Sugar is the new "Devil"
Replies
-
No such thing as a healthy smoker.
No such thing as a healthy inactive obese person either.
Correct0 -
I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.
You are mixing things
It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another
And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment
Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.
IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states
Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner
A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun
Unfortunately Thomas Jefferson didn't write a "How-to-interpret" guide that accompanies the constitution. You believe that the *federal* constitution should be interpreted narrowly and that those are the only powers the feds should have. Other people disagree and have a wider interpretation of the constitution.
And look where we are at now.
Yes the powers held by the federal gov. should be narrow and limited.
The states have their own gov. and are closer to their ppl...let them put the limitations in place.
Then people can "vote with their feet"0 -
I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.
You are mixing things
It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another
And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment
Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.
IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states
Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner
A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun
I'd rather mob rule than rich rule, which is, if you know your history (and I suspect you're intelligent enough to know it) is what we've always had.
And why do we have rich rule??
Oh, cause we have politicians that like to line their pocketbooks......
Name one country on this earth that exists or has existed where this has not been the case???
Even in communist countries, where it government control, you always had "rich ppl"
Correct. Which is why centralized planning must be limited or non-existent. Participatory Economics addresses a lot of the issues with power centralizing into the hands of a few decision makers.
https://player.vimeo.com/video/4041228
You might find it interesting.0 -
Uh Oh - What have I started - it was just supposed to be a light hearted view of the world from some 45 year-old house wife that lives in South Africa...............
haha
Great topic, thank you
Yeah it is a good topic, and I'm glad we've had respectable discussion so far.0 -
GNC is the devil0
-
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.0 -
We disagree on who should decide what government should be involved in. I say direct democracy for what affects us all. We all decide together. No more wealthy decision makers. Who, by the way, don't follow our Constitution anyway.
To some extent I agree with you.
Strip power from Fed. Government and return to states and local governments0 -
GNC is the devil
Totes Agree0 -
No such thing as a healthy smoker.
No such thing as a healthy inactive obese person either.
Correct
So perhaps I was not eloquent enough in my article, the comparison was supposed to be between an active 45-year-old who smokes vs and inactive, obese, 45-year-old who doesn't smoke - IN SOUTH AFRICA.
Neither are healthy but for different reasons.0 -
GNC is the devil
Totes Agree
Now on THIS I agree with you!!!0 -
We disagree on who should decide what government should be involved in. I say direct democracy for what affects us all. We all decide together. No more wealthy decision makers. Who, by the way, don't follow our Constitution anyway.
To some extent I agree with you.
Strip power from Fed. Government and return to states and local governments
The reason Madison wanted a strong federal government was to stop exactly the trend you seem most wary of. If you haven't already, you should study not just Shays Rebellion but the actions of colonists (many of them Revolutionary War veterans angry at getting screwed out of their pay) prior to Shays Rebellion. Then read Madison and the other Constitutional Convention participants' writings in that context.
The Founders had to run a propaganda campaign prior to the Revolutionary War in order to get people to fight the British. So they spoke of liberty and justice for all. But the last thing they wanted was democracy. They wanted the decisions made by men like themselves: Wealthy, white, land holding. And that is what they got.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
We disagree on who should decide what government should be involved in. I say direct democracy for what affects us all. We all decide together. No more wealthy decision makers. Who, by the way, don't follow our Constitution anyway.
To some extent I agree with you.
Strip power from Fed. Government and return to states and local governments
The reason Madison wanted a strong federal government was to stop exactly the trend you seem most wary of. If you haven't already, you should study not just Shays Rebellion but the actions of colonists (many of them Revolutionary War veterans angry at getting screwed out of their pay) prior to Shays Rebellion. Then read Madison and the other Constitutional Convention participants' writings in that context.
The Founders had to run a propaganda campaign prior to the Revolutionary War in order to get people to fight the British. So they spoke of liberty and justice for all. But the last thing they wanted was democracy. They wanted the decisions made by men like themselves: Wealthy, white, land holding. And that is what they got.
Then what pray tell do you propose??
I mean go with any form of gov. and you are gonna have some group of people getting screwed....
Just how it is.0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?0 -
I fully agree. It may have started as sugar but this debate is a great topic where hopefully people don't f it up and get it locked by turning it into personal insults. Not enough people know politics and American history and it's sad.Uh Oh - What have I started - it was just supposed to be a light hearted view of the world from some 45 year-old house wife that lives in South Africa...............
haha
Great topic, thank you
+10 -
We disagree on who should decide what government should be involved in. I say direct democracy for what affects us all. We all decide together. No more wealthy decision makers. Who, by the way, don't follow our Constitution anyway.
To some extent I agree with you.
Strip power from Fed. Government and return to states and local governments
The reason Madison wanted a strong federal government was to stop exactly the trend you seem most wary of. If you haven't already, you should study not just Shays Rebellion but the actions of colonists (many of them Revolutionary War veterans angry at getting screwed out of their pay) prior to Shays Rebellion. Then read Madison and the other Constitutional Convention participants' writings in that context.
The Founders had to run a propaganda campaign prior to the Revolutionary War in order to get people to fight the British. So they spoke of liberty and justice for all. But the last thing they wanted was democracy. They wanted the decisions made by men like themselves: Wealthy, white, land holding. And that is what they got.
Then what pray tell do you propose??
I mean go with any form of gov. and you are gonna have some group of people getting screwed....
Just how it is.
Participatory Economics combined with direct democracy for the decisions that will affect us all.0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
Ever read Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED?0 -
I don't agree with the tax.
But one day I would like to see soda or sweet sugary drinks be more price wise than water. But that's more me wanting to see the price of bottled water go down because it's redic. I hardly ever drink it - but live in a town that has some horrible water so if I'm somewhere that dosn't have a filter I'll go buy a bottle. I find my self wanting water sometimes but getting soda because in the end it's cheaper.0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
Ever read Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED?
I've read Ayn Rand. If you're a Randian we'll simply never see eye to eye on anything because it's basically social darwinism. Social darwinists believe that the rich rule because they are the best. Not the most ruthless and nasty, but the smartest and most fit. After studying history a couple of decades, I think they're just the most ruthless and nasty.0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
But if they got a job and were making money they could advance in their position, get a raise and lift themselves out of their situation. The fact is that it's easier to sit back with a hand out. I have known people to take a job -- ANY job -- so that they could get themselves out of the situation that they are in. Why should I have to pay for someone who is perfectly capable of getting a job, and yes, even a low paying factory job if they had to, but choose to sit back and get a hand out instead? How is that right and why should it be allowed?
It's rather funny how when our welfare system is explained to someone who comes from a country where there are no government hand outs they shake their head in wonder and ask "How is that right?"0 -
This content has been removed.
-
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
Ever read Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED?
I've read Ayn Rand. If you're a Randian we'll simply never see eye to eye on anything because it's basically social darwinism. Social darwinists believe that the rich rule because they are the best. Not the most ruthless and nasty, but the smartest and most fit. After studying history a couple of decades, I think they're just the most ruthless and nasty.
Would not call myself an Objectivist (Randian)
But I do look at where she came from and what she saw, and what she wrote about.
And I like most of it0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
But if they got a job and were making money they could advance in their position, get a raise and lift themselves out of their situation. The fact is that it's easier to sit back with a hand out. I have known people to take a job -- ANY job -- so that they could get themselves out of the situation that they are in. Why should I have to pay for someone who is perfectly capable of getting a job, and yes, even a low paying factory job if they had to, but choose to sit back and get a hand out instead? How is that right and why should it be allowed?
It's rather funny how when our welfare system is explained to someone who comes from a country where there are no government hand outs they shake their head in wonder and ask "How is that right?"
It depends on the numbers. How many people who receive umemployment are actually not looking for or turning down jobs? How many people on SNAP or WIC could actually work harder instead of receiving government assistance? I suspect that there are a lot more working poor people then you think there are. Are there people who abuse the system? Absolutely - but those are the kinds of people would abuse the system at any level of income. There are some people who like to cheat - whether it's on wall street or regarding social security disability. That's not a flaw in the program, that's a flaw with a few people.0 -
I don't agree with the tax.
But one day I would like to see soda or sweet sugary drinks be more price wise than water. But that's more me wanting to see the price of bottled water go down because it's redic. I hardly ever drink it - but live in a town that has some horrible water so if I'm somewhere that dosn't have a filter I'll go buy a bottle. I find my self wanting water sometimes but getting soda because in the end it's cheaper.
That is just crazy!!!! I'm so lucky here in South Africa because the water on tap is pretty good by most standards. I rarely have to buy bottled water.
Now that's really one for the books - WHY IS WATER MORE EXPENSIVE THAN SODA? Does not make sense.0 -
It has, i know that price is the reason for alot of my friends quitting. that being said a pack of cigs in canada is pushing 10 bucks or more.. adds up pretty fast
Not sure how to study it (obviously even smoking couldn't be perfectly inelastic, but I mean the extent of the effect), but anecdotally I've heard the same kind of thing, including from family members. They wanted to quit eventually anyway, but price was part of why they finally decided it wasn't worth it anymore.0 -
I don't agree with the tax.
But one day I would like to see soda or sweet sugary drinks be more price wise than water. But that's more me wanting to see the price of bottled water go down because it's redic. I hardly ever drink it - but live in a town that has some horrible water so if I'm somewhere that dosn't have a filter I'll go buy a bottle. I find my self wanting water sometimes but getting soda because in the end it's cheaper.
That is just crazy!!!! I'm so lucky here in South Africa because the water on tap is pretty good by most standards. I rarely have to buy bottled water.
Now that's really one for the books - WHY IS WATER MORE EXPENSIVE THAN SODA? Does not make sense.
It shouldn't be, because water bottling companies take the water out of the ground and then put it in plastic bottles. No reason it should be more expensive then something that requires ingredients AND water as a base. :laugh:0 -
If they're going to have a sin tax on processed sugar stuff, that tax should be used to subsidize the cost of fruits, vegetables, and other healthy options that are currently expensive. This in turn would benefit the farmers.
Ideally, what they should do is just stop all subsidies rather than the feds subsidizing on one end and the states taxing on the other. But it's not the same entities doing the taxes and the subsidies, and most states are pretty starved for cash (mine certainly is a basket case), so there you are.
Also, lots of states don't tax food or tax it at a much lower rate, so imposing the full tax or extra on stuff like soda is kind of the counterpoint of that.0 -
People want to work and have nice things
Are you sure about that?
Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.
I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.
The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?
Ever read Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED?
I've read Ayn Rand. If you're a Randian we'll simply never see eye to eye on anything because it's basically social darwinism. Social darwinists believe that the rich rule because they are the best. Not the most ruthless and nasty, but the smartest and most fit. After studying history a couple of decades, I think they're just the most ruthless and nasty.
Would not call myself an Objectivist (Randian)
But I do look at where she came from and what she saw, and what she wrote about.
And I like most of it
I'm opposed to making humanity more vicious rather than more civilized by rewarding people with power for wealth accumulation. I see no reason why a Bush should have more decision making power in policies that affect my life than I do just because many great-great-grandaddy Bush's ago the family made a killing in the slave trade. I'd rather take my chances on direct democracy for anything that absolutely has to be decided on to maintain society together.
Thank you for the civil and intelligent discussion, though, hope you have a nice day! :flowerforyou:0 -
I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.
You are mixing things
It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another
And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment
Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.
IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states
Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner
A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun
I'd rather mob rule than rich rule, which is, if you know your history (and I suspect you're intelligent enough to know it) is what we've always had.
Oh boy. Really? The only reason you can say that is because of how far we have come as a society. If we were a mob rule government, minorities would never have a fair shot. Women's suffrage would have never happened. And people would still find a way to gain the system for their benefit.0 -
Uh Oh - What have I started - it was just supposed to be a light hearted view of the world from some 45 year-old house wife that lives in South Africa...............
Sugar + taxes, it was irresistible. Don't worry, just enjoy it!
(I liked your initial post.)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions