Now they are going to ban free refills on drinks?

people complaining that they cant dip apple in caramel are, they talk about it as if its a right to be able to do that..sure in your own home but why complain that somewhere doesn't sell it.. and i have never seen caramel being offered with apples. Neither when i've been in the US.

also how does it show ignorance to health and nutrtion? On what planet is Caramel good for your health.

No food is good or bad in a vacuum. It all interacts together to form an overall diet. In a healthy diet, you can eat caramel every day and maintain perfect health. The only time a food is "bad" is if it prevents you from consuming adequate amounts of protein, fat, vitamins, or minerals. If you reach all of those goals, there's no such thing as a "bad" food.

there is such thing as a bad food, esspecially corn syrup, its very bad for your health. Some foods should be avoided all together and are unnessciary, i think that attitude is why so many people are overweight because telling people they can eat what they want and loose weight is going to end up diaster. I mean it works for people that have self control, loads of my friends eat whatever they want but no when to stop. People who are overweight don't know when to stop, like myself so cutting out unnesscary stuff like adding caramel to an already sugary apple would be one. (Plus all my friends that are in great shape who eat whatever don't dream of eating mcdonalds or kfc, they go for great home made burgers or great resturants and i think thats important, if your going to eat junk food atleast eat the yummiest junk food)

People who are saying that this will lead to communism - are they serious or being sarcastic? I have this awful feeling that they're being serious...

Does anyone think this is more relevant in a country with free public health care?

BINGO.

People who are saying that this will lead to communism - are they serious or being sarcastic? I have this awful feeling that they're being serious...

Welcome to Amerika!

One day, we will all be punished for even writing posts in this forum which complain about the government.

Sound familiar? Like something you may have heard on the evening news? Something that happens today in countries far, far away? Something that would never happen here? Yeah, right.

A society that does not fight to keep its rights will certainly lose them.

I think this is going way too far. I understand why they want too but seriously? Now the government wants to control how many refills we can drink?

The horror!

How many sodas does any one person need exactly? Some people just don't need more fizzy pop - they need an intervention.

Considering obesity and related illnesses cost the US approximately $200 billion you would think taking any kind of active steps to reduce it and therefore the amount of tax dollars US citizens have to pay would at least be given a shot. That's probably a bit too much like Communism though...

Its all about PERSONAL responsibility, friend.

People should be able to regulate their own diet. Eat what they want to eat and drink what they want to drink.

Of course, eating healthier would be better, but personal food choices, like religion, should remain a free-will choice, not a government regulation.

It will only continue to grow worse.

Here is your bowl of gruel for the day. It is what is best for the government economy. C'mon, do your part!

Its all about PERSONAL responsibility, friend.

People should be able to regulate their own diet. Eat what they want to eat and drink what they want to drink.

Of course, eating healthier would be better, but personal food choices, like religion, should remain a free-will choice, not a government regulation.

It will only continue to grow worse.

Here is your bowl of gruel for the day. It is what is best for the government economy. C'mon, do your part!

Of course it is about personal responsibility in the main. However, what happens when that just doesn't work as a complete solution? Sometimes you need the stick as well as the carrot.

Does anyone really think that obesity rates are going to get better or worse without some kind of intervention in the market? Obesity is a classic example of market failure. Suppliers are rewarded for making people fat by over consumption of their products. What will they then rationally do? Find more ways for consumers to buy more or their products not less, making them fatter.

As for the slippery slope argument - it's simply emotional scare mongering. Is there any evidence that this kind of intervention will some how mushroom to such an extent that it leads to a police state? Errrrrr, no.

I think this is going way too far. I understand why they want too but seriously? Now the government wants to control how many refills we can drink?

The horror!

How many sodas does any one person need exactly? Some people just don't need more fizzy pop - they need an intervention.

Considering obesity and related illnesses cost the US approximately $200 billion you would think taking any kind of active steps to reduce it and therefore the amount of tax dollars US citizens have to pay would at least be given a shot. That's probably a bit too much like Communism though...

Its all about PERSONAL responsibility, friend.

People should be able to regulate their own diet. Eat what they want to eat and drink what they want to drink.

Of course, eating healthier would be better, but personal food choices, like religion, should remain a free-will choice, not a government regulation.

It will only continue to grow worse.

Here is your bowl of gruel for the day. It is what is best for the government economy. C'mon, do your part!

Whilst I agree people should be able to eat/drink whatever they like, why should it be free?? We do have free refills in the UK but not everywhere and I see it as a bonus rather than a god given right. Just my view.....

Good point. Just for clarification, if a merchant WANTS to offer free refills to induce customers to come purchase food and drink from his business, he should be allowed to continue to offer this enticement. its the REGULATION of this that bothers me.

If a merchant does not want to offer it, he certainly does not have to do so...its THEIR business! They have that CHOICE.

I agree with a merchant charging for refills, too! If it is THEIR choice to do so.

Yes I see your point, they should be able to have the choice!

Good point. Just for clarification, if a merchant WANTS to offer free refills to induce customers to come purchase food and drink from his business, he should be allowed to continue to offer this enticement. its the REGULATION of this that bothers me.

If a merchant does not want to offer it, he certainly does not have to do so...its THEIR business! They have that CHOICE.

I agree with a merchant charging for refills, too! If it is THEIR choice to do so.

One more thing before I have to go (I know this wasn't addressed to me but you make a good point so I have to stick my oar in

Who do you think picks up the tab for the negative externality of increased social / health costs which accrue as a result of the merchant's production and inducements to buy? Is it the merchant? No. It is the tax payer.

Companies aren't some benign and benevolent benefactor who make these tasty treats out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it to maximise profits (which is no bad thing - I am a fan of the profit motive myself...) However, they try to conveniently side step the "hidden" social cost that their production causes and pass that cost on to to be picked up by the general population.

I'd love that choice myself...

Who do you think picks up the tab for the negative externality of increased social / health costs which accrue as a result of the merchant's production and inducements to buy? Is it the merchant? No. It is the tax payer.

Companies aren't some benign and benevolent benefactor who make these tasty treats out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it to maximise profits (which is no bad thing - I am a fan of the profit motive myself...) However, they try to conveniently side step the "hidden" social cost that their production causes and pass that cost on to to be picked up by the general population.

I'd love that choice myself...

**claps**

personal responsibility implies that the public is aware of the responsibilities they have.

Good point. Just for clarification, if a merchant WANTS to offer free refills to induce customers to come purchase food and drink from his business, he should be allowed to continue to offer this enticement. its the REGULATION of this that bothers me.

If a merchant does not want to offer it, he certainly does not have to do so...its THEIR business! They have that CHOICE.

I agree with a merchant charging for refills, too! If it is THEIR choice to do so.

One more thing before I have to go (I know this wasn't addressed to me but you make a good point so I have to stick my oar in

Who do you think picks up the tab for the negative externality of increased social / health costs which accrue as a result of the merchant's production and inducements to buy? Is it the merchant? No. It is the tax payer.

Yes, it is the tax payer, but that would not be the case if personal responsibility were also applied to insurance. You should have a CHOICE as to whether you buy health insurance, where you buy it and how much of it you get.

Again, if insurance were not REGULATED by the government, then it would not be a tax payer issue.

Where I live most restaurants don't allow free refills. They don't sell drinks any bigger than the American sized Medium either. You are more than welcome to purchase another drink though.

I don't see anything wrong with banning free refills. If you want more than pay for it? They're not telling you that you can't have more.

agree with this

:grumble: Hmmm this ban has Michelle Obama written all over it

It's a proposal in it's infancy stage from the mayor of Cambridge, Massachusetts. It is not a ban nor has anything to do with Michelle Obama of all people O.O There can be legitimate criticisms of initiatives like these but come on now, that's reaching pretty far.

That's not reaching pretty far to think of her. I did too until I read it. She has already banned McDonald's from giving out caramel for the apples. Heaven forbid kids should have caramel to dip their apples in!

Uhhh, how did Michelle Obama ban McDonalds from giving out caramel for apples? She doesn't have the authority to do that.

OF COURSE SHE HAS THE POWER. she's practically the witch queen of new orleans. she practices hoodooo in the basement of the white house. SHE IS AN EVIL WOMAN who wants america to MOVE. it's the same goal as EVERYONE ON THIS SITE but vote agin her and her husband cos she's married to a muslim devil who won't rest until the very fabric of 'merica is shredded in the dirt. STOP THEM NOW.

Where I live most restaurants don't allow free refills. They don't sell drinks any bigger than the American sized Medium either. You are more than welcome to purchase another drink though.

I don't see anything wrong with banning free refills. If you want more than pay for it? They're not telling you that you can't have more.

agree with this

It should certainly be the merchant's choice if they want to sell refills or not. If you were a merchant, and the government said you could no longer offer one of your items for sale or reduced cost, would you be alright with that?