Tuesday, November 09, 2010

America's Food Police march on!

This is the kind of stuff that makes libertarians go ballistic! The Nanny state never rests. Where does it stop? LINK

8 comments:

  1. Is this for real? Or is it some weird joke? San Francisco you say? Ah! Now it all makes sense. Only in the Bay area can one expect insanity to reign supreme.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Of course . . . the idea that a few $billion spent on media to promote gluttony with profitable, garbage carbohydrates could have any impact on national health is absurd. Just like the idea that the average weight of a vehicle in the US is determined by marketing expenditures. . . why that's just ludicrous.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 44 & Ridgway: Thanks for the comments. ZLet me play the role of a libertarian gone ballistic. Believe it or not, corporations have most of the constitutional rights of real persons. Commercial speech, such as advertising, is protected by the First Amendment. The issue is not whether bad consumer choices lead to health problems. We all know that to be true. However, it is a potentially dangerous situation when government tries to "protect" us from ourselves, our exposure to lawful advertising, and take away freedom of choice because we might make bad choices. Having an abortion, buying a gun, watching X-rated movies, drinking alcohol, Reading Marx, the Bible or the Quran and lots of other things are targets of those who want to take away the choices of others. One would think that public education on health issues, rather than bans would be the preferred approach. Do we want to start down that slippery slope?

    ReplyDelete
  4. No we do not! Libertarian or not, what Ray has stated is absolutely on target with our founders' message as outlined by the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Bill of Rights, the constitution's most critical structural element to our freedoms. It's not an issue of money but rather of principle. A concept often overlooked by politicos, especially social progressives.

    The sacrifices made by our men and women in uniform are never in vain. Not as long as they are true to their oath to support and defend our constitutional liberties. They've done their duty having answered a far higher purpose and calling regardless of what people's attitudes are or who the current occupants of the White House and congress happen to be. There's no price tag you can put on the blood and tears shed by citizens who stood to protect our right to eat whatever we want, live where we choose and say what's on our mind.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To be clear about "It's not an issue of money but rather of principle."

    True prosperity and individual well being are dependent upon the wiser path of limited government.

    See http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Now that I've seen the light of "principal" I think we should stop beating up on Big Tobacco . . . one million premature deaths per year would be far more preferable to the current 440,000 . . . which itself is only 1,100% of the traffic fatality rate. Profit motive edges corporate ethics aside as growth and time advance. Relying on Public education to counteract destructive, amoral marketing is whistling in the cemetery. The differences in size and scope are insurmountable orders of magnitude.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 44 & Ridgway: Thanks for the comments. Longest thread yet! Can't spend any more time on this except to say let's agree to disagree! Thanks again for the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. OK, I promise to get a life and stay off the blog until after Thanksgiving. I just want to clarify one thing. I am not a fan of either Big Tobacco or the ethics of corporate America. Big Tobacco knew their product was addictive and covered it up. I am a "cautious," not absolutist libertarian and civil libertarian. I see nothing wrong with banning cocaine, heroin and PCP. I may be open to states experimenting with totally legal marijuana. Thanks again you two!

    ReplyDelete