Gil Hamilton wrote:I don't think you people who are happily writing laws and taxes to ban unhealthy things are getting the root cause of the obesity problem. The problem is not the food, particularly (even if high fructose corn syrup is the White Man's Poison). The problem is the culture, with normal sized portions being considered weak and mass market junk food everywhere as big business. Crass consumerism is the overarching problem. If you go around banning and taxing things, people will get them anyway one way or another or gorge themselves on something else. The solution isn't having a competition to who can conceive of the most draconian laws to get rid of the evil stuff, because it doesn't address root cause. Besides, has prohibition ever really worked that well?
Do people buy giant steaks all the time they cannot afford? No. So the meat market is responsive to the price elasticity of demand. Concession accepted.
Of course it won't stop it outright. Of course some people will still eat shit and spend themselves retarded getting fat. But those are not reasonable standards for success. I ALSO support high gas taxes, reurbanization, high CAFE standards, and public transit growth. I support a more liberal labor policy and employee-ownership All of these things would decrease sedentary lifestyles. But regulation and change are comprehensive, step by step solutions. I know its fashionable to wade into a debate and say, "missing the point, you see its...culture. Look! I made a revelation." But believe it or not, the government has a role in shaping culture and regulating public life, and food standards are a part of that.
Gil Hamilton wrote:However, one thing that could be done if we are talking laws rather than social engineering is to quit subsidizing corn to the degree that the government does via the Farm Bill. End subsidize there and shift them to healthier vegetables, which are less terrible for humans and the environment. One of the main vectors for obesity is that junk food, which is basically processed corn and soy, is absurdly cheap due to government subsidy while healthy fruits and vegetables are expensive. Target corn and soy and shift those dollars make fruits and vegetables (on a rotating basis based on the season), and you'll go a long way to making healthy foods more available to everyone without banning anything.
You're acting like banning transfats and HFCS is exclusive to accepting these proposals. Of course, your approach is more silly because guess what - garden fresh vegetables from fucking 8000 miles away are more unprecedently available today in your supermarket than ever before. Has that availability prevented fatty garbage consumption? No. You can't just make alternatives available, you obviously have to constrain demand by either eliminating the substances or making them cost prohibitive.
If cigarettes respond to price elasticity - and they are extremely addictive - than so will ground round and candy.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear,
Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid
post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
