Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 104

Thread: Another ban on Big Gulps!

  1. #21
    W. Baker Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    Cheri <[email protected]> wrote:
    : "Alice Faber" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    : news:[email protected]..

    : > Personally, I don't like outright banning of the big-gulp size. However,
    : > and this is a big however, I would like vendors to be required to sell a
    : > single serving (i.e., a soda can typically is labeled as having 2
    : > servings, so a single serving would be 8 oz) at a proportional price, so
    : > that there is no economic incentive for ordering a huge soda (or juice,
    : > or whatever).

    : It's not the banning of the Big Gulp that bothers me at all, I was never
    : much of a soda drinker even in the smallest size, now only ice water, but
    : it's just one more foot in the door with taking away personal choices IMO.
    : If they want to sell it in trash can sizes and people want to buy it...it's
    : not the governments business, and while we're at it, neither is their
    : interference in baseball! :-)

    : Cheri

    How do you feel about the State requirements to have automobile insurance?

    Wendy



  2. #22
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/22/2012 1:20 PM, W. Baker wrote:

    > How do you feel about the State requirements to have automobile insurance?
    >


    The list goes on and on... mandatory education, surgeon general warnings
    on cigarettes and alcohol with age restrictions on both, age
    requirements for driving, compliance with TB treatment enforced, etc...

    Susan

  3. #23
    Cheri Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    "W. Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:js29gs$3hf$[email protected]..
    > Cheri <[email protected]> wrote:
    > : "Alice Faber" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > : news:[email protected]..
    >
    > : > Personally, I don't like outright banning of the big-gulp size.
    > However,
    > : > and this is a big however, I would like vendors to be required to sell
    > a
    > : > single serving (i.e., a soda can typically is labeled as having 2
    > : > servings, so a single serving would be 8 oz) at a proportional price,
    > so
    > : > that there is no economic incentive for ordering a huge soda (or
    > juice,
    > : > or whatever).
    >
    > : It's not the banning of the Big Gulp that bothers me at all, I was never
    > : much of a soda drinker even in the smallest size, now only ice water,
    > but
    > : it's just one more foot in the door with taking away personal choices
    > IMO.
    > : If they want to sell it in trash can sizes and people want to buy
    > it...it's
    > : not the governments business, and while we're at it, neither is their
    > : interference in baseball! :-)
    >
    > : Cheri
    >
    > How do you feel about the State requirements to have automobile insurance?
    >
    > Wendy


    There is a LAW against driving without insurance. There is no law against
    buying a large sized soda...yet!

    Cheri


  4. #24
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/22/2012 7:16 PM, Cheri wrote:

    > There is a LAW against driving without insurance.


    Right, and Wendy asked how you feel about it. :-)

    Susan

  5. #25
    Cheri Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > x-no-archive: yes
    >
    > On 6/22/2012 7:16 PM, Cheri wrote:
    >
    >> There is a LAW against driving without insurance.

    >
    > Right, and Wendy asked how you feel about it. :-)
    >
    > Susan


    When you're driving you are putting other lives/property damage at risk with
    vehicle accidents etc., so I don't have a problem with it, though...the
    couple of times I have been hit, the a-holes didn't have insurance. Oh, and
    I'm also OK with laws against murder, burglary, arson, child abuse etc. They
    should be as vigilant with that **** as they are about some ballplayer using
    steroids or the size of a friggin soda cup. :-)

    Cheri


  6. #26
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/22/2012 8:24 PM, Cheri wrote:

    > When you're driving you are putting other lives/property damage at risk
    > with vehicle accidents etc., so I don't have a problem with it,
    > though...the couple of times I have been hit, the a-holes didn't have
    > insurance. Oh, and I'm also OK with laws against murder, burglary,
    > arson, child abuse etc. They should be as vigilant with that **** as
    > they are about some ballplayer using steroids or the size of a friggin
    > soda cup. :-)


    So you're for government interventions, just have a different
    comfortable spot on that slippery slope. ;-)

    Susan

  7. #27
    W. Baker Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    Cheri <[email protected]> wrote:
    : "W. Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    : news:js29gs$3hf$[email protected]..
    : > Cheri <[email protected]> wrote:
    : > : "Alice Faber" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    : > : news:[email protected]..
    : >
    : > : > Personally, I don't like outright banning of the big-gulp size.
    : > However,
    : > : > and this is a big however, I would like vendors to be required to sell
    : > a
    : > : > single serving (i.e., a soda can typically is labeled as having 2
    : > : > servings, so a single serving would be 8 oz) at a proportional price,
    : > so
    : > : > that there is no economic incentive for ordering a huge soda (or
    : > juice,
    : > : > or whatever).
    : >
    : > : It's not the banning of the Big Gulp that bothers me at all, I was never
    : > : much of a soda drinker even in the smallest size, now only ice water,
    : > but
    : > : it's just one more foot in the door with taking away personal choices
    : > IMO.
    : > : If they want to sell it in trash can sizes and people want to buy
    : > it...it's
    : > : not the governments business, and while we're at it, neither is their
    : > : interference in baseball! :-)
    : >
    : > : Cheri
    : >
    : > How do you feel about the State requirements to have automobile insurance?
    : >
    : > Wendy

    : There is a LAW against driving without insurance. There is no law against
    : buying a large sized soda...yet!

    : Cheri

    When we had only horses and buggies no one needed a driver's lisence.
    When automobiles came in the government decided we needed lisences and
    made a law that said(if you remember your book you got when first applying
    for a learner's permit) Driving is a priviledge, not a right. to earn the
    priviledge you have to pass a test and then continue to drive safely(not
    too many tickets). What gave the government the right to pass that law?
    We accepted it because it seemed clear that something was needed.

    thisis where it starts, with someone getting a bright idea of how to save
    the health of individuals and money (via the health care system) for the
    citizens who have to pay the health care costs of the indigent.

    Wendy


  8. #28
    Ozgirl Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!



    "Cheri" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]..
    >> x-no-archive: yes
    >>
    >> On 6/22/2012 7:16 PM, Cheri wrote:
    >>
    >>> There is a LAW against driving without insurance.

    >>
    >> Right, and Wendy asked how you feel about it. :-)
    >>
    >> Susan

    >
    > When you're driving you are putting other lives/property damage at
    > risk with vehicle accidents etc., so I don't have a problem with it,
    > though...the couple of times I have been hit, the a-holes didn't have
    > insurance. Oh, and I'm also OK with laws against murder, burglary,
    > arson, child abuse etc. They should be as vigilant with that **** as
    > they are about some ballplayer using steroids or the size of a friggin
    > soda cup. :-)


    I am not getting into the argument but I have never heard you swear,
    lol.



  9. #29
    Ozgirl Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!



    "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > x-no-archive: yes
    >
    > On 6/22/2012 8:24 PM, Cheri wrote:
    >
    >> When you're driving you are putting other lives/property damage at
    >> risk
    >> with vehicle accidents etc., so I don't have a problem with it,
    >> though...the couple of times I have been hit, the a-holes didn't have
    >> insurance. Oh, and I'm also OK with laws against murder, burglary,
    >> arson, child abuse etc. They should be as vigilant with that **** as
    >> they are about some ballplayer using steroids or the size of a
    >> friggin
    >> soda cup. :-)

    >
    > So you're for government interventions, just have a different
    > comfortable spot on that slippery slope. ;-)
    >
    > Susan


    I think there are obvious things that should be against the law, other
    things come under personal choice and peoples rights. So not on the same
    slope at all IMO.


  10. #30
    Malcom \Mal\ Reynolds Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    In article <js04p4$1fn$[email protected]>, "Julie Bove" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]..
    > > x-no-archive: yes
    > >
    > > On 6/21/2012 8:47 AM, Gary Owens wrote:
    > >> For once I need to agree with Julie. Telling what we should eat is one
    > >> thing, but a ban on a specific food is just not right. This is just
    > >> another example of the direction this world is heading. Those of you who
    > >> live in the affected areas should feel ashamed at having elected these
    > >> idiots in the first place.
    > >> I don't think anyone has ever looked to see what the actual $ cost of
    > >> these stupid laws is. I'll bet the cost in lawyers to draw up a law like
    > >> this is more than it will ever save in health costs. The people who buy
    > >> a Big Glup will just do something else stupid.

    > >
    > > There's no ban on the "Big Glup" as a food. Just a particular cup size.

    >
    > Oh dur Susan! Big Gulp *is* the size.


    it must hurt to be so wrong so often

    Among 7-Eleven's offerings are private label products, including Slurpee, a
    partially frozen soft drink introduced in 1967,[15] and the Big Gulp introduced
    in 1980[15] that packaged soft drinks in large cups ranging in size from 20 to
    64 U.S. fluid ounces (0.59 to 1.9 liters).
    [edit] Other products

    In addition to Slurpee and the Big Gulp, 7-Eleven would come to own or operate
    several brands of food and concepts,

  11. #31
    Julie Bove Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!


    "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > x-no-archive: yes
    >
    > On 6/22/2012 7:16 PM, Cheri wrote:
    >
    >> There is a LAW against driving without insurance.

    >
    > Right, and Wendy asked how you feel about it. :-)
    >
    > Susan


    Apples and oranges. Making a law for a safe way to drive a vehicle is
    hardly telling us how/what to eat/drink.



  12. #32
    Julie Bove Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!


    "W. Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:js3av5$qab$[email protected]..
    > When we had only horses and buggies no one needed a driver's lisence.
    > When automobiles came in the government decided we needed lisences and
    > made a law that said(if you remember your book you got when first applying
    > for a learner's permit) Driving is a priviledge, not a right. to earn the
    > priviledge you have to pass a test and then continue to drive safely(not
    > too many tickets). What gave the government the right to pass that law?


    What gave them the right to pass *any* law? But making laws about food and
    drink (alcohol excepted) is wrong, IMO. Now I have no qualms with them
    saying that the manufacturers have to list ingredients or allergens. But to
    tell us what we can and can not buy? I'm not even sure I agree with the ban
    in NY on trans-fats. People know what they are. If they choose to eat
    them. Well... That's their choice.

    Why is alcohol allowed? Isn't it a drug? Shouldn't it be treated as such?
    I think so but I'm not in charge.

    Heck at the rate they are going they are going to ban any food that has more
    than a certain number of grams of sugar per serving. Next they might even
    monitor our carb intake! And then what? Fried foods? Butter?

    I can even understand it if they find something to be unsafe. I am thinking
    of cocaine that used to be put in Coca Cola. Yes, it has its uses. But
    shouldn't be available OTC. Or Sarsparilla or however you spell it. They
    found that to be harmful.

    But to say that you can buy a food or drink but you can only buy so much at
    once? Beyond ridiculous. Ban the damned stuff or put a warming label on
    it. But don't treat us like children.
    > We accepted it because it seemed clear that something was needed.
    >
    > thisis where it starts, with someone getting a bright idea of how to save
    > the health of individuals and money (via the health care system) for the
    > citizens who have to pay the health care costs of the indigent.
    >
    > Wendy


    That isn't going to help. Everyone will now run out and get a Soda Stream.
    Then they can suck down as much HFCS or Splenda as they want.



  13. #33
    Cheri Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    "Julie Bove" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:js3gub$nfu$[email protected]..

    > That isn't going to help. Everyone will now run out and get a Soda
    > Stream. Then they can suck down as much HFCS or Splenda as they want.


    Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, and portion size won't work for
    obesity. I'm sure it's all going to come down to more money the government
    can squeeze out of people. High taxes on large sizes etc. Next *they* will
    decide that ribeye steak/pork/lamb is bad for you, or whatever the
    collective hysteria happens to be on a certain day, so you can only sell it
    in 3-4 oz size and so on. Personally, most of us have paid taxes all of our
    lives for the very expensive poor choices of others, and will continue to do
    so, so the old "oh but it costs so much" doesn't fly at all with me.

    Cheri


  14. #34
    Cheri Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    "Ozgirl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..

    > I am not getting into the argument but I have never heard you swear, lol.


    Sure you have, you just forgot. :-)

    Cheri


  15. #35
    Julie Bove Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!


    "Cheri" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > "Julie Bove" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:js3gub$nfu$[email protected]..
    >
    >> That isn't going to help. Everyone will now run out and get a Soda
    >> Stream. Then they can suck down as much HFCS or Splenda as they want.

    >
    > Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, and portion size won't work for
    > obesity. I'm sure it's all going to come down to more money the government
    > can squeeze out of people. High taxes on large sizes etc. Next *they* will
    > decide that ribeye steak/pork/lamb is bad for you, or whatever the
    > collective hysteria happens to be on a certain day, so you can only sell
    > it in 3-4 oz size and so on. Personally, most of us have paid taxes all of
    > our lives for the very expensive poor choices of others, and will continue
    > to do so, so the old "oh but it costs so much" doesn't fly at all with me.


    Agreed.



  16. #36
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/23/2012 12:00 AM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

    > it must hurt to be so wrong so often
    >


    Ignorance is bliss, so I'm sure you're wrong about that.

    Susan

  17. #37
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/23/2012 2:21 AM, Cheri wrote:

    > Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, and portion size won't work for
    > obesity.


    There is absolutely no analogy between the two. It's just a size
    regulation for sellers, not a limit on public or private use of soft drinks.

    Susan

  18. #38
    Julie Bove Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!


    "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > x-no-archive: yes
    >
    > On 6/23/2012 2:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
    >
    >> Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, and portion size won't work for
    >> obesity.

    >
    > There is absolutely no analogy between the two. It's just a size
    > regulation for sellers, not a limit on public or private use of soft
    > drinks.


    But currently most places offer a discount on a bigger size. We will no
    longer get that so it does impact us.



  19. #39
    Cheri Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    "Susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > x-no-archive: yes
    >
    > On 6/23/2012 2:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
    >
    >> Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, and portion size won't work for
    >> obesity.

    >
    > There is absolutely no analogy between the two. It's just a size
    > regulation for sellers, not a limit on public or private use of soft
    > drinks.
    >
    > Susan




    There is absolutely no reason for the government to be regulating the size
    of soft drinks, period. You don't mind, and that's fine, but I do mind and
    that's not going to change. :-)

    Cheri


  20. #40
    Susan Guest

    Default Re: Another ban on Big Gulps!

    x-no-archive: yes

    On 6/23/2012 12:11 PM, Cheri wrote:

    > There is absolutely no reason for the government to be regulating the
    > size of soft drinks, period. You don't mind, and that's fine, but I do
    > mind and that's not going to change. :-)


    But there is a reason, health care costs that accrue to all of us.

    We may disagree about what's a good reason and what isn't.

    Susan

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32