re: #453 makeitstop

You can be opposed to Bloomberg’s soda ban without resorting to nonsensical Godwinning.

I’m opposed to his plans on several grounds. He chose the easiest route to try to reduce caloric intake, even though soda consumption is actually down in recent years. There are other beverages that contain far more calories, but aren’t included in the ban. It applies only to fountain sodas 16oz or more.

It doesn’t apply to coffee products (think DnD or Starbucks frappes), milk products - milk shakes at Carvel, or to supermarket sodas - 2liter bottles.

It also functions as a tax on soda - such that if someone had been buying soda in those sizes to share among multiple people, they’ll be hit up for higher costs. It also ignores refills.

Obesity isn’t a product of consumption choices alone. Sedentary lifestyle plays a major role - and we have too many sitting on their asses and not enough activity.

But it’s also interesting that he chose soda, and not super sized portions of beef or other foods, which can be as bad or worse than soda. They might not be the empty calories of soda but they could be worse in some ways because of the fats, sugars, and other factors that can adversely affect health.

And what’s to stop soda makers from putting vitamins and minerals in the sodas to offset the claims that they’re empty calories. That’s the dividing line here - juices aren’t banned, but soda is, even though juices can contain as many calories as the same sizes of soda.