Should sugar be controlled like tobacco and alcohol

13567

Replies

  • whiteheaddg
    whiteheaddg Posts: 325 Member
    Great! Now I suppose I should start growing sugar beets in my closet with a UV light.
  • The problem is over population, which is leading to an exponentially larger number of stupid people in the world who use zero common sense and don't take any accountability for what they do/consume. The obesity pandemic is just evolution at work. Somehow I managed to get un-obese with sugar being a readily available and uncontrolled substance.

    I put down the 32 oz big gulps and started getting my nutrition and fitness on...it was pretty easy and mostly a lot of common sense changes that did it for me.

    Survival of the fittest, the clean eaters will survive and the obese will fall away.

    tumblr_mas1t0ExD11qgd0muo1_500.gif
  • septembergrrl
    septembergrrl Posts: 168 Member
    No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger

    The thing is, you don't live on some tiny little island by yourself. If you eat too much sugar, and end up immobile, odds are you;'re gonna go on medicare or Medicaid. The rest of us pay for that. If you smoke opium, fall asleep driving, and crash into a schoolbus, the rest of us could lose our kids.
    '
    I agree the original article is absurd, and regulating sugar isn't the answer. But I think the libertarian "my body my business" argument needs to acknowledge that there is a point where your choices affect the rest of us.
    The people who are eating so much they're immobile have serious problems with food in general. I bet some of them get that way who don't like sweet things at all.

    Sorry, not quite getting your point. I agree not everyone with a weight-related health problem has an issue with sugar specifically. But saying "it's not the government's business to control my choices" ignores the fact the government -- meaning the rest of us -- ends up paying for it if your poor choices make you sick.

    Actually, it's an argument for taxing junk food more than anything else...
  • mojohowitz
    mojohowitz Posts: 900 Member
    Cue the Randy Weavers and Dale Gribbles...
  • mom2sons02
    mom2sons02 Posts: 111 Member
    No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger



    Spoken like a true libertarian. AND I agree!
  • Cue the Randy Weavers and Dale Gribbles...

    I believe they prefer to be called Rusty Shacklefords.
  • vim_n_vigor
    vim_n_vigor Posts: 4,089 Member
    So, since my banana has more sugar in it than most gummi bears do, would my banana be regulated and I could eat the gummi bears, or would they both require id?
  • dirty_dirty_eater
    dirty_dirty_eater Posts: 574 Member
    We don't ban ****-***** and that's where the real danger lies.
  • Minnie2361
    Minnie2361 Posts: 281 Member
    No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger

    The thing is, you don't live on some tiny little island by yourself. If you eat too much sugar, and end up immobile, odds are you;'re gonna go on medicare or Medicaid. The rest of us pay for that. If you smoke opium, fall asleep driving, and crash into a schoolbus, the rest of us could lose our kids.
    '
    I agree the original article is absurd, and regulating sugar isn't the answer. But I think the libertarian "my body my business" argument needs to acknowledge that there is a point where your choices affect the rest of us.

    So when the obese drain medicare or Medicaid with their multiple ailments and the rest of us pay for that with higher taxes, it is on our dime, shouldn't it make sense we are taxing the products that impact health care. Look at what they have done to tobacco, taxed it and taxed it and taxed it again.
  • No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger

    The thing is, you don't live on some tiny little island by yourself. If you eat too much sugar, and end up immobile, odds are you;'re gonna go on medicare or Medicaid. The rest of us pay for that. If you smoke opium, fall asleep driving, and crash into a schoolbus, the rest of us could lose our kids.
    '
    I agree the original article is absurd, and regulating sugar isn't the answer. But I think the libertarian "my body my business" argument needs to acknowledge that there is a point where your choices affect the rest of us.

    So when the obese drain medicare or Medicaid with their multiple ailments and the rest of us pay for that with higher taxes, it is on our dime, shouldn't it make sense we are taxing the products that impact health care. Look at what they have done to tobacco, taxed it and taxed it and taxed it again.

    So obese people must all be on government assistance and are only obese because of calories from sugar.

    Logic.
  • Thomasm198
    Thomasm198 Posts: 3,189 Member
    away.jpg
  • ArroganceInStep
    ArroganceInStep Posts: 6,239 Member
    No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger

    The thing is, you don't live on some tiny little island by yourself. If you eat too much sugar, and end up immobile, odds are you;'re gonna go on medicare or Medicaid. The rest of us pay for that. If you smoke opium, fall asleep driving, and crash into a schoolbus, the rest of us could lose our kids.
    '
    I agree the original article is absurd, and regulating sugar isn't the answer. But I think the libertarian "my body my business" argument needs to acknowledge that there is a point where your choices affect the rest of us.

    So when the obese drain medicare or Medicaid with their multiple ailments and the rest of us pay for that with higher taxes, it is on our dime, shouldn't it make sense we are taxing the products that impact health care. Look at what they have done to tobacco, taxed it and taxed it and taxed it again.

    Tobacco isn't taxed because it kills you.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    The problem is over population, which is leading to an exponentially larger number of stupid people in the world who use zero common sense and don't take any accountability for what they do/consume. The obesity pandemic is just evolution at work. Somehow I managed to get un-obese with sugar being a readily available and uncontrolled substance.

    I put down the 32 oz big gulps and started getting my nutrition and fitness on...it was pretty easy and mostly a lot of common sense changes that did it for me.

    Survival of the fittest, the clean eaters will survive and the obese will fall away.

    I don't eat "clean"...I just use common sense, eat a well rounded and balanced diet, and get my fitness on.
  • AllonsYtotheTardis
    AllonsYtotheTardis Posts: 16,947 Member
    No ™


    Trademarks remain property of Crankstr, Inc, and are used only to directly describe the products being provided. Their use in no way indicates any relationship between the poster, and Crankstr, Inc.
  • paygep
    paygep Posts: 401 Member
    :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

    SUGAR INTERVENTION!!!

    The whole family gathers round and tells you all the reasons your sugar-eating is ruining everyone's life! LOL
  • No, just no, and while we're at it, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling peoples choices. So long as your choices don't adversely, and directly affect another individual, the government should have NO say in what you do. If you want to freebase opium, I say go nuts.

    Rigger

    The thing is, you don't live on some tiny little island by yourself. If you eat too much sugar, and end up immobile, odds are you;'re gonna go on medicare or Medicaid. The rest of us pay for that. If you smoke opium, fall asleep driving, and crash into a schoolbus, the rest of us could lose our kids.
    '
    I agree the original article is absurd, and regulating sugar isn't the answer. But I think the libertarian "my body my business" argument needs to acknowledge that there is a point where your choices affect the rest of us.

    So when the obese drain medicare or Medicaid with their multiple ailments and the rest of us pay for that with higher taxes, it is on our dime, shouldn't it make sense we are taxing the products that impact health care. Look at what they have done to tobacco, taxed it and taxed it and taxed it again.

    Tobacco isn't taxed because it kills you.

    Sure it is! The governments wants us to be healthy, so they tax it people won't do it!

    Oh....wait, they tax it because people are addicted and they can make bank?
  • dirty_dirty_eater
    dirty_dirty_eater Posts: 574 Member
    Xzhibit-heard-you-like-derp-Pdn4FA.jpg
  • Minnie2361
    Minnie2361 Posts: 281 Member
    Tobacco taxes in Canada

    British Columbai which will receive $44.60 per carton in taxes with the new increase, to eventually tax cigarettes as heavily as leaders Northwest Territories and Manitoba, which both receive more than $56 per carton. Quebec and Ontario, the provinces that tax cigarettes the least, both raise less than $30 per carton in taxes. In Ontario, a pack can cost as little as $6.50.

    “I appreciate that it is hard for smokers to quit,” Seely said. “But there is now a year-old B.C. smoking cessation program that provides smokers with the 1-888-QUIT line, (through) which they can receive counselling and subsidized nicotine replacement therapies.
  • BeachIron
    BeachIron Posts: 6,490 Member
    I stopped reading at "Lustig."
  • Tobacco taxes in Canada

    British Columbai which will receive $44.60 per carton in taxes with the new increase, to eventually tax cigarettes as heavily as leaders Northwest Territories and Manitoba, which both receive more than $56 per carton. Quebec and Ontario, the provinces that tax cigarettes the least, both raise less than $30 per carton in taxes. In Ontario, a pack can cost as little as $6.50.

    “I appreciate that it is hard for smokers to quit,” Seely said. “But there is now a year-old B.C. smoking cessation program that provides smokers with the 1-888-QUIT line, (through) which they can receive counselling and subsidized nicotine replacement therapies.

    tumblr_m8k7pplE0K1rdw4pko1_400.gif
  • ami5000psu
    ami5000psu Posts: 391 Member
    In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women!
  • :frown:
  • I think legitimate questions shouldn’t be made fun of. Aren’t we all here for support??

    No question is a dumb question.

    Less judgment, more support people.

    :frown:

    Sorry where was question in this post? It was a statement that sugar should be me controlled by the government and an article to attempt to support that.
  • Some people were being mean.
  • Thomasm198
    Thomasm198 Posts: 3,189 Member

    I think legitimate questions shouldn’t be made fun of. Aren’t we all here for support??

    No question is a dumb question.

    Less judgment, more support people.


    :frown:

    You're obviously new and not familiar with Minnie's crusade against sugar. :smile:
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    The problem is over population, which is leading to an exponentially larger number of stupid people in the world who use zero common sense and don't take any accountability for what they do/consume. The obesity pandemic is just evolution at work. Somehow I managed to get un-obese with sugar being a readily available and uncontrolled substance.

    I put down the 32 oz big gulps and started getting my nutrition and fitness on...it was pretty easy and mostly a lot of common sense changes that did it for me.

    Survival of the fittest, the clean eaters will survive and the obese will fall away.

    what a shock, you don't understand evolution either.

    eta: "survival of the fittest" is something that is greatly misunderstood. It means that the fittest of en entire population, not just the ones at the peak. A better way to say it is "survival of the minimally fit". I mean, look around you. Clearly not only the strongest/smartest are REPRODUCING. You just have to be able TO REPRODUCE

    fify
  • Achrya
    Achrya Posts: 16,913 Member
    Yes. It should be carefully controlled and distributed.

    I volunteer for that position. All the sugar should be under my control!
  • Some people were being mean.

    :huh:
  • ThickMcRunFast
    ThickMcRunFast Posts: 22,511 Member

    I think legitimate questions shouldn’t be made fun of. Aren’t we all here for support??

    No question is a dumb question.

    Less judgment, more support people.


    :frown:

    You're obviously new and not familiar with Minnie's crusade against sugar. :smile:

    or her crusades against logic and basic science.

    And no, I do not have to support bullsh*t.