NYC: No Supersize My Drinks

arniejoltarniejolt Weird-Huey Lewis
edited September 2012 in Less Rokk More Talk
The vote is in, and supersized soft drinks are out.

New York City's Board of Health approved Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on big-size sugary beverages.

The measure, which could go into effect as early as March, places a 16-ounce cap on bottled drinks and fountain beverages sold at city restaurants, movie theaters, sports venues and street carts.

It applies to sugary drinks that have more than 25 calories per 8 ounces. It would not affect 100% juice or beverages with more than 50% milk or milk substitute.

In New York, hundreds of soft drink makers and sellers, trade groups and community organizations banded together to fight the ban, forming the New Yorkers for Beverage Choices coalition. That group includes companies and associations such as Coca-Cola and the National Association of Theatre Owners, as well as small mom-and-pop food sellers. Funding comes from the American Beverage Association.


The rest of the article at Digtriad:
http://www.digtriad.com/news/local/article/245257/57/Supersized-Drinks-On-Way-Out-In-NYC

How does this make you feel? Particularly those who live near or within the NYC vicinity?

Comments

  • DerLindwurmDerLindwurm Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    Are free refills also banned?
  • BulzeebBulzeeb Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    Well that sucks for NYC, but I'm trying to go for healthier choices anyway, so maybe a visit won't shake me too bad.
  • Dadasaurus RexDadasaurus Rex Rawwwwwwr!
    edited September 2012
    Seems like an F'n waste of tax and lobby dollars. Feed and clothe some kids with that money. *face palm*
  • LiveHomeVideoLiveHomeVideo Trying too hard
    edited September 2012
    In my opinion, the government shouldn't be THIS involved with our health choices. I mean, where's those funds going to that should be going towards getting new jobs and keeping crime rates down in the city? It's going towards making sure our soft drinks are not over 16oz.

    Cute, New York. What's next, a limit on how much candy a kid can get on Halloween?
  • Dadasaurus RexDadasaurus Rex Rawwwwwwr!
    edited September 2012
    LiveHomeVideo;4877704 said:
    .....Cute, New York. What's next, a limit on how much candy a kid can get on Halloween?

    No seconds at Thanksgiving and Christmas?
  • WitticusWitticus VERY DEEP
    edited September 2012
    Then again more people walk in NYC than anywhere else in the country. So they're already among the healthiest lifestyle.
  • EhfahqEhfahq Headliner
    edited September 2012
    So people will buy two.

    If I want to drink a gallon of corn syrup I will.
  • JBlack240JBlack240 Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
  • Mega-TallicaMega-Tallica Washed Up
    edited September 2012
    There shouldn't be a law telling you you can't drink as much soda as you want. If you want to drink a supersized soda, you sure as hell should be allowed to drink a supersized soda, this is why we live in the America. It's beyond stupid. And like Ehfahq said, people will just start buying two medium sodas or something, stupid law, not going to make a difference whatsoever. Do they even pass laws that actually make a difference anymore?
  • JglaubmanJglaubman Headliner
    edited September 2012
    I live in New York, and this will literally have no effect on me whatsoever.

    I get what he's trying to do, but it's not going to stop anyone from being unhealthy. They should have just raised the taxes on the supersize stuff.
  • EhfahqEhfahq Headliner
    edited September 2012
    I would have no problem with this if it was voted on by the people, and not by 8 mayor appointed officials.

    But since I live in CA it really doesn't matter.
  • Cipher_PeonCipher_Peon I don't get it at all
    edited September 2012
  • GreatJedi7GreatJedi7 Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    That's really stupid. Again, to quote Ehfahq, people are just going to buy two sodas to bypass it. And what will they do then, arrest people for having large amounts of soda? No.

    Oh well. At least I live in Ohio, where we can drink all the soda we want.
  • RunesmithRunesmith Headliner
    edited September 2012
    I gave up soda years ago, but with that said, Bloomberg should be ashamed of himself for passing a law infringing upon the people's freedom of choice. If people want to drink battery acid, they should be allowed to do so. Whatever happened to the parents deciding what's best for their children? Now parents can't even decide what they want to drink when they go out.
  • Lawdog1521Lawdog1521 Squirrel Chasing Expert
    edited September 2012
    It's a scam, it has nothing to do with public health. If that was the case, why not do the same for alcohol, which has a far greater impact on society?

    It was done because the people who would by it now have to buy two, which means twice the tax revenue.

    Good old New York, figuring out how to steal peoples money since 1898.
  • clashcityrocker10clashcityrocker10 Headliner
    edited September 2012
    As a (temporarily displaced) New Yorker, I'll say I genuinely don't care that this has been approved. It's provided for some laughs on late-night shows, and that's about it.

    People can still buy Big Gulps at whatever size they please, because 7-11s aren't covered under this ban. I fully expect restaurants to start offering "2-for-1" deals or something to that effect on the largest-sized drinks allowed. New York City's mayoral election is next year, Bloomberg isn't running for a fourth term, and it's not like his successor couldn't reverse the ban. In the end, not much has changed.
  • EhfahqEhfahq Headliner
    edited September 2012
    Lawdog1521;4877953 said:

    Good old New York, figuring out how to steal peoples money since 1898.

    I'm old school, I call it New Amsterdam.
  • daxx1970daxx1970 110% Awesome
    edited September 2012
    It's probably because "The Rent Is Too Damn High" party recently changed over to "The Drinks Are Too Damn Big" party.
  • EhfahqEhfahq Headliner
    edited September 2012
    Daxx wins the thread.
  • WitticusWitticus VERY DEEP
    edited September 2012
    Ehfahq;4877961 said:
    I'm old school, I call it New Amsterdam.

    Why they changed it, I can't say. People just liked it better that way.
  • Dadasaurus RexDadasaurus Rex Rawwwwwwr!
    edited September 2012
    daxx1970;4877962 said:
    It's probably because "The Rent Is Too Damn High" party recently changed over to "The Drinks Are Too Damn Big" party.

    Nice link
  • Lawdog1521Lawdog1521 Squirrel Chasing Expert
    edited September 2012
    clashcityrocker10;4877955 said:
    As a (temporarily displaced) New Yorker, I'll say I genuinely don't care that this has been approved. It's provided for some laughs on late-night shows, and that's about it.

    People can still buy Big Gulps at whatever size they please, because 7-11s aren't covered under this ban. I fully expect restaurants to start offering "2-for-1" deals or something to that effect on the largest-sized drinks allowed. New York City's mayoral election is next year, Bloomberg isn't running for a fourth term, and it's not like his successor couldn't reverse the ban. In the end, not much has changed.
    See, I feel the opposite. I'm not a New Yorker but Bloomberg puts his nose in other states business so I feel It's only fair I can too. :) I don't care about 32 oz. soda, in fact I don't think I've ever had one. But that's not the point. The point is that if you let them start taking away things I don't care about, sooner or later they'll think it's okay to take away things I do care about.

    Really, telling somebody your changing their behavior because it's "good for them" should be troubling for everyone. Since sexual intercourse can cause health concerns, should rules be placed on sex? Should certain religions (or lack thereof) be banned because they may have a perceived negative impact?

    The concept of the slippery slope is very real. Politicians never know when enough is enough, they always take things one more step. That's not to say anything goes, crack shouldn't be sold at the 7-11. But before a law is passed, something you're going to punish people for if broken, it needs to be thought about long and hard. And unless it's necessary for a society, it shouldn't be passed.
  • dragoninforcerdragoninforcer UnWashed
    edited September 2012
    Glad I don't live in the city. Whew.
  • NumskullNumskull Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    Mega-Tallica;4877850 said:
    If you want to drink a supersized soda, you sure as hell should be allowed to drink a supersized soda, this is why we live in the America.

    This may be true in your case, but I live in "the America" for more practical reasons.
  • rkbdgurlrkbdgurl Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    Now when you buy the "smaller" soda, you will be paying the same price you did for the super size. Mark my words people...you get less, and pay more. IF you have to buy two drinks...you're certainly paying more. That's how it works.

    Jeez....I hate Politicians.
  • DerLindwurmDerLindwurm Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    I really doubt that anyone's going to become thinner and healthier because of this...

    They might as well cut to the chase demand that residents of NYC attend bimonthly weigh-ins. Anyone whose BMI is too high must lose a certain amount of weight by the next weigh-in or pay a fine. Anyone who fails to report for their scheduled weigh-in must pay an even bigger fine. And incarcerate anyone with a BMI over 40 until they are slim enough to be re-admitted to society. We obviously can't rely on the people themselves to manage problems like this, right?
  • NumskullNumskull Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    DerLindwurm;4878102 said:
    I really doubt that anyone's going to become thinner and healthier because of this...

    They might as well cut to the chase demand that residents of NYC attend bimonthly weigh-ins. Anyone whose BMI is too high must lose a certain amount of weight by the next weigh-in or pay a fine. Anyone who fails to report for their scheduled weigh-in must pay an even bigger fine. And incarcerate anyone with a BMI over 40 until they are slim enough to be re-admitted to society. We obviously can't rely on the people themselves to manage problems like this, right?

    Yes, of course. A ban on oversized soft drinks, and then this. It is totally the next logical step and you are not exaggerating at all. Seriously.
  • DerLindwurmDerLindwurm Road Warrior
    edited September 2012
    Numskull;4878210 said:
    Yes, of course. A ban on oversized soft drinks, and then this. It is totally the next logical step and you are not exaggerating at all. Seriously.
    Just remember that you saw it here first. :p
  • killer_roachkiller_roach Washed Up
    edited September 2012
    DerLindwurm;4878222 said:
    Just remember that you saw it here first. :p

    At least at a BMI of 27.4 (6' 3.5", 222 pounds) I'd be safe for a while... enough truly fat people to deal with before getting to my sizable person.

    Back on topic, this law doesn't make a lot of sense, but it's the hallmark of progressive paternalism - the state knows what's best for you, after all.
  • Mega-TallicaMega-Tallica Washed Up
    edited September 2012
    Numskull;4878052 said:
    This may be true in your case, but I live in "the America" for more practical reasons.
    I was referring to freedom of choice which is why we live in America, right? At least, that's why I wouldn't want to live in any other place at any other time.

    Soda is terrible for you anyway, I stopped drinking it long ago, but if people wish to drink a supersized soda there shouldn't be anybody putting their foot down to stop you from doing that and certainly not the government. That's the whole freedom of choice thing there that's suddenly getting taken away.
Sign In or Register to comment.