Thursday, May 31, 2012

Told you so.

Allahpundit on Hotair notes much the same reasoning that I've seen and concludes:

Actually, I think the reason he’s taking such a half-assed step now is simply to set a precedent that NYC and other cities can build on later. We may yet see a dip in sugary-drink consumption if portion size is regulated, simply because some people won’t want to pop for a second cup to get their fill. When that happens, Bloomy will point to the decline as evidence that regulation works and the public, meanwhile, will have gotten used to the idea of having its dietary choices restricted. The next step would be to apply the size rule to supermarkets and convenience stores, then after that to impose a calorie rule, and maybe down the road to drop one of those European “fat taxes” on sugary beverages to really drive down demand. It’s the same M.O. as regulating smoking — one of Bloomberg’s points in the clip below, in fact, is how obesity is now a bigger health threat than cigarettes — but minus the “secondary smoke” logic of regulating the individual to protect those around him. What he’s trying to do here is simply get his foot in the prohibitionist door. (And I do mean his foot; according to NY1, Bloomberg won’t even seek a rubber stamp from the City Council to impose this policy.) That’s more important long-term to controlling people’s diets than enacting a policy on soda portions that’s consistent or coherent.

My a half assed law based on scare tactics exploiting a "crisis" to get the public "a little bit pregnant", set precedent, and be used to further the agenda?

Well America, welcome to the world us gunnies have been living in.

And go to the link for the bonus update that goes to this.

Just click.

I'm sure Bloomie could do something to define a baker's dozen to something more "healthy".

Also Department of Health and Mental Hygiene really? Man talk about reactionary 50's style social control.

No comments: