone. Just like our freedom. You start with something like this and next thing you know we won't have anything.
And just because you seem confused on it. We're not arguing for the freedom to be unhealthy, but to live our life the way we choose to.5 -
not to mention that McD's and most if not all of the fast food places around today also offer healthier options like salads and fruit sides instead of fries and the like.
I'd also like one of those customized food lists as well - using my Dr as an example (since he still listens to and toes the government line) - red meat is the Debil and nobody should ever eat red meat again - personally, I eat red meat at least 5 times a week (sometimes more)... so under your plan, how is that letting me eat whatever I want if the government and my Dr say it's bad?!?!?0 -
Maybe have smaller bottles of alcohol? Same price but little bottles?0
-
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.
I've only read a few of these posts so far, but you are definitely troll of the year right here. I get it. The facetiousness in the wordplay is ingeniously veiled, but it is there. I would have totally believed it if only it wasn't so unbelievable. Well played, well played.1 -
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
And when shutting down McDonald's spikes the unemployed rate through the roof, then what?
And please stop saying we would be allowed to eat whatever we want when you're just going to keep saying "except this because it's unhealthy and no one needs it."
You clearly have no understanding of nutrition, economics or the legislative process.
The possibility that your insane program could end up being run by someone like you is one of the more frightening parts of this ridiculous proposal.4 -
Maybe have smaller bottles of alcohol? Same price but little bottles?
So make the wine industry entirely change their production model? Nope. Also, alcohol is a good example of something I might buy in large quantities for a party - I guess parties are out the window because 1) a host can't buy all the supplies needed on their card and 2) it's not guaranteed people would only consume their "share" at a party. No more parties, guys.
You haven't answered my question about how people who buy things in bulk to save money would be able to use their card, either.2 -
-
-
I didn't say that anyone was outlawing McDonald's. I would but it's not up to me. Maybe just have McDonald's but not sell unhealthy things.Carlos_421 wrote: »
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
And when shutting down McDonald's spikes the unemployed rate through the roof, then what?
And please stop saying we would be allowed to eat whatever we want when you're just going to keep saying "except this because it's unhealthy and no one needs it."
You clearly have no understanding of nutrition, economics or the legislative process.
The possibility that your insane program could end up being run by someone like you is one of the more frightening parts of this ridiculous proposal.
It's not an insane idea. It's sane and reasonable and entirely easy to do. Here's a card, eat whatever you want. It would make things so easy for everyone make us healthier and save us money as a country.
It seems to me that nothing would change for anyone here so I'm not really understanding what people are debating against. You already do this, so no change for you.
0 -
I'm not trolling. I just don't know WHAT the answer is for alcohol.sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
The card system is an excellent idea and would make things easier for everyone.
0 -
I didn't say that anyone was outlawing McDonald's. I would but it's not up to me. Maybe just have McDonald's but not sell unhealthy things.Carlos_421 wrote: »
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
And when shutting down McDonald's spikes the unemployed rate through the roof, then what?
And please stop saying we would be allowed to eat whatever we want when you're just going to keep saying "except this because it's unhealthy and no one needs it."
You clearly have no understanding of nutrition, economics or the legislative process.
The possibility that your insane program could end up being run by someone like you is one of the more frightening parts of this ridiculous proposal.
It's not an insane idea. It's sane and reasonable and entirely easy to do. Here's a card, eat whatever you want. It would make things so easy for everyone make us healthier and save us money as a country.
It seems to me that nothing would change for anyone here so I'm not really understanding what people are debating against. You already do this, so no change for you.
What unhealthy things does McDonalds sell? What makes them unhealthy? Are they unhealthy in any quantity at any frequency?0 -
I do not know. I just do not know the answer for alcohol.mskessler89 wrote: »Maybe have smaller bottles of alcohol? Same price but little bottles?
So make the wine industry entirely change their production model? Nope. Also, alcohol is a good example of something I might buy in large quantities for a party - I guess parties are out the window because 1) a host can't buy all the supplies needed on their card and 2) it's not guaranteed people would only consume their "share" at a party. No more parties, guys.
You haven't answered my question about how people who buy things in bulk to save money would be able to use their card, either.
Buy in bulk. Who said anything about stopping you? You're making it more complicated than it needs to be.0 -
I do not know. I just do not know the answer for alcohol.mskessler89 wrote: »Maybe have smaller bottles of alcohol? Same price but little bottles?
So make the wine industry entirely change their production model? Nope. Also, alcohol is a good example of something I might buy in large quantities for a party - I guess parties are out the window because 1) a host can't buy all the supplies needed on their card and 2) it's not guaranteed people would only consume their "share" at a party. No more parties, guys.
You haven't answered my question about how people who buy things in bulk to save money would be able to use their card, either.
Buy in bulk. Who said anything about stopping you? You're making it more complicated than it needs to be.
But if people have pre set limits on their cards as you previously suggested, then surely buying in bulk would exceed those limits...
You seem to think this is so simple but fail to grasp the limitless nuanced complexities of such a proposal...2 -
I didn't say that anyone was outlawing McDonald's. I would but it's not up to me. Maybe just have McDonald's but not sell unhealthy things.Carlos_421 wrote: »
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
And when shutting down McDonald's spikes the unemployed rate through the roof, then what?
And please stop saying we would be allowed to eat whatever we want when you're just going to keep saying "except this because it's unhealthy and no one needs it."
You clearly have no understanding of nutrition, economics or the legislative process.
The possibility that your insane program could end up being run by someone like you is one of the more frightening parts of this ridiculous proposal.
It's not an insane idea. It's sane and reasonable and entirely easy to do. Here's a card, eat whatever you want. It would make things so easy for everyone make us healthier and save us money as a country.
It seems to me that nothing would change for anyone here so I'm not really understanding what people are debating against. You already do this, so no change for you.
You can't eat what ever you want if the card stops you from buying whatever you want.1 -
I'm not trolling. I just don't know WHAT the answer is for alcohol.sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
The card system is an excellent idea and would make things easier for everyone.
Well, there is another option to trolling.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions