New York Coke Limit

Discussion in 'Teacher Time Out' started by JustMe, Sep 13, 2012.

  1. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Sep 15, 2012

    It is a slippery slope to restrict what food anyone buys I agree with you in principle. I wonder what is going on when a person in front of me at the market uses their food stamps card to buy High priced steak and I am buying hamburger meat. The food stamps card allows a person to spend all the food stamp money on food and their money on booze and cigarettes!
    I find it hard to understand why personal responsibility is thrown by the wayside.
     
  2. love2teach

    love2teach Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    1

    Sep 15, 2012

    I don't live in NYC but close enough that it is all over the local news and in the newspapers. I think it is crazy that this law passed!!
    Who is the government to tell me what I can and can't eat? What is going to stop someone from buying 2 smaller sodas? I think that it is the governments job to inform and educate us about the impacts that different food/diet choices can have on our bodies. Many resturants in NYC and other parts of NY have to list the nutritional value of the meals they serve. Why not just have that listed on the cup or near the soda machine? THis way people are educated and informed about the drink choices they make. Let the people make thier own choices! :2cents:

    Oh and don't even get me STARTED on the whole breastfeeing thing......:dizzy:
     
  3. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 15, 2012

    I don't see it as the government telling you what you can and cannot eat. In fact, they're not in this case. You are not limited to how much coke you can buy and drink. They are just requiring restaurants to offer the drinks in reasonably sized cups.
     
  4. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,980
    Likes Received:
    1,920

    Sep 15, 2012

    No, the are requiring that certain types of drinks not be offered in large quantities. There is a difference from what you said. Your comment would mean that the government would required places like 7-11 or restaurants to offer a 16 oz size sugary drink or smaller to its patrons instead of just having Big Gulps. (Yes, I know 7-11 offers many sized drinks.) Almost all restaurants I know of already have 16 oz cups and some even smaller as AN OPTION. So restaurants already offer sugary drinks in reasonably sized cups. They just so happen to offer them in larger quantities also.
     
  5. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Sep 15, 2012

    Just Me, the law will make it illegal to sell a cup of non-diet soda in quantitie over 16 oz. There's something like a $200 fine for doing so.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/13/nyc-big-soda-crackdown-plan-goes-to-vote/

    NYC on a hot summer's day can frequently hit the triple digits, with very high humidity levels. If a commuter on the LIRR chooses to get a big 20oz glass of lemonade for that long hot ride home, it's illegal. Of course, he's welcome to buy a gallon of wine for his consumption, just not that Big Gulp of lemonade... as long as he does so before midnight. A six pack of beer? Six Big Macs to go with that sixpack of beer? Not a problem. But a Big Gulp of lemonade??? Nope, not allowed.

    I'm sorry, because I honestly like Michael Bloomberg. But I strongly resent the implication that I should turn to government for assistance in knowing exactly how much soda I can buy. For what it's worth, I've never, ever bought that much soda to drink at one sitting. But that's not the issue. The issue is that I'm a big girl with a Master's Degree, and don't need a politician to tell me how much Pepsi I can buy on a hot summer's day.

    And the forumla thing??? Are you kidding me??????

    With all the serious problems facing NYC, THESE are the battles we need to be fighting???? Could we perhaps worry about the infrastructure of our bridges and tunnels? Or perhaps talk about the state of our schools? How about getting the NYC economy back to something approaching pre-9/11 levels?? Could the Port Authority find a way to work their numbers so that the cash toll on the GWBridge is less than $12??? Or could we somehow find a way to work it so that we can get from one end of the Cross Bronx Expressway to the other without sitting dead in one spot for 15 minutes? Could we sometime in my lifetime end the construction on the Belt Parkway?? How about working the number of people in NYC living on the streets? Or those who go to bed hungry every night?? Or those who need access to mental health clinics that no longer exist? Or those who need access to medical care but cannot afford insurance?

    Instead we're worrying that I might buy a contraband glass of SODA??? Or feed my child Similac without a lecture first????
     
  6. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 15, 2012

    :rolleyes:

    Then insert the word "only" to my original sentence to read: They are just requiring restaurants to offer the drinks in reasonably sized cups only.
     
  7. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 15, 2012

    Is is just the government's involvement that people oppose? Meaning, if all the restaurants came together and adopted this new policy, would you accept that?
     
  8. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,980
    Likes Received:
    1,920

    Sep 15, 2012

    Not if they did so and then decided to all charge 5.00/drink. That would be illegal. However, if a restraunt decided on its own that it wanted to have the largest beverage size as 16 oz, there is no problem with that.

    Why would all businesses decide to do so if there is a market out there for a larger size? What would bind them to such an agreement?
     
  9. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 15, 2012

    Why would they? Because they cared about their customers. :)

    What would bind them to such an agreement? Well, this is very much hypothetical (obviously), so they would be doing this voluntarily because they felt ethically compelled to do so.
     
  10. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,980
    Likes Received:
    1,920

    Sep 15, 2012

    I guess it is just too hypothetical and in my view unrealistic to think all companies would voluntarily get rid of a product that sells well because they cared about their customers when so many of their other products are as bad, if not worse, than a 20 oz sugary drink.

    I see it now, "I'm sorry. We don't sell 20 oz sugary drinks because people are too fat. Do you want to super size that fry? You said 2 Big Macs, right? Are they both for you? Sorry, you can only have 1."
     
  11. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 15, 2012

    Well, yeah, it's very hypothetical...asked to understand if it was just the government's involvement or the general idea that bothered people.
     
  12. bison

    bison Habitué

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 16, 2012

    7-11 falls into the grocery category, so yes, you can still buy a Big Gulp.
     
  13. Cerek

    Cerek Aficionado

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 16, 2012

    Many fast-food restaurants now just allow walk-in customers to fill their own drinks at the soda fountain, which allows them to get as many refills as they want. Restricting the size of the cup will just mean customers go back for 1 or 2 more refills than before.

    Of course, these restaurants can now increase the cost of the 16 oz soda accordingly to compensate for the extra refills and the consumer probably won't even notice.

    The same is true for "sit-down" restaurants as well. My first thought, when I read this, was that those restaurants will also see an increase in profit since customers will now have to order a second (or third) glass of soda if they want more to drink. Placing a small increase on the price of these drinks will help the profit margin even more.
     
  14. Irishdave

    Irishdave Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,007
    Likes Received:
    12

    Sep 16, 2012

    Since the businesses may or may not want to sacrifice profits, ( after all isn't what a business wants to do make a profit? ) are we going legislate ethics and morality? Who's ethics and morality? Mine might be higher or lower than yours! We tried legislate away booze we got bootleggers, we tried to legislate away marijuana we got gangs.

    In a perfect world where I was elected King I would decree business ethics and personal morality be to my liking, reasonable profits, healthy snacks, school teachers paid like a rock star, Parents would be given parenting classes, everyone would receive a good wage, I still haven't figured out where the money will come from
     
  15. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Sep 16, 2012

    OK, so change the argument to a Supersize soda from McDonalds. That same soda that's allowed from 7-11 is now arbitrarily against the law if I buy it at the McDonalds or Sbarros in Penn Station for my commute home. For many commuters, it's a 1 1/2 to 2 hour ride from there in a train that may or may not be air conditioned, so the refill thing won't solve the problem.

    But I can buy it for my commute TO the city and bring it into Penn, as long as I buy it before I hit the city line. I wonder if I would need my receipt to prove that it's not contraband??

    I'm sorry, but I really think that Mayor Bloomberg has bigger fish to fry than legislating my soda consumption, along with just where I buy that supersize soda.

    To answer JustMe's question: if the larger sized sodas stopped selling, I would be fine with stores and restaurants choosing not to carry them. Stores exist to make a profit. So as long as there's that demand-- and there will be in NYC, particularly in the summer-- I think they should be able to sell as much soda as the consumers want.

    So, yeah, for me it's not about the soda. I don't buy large sodas; even 16 ounces is way too much for me. But I strongly disagree with Mayor Bloomberg's style of parenting a city he was elected to govern. The two job descriptions are not synonomous, and I think Mayor Bloomberg has overstepped his boundaries on several issues.
     
  16. MissCeliaB

    MissCeliaB Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,336
    Likes Received:
    505

    Sep 16, 2012

    Restaurants will still make profit off of sodas. I don't agree with the law, but they will still make a profit. At McDonalds, all drinks are the same price no matter what size. (For the record, I keep hearing people talk about "Supersize" drinks at McDonalds, which is a size that no longer exists, and hasn't for several years...) A small soda is a dollar, a large soda is a dollar. They sell cheap sodas to get you there to buy other food. Sonic is probably the worst soda size offender, with a 44 oz. soda, though they do offer non-soda options, like tea, slushies, etc.
     
  17. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Sep 16, 2012

    OK, since I don't buy those sizes of soda, I'm unaware of the proper names. Assume that anytime I said "supersize" I meant "larger than 16 oz." And that any time I said "McDonalds" or "7-11," you can subsititue "Sonic" or any other vendor covered under the new law.

    It's not the specifics that bother me. It's the mayor legislating something not within his job description.

    Oh, and as an aside, here's an interesting point of view I hadn't considered: http://www.naturalnews.com/037197_Mayor_Bloomberg_New_York_City_soda_ban.html Many people consider soda laced with aspartane-- diet sodas not covered under the new law-- to be more harmful than their sugary counterparts.
     
  18. worrywart

    worrywart Companion

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 16, 2012

    Not fine lol!!!

    Personally, I am totally against this law and think it is crazy. Seriously..you can be at the movies order a huge tub of buttered popcorn, a fatty hot dog and a couple boxes of candy but can't get a normal size coke? With ice, you would only get maybe 10 oz. of drink!

    I don't drink sugar sodas and don't live in NY so this does not affect me but when the government starts telling us how much of something we can and can't EAT things have gone to far!!! I'm shocked that this bill passed. And cigarettes and alchohol still on the shelves of course (tax money for the state)!

    Anyway sodas only really contribute to weight and diabetes. What about bacon and all the fatty foods that contribute to heart disease, obesity and cholesterol. Is that next?
     
  19. Cicero

    Cicero Companion

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 16, 2012

    :yeahthat:

    Also, everytime I see this topic be the lead topic for "Teacher Time Out" on the main forums page it makes me think, "I could go for a soda right now." Not out of disrespect or anything.. moreso out of addiction (which could be an argument for a coke limit).
     
  20. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Sep 16, 2012

    Yes, diets were mentioned earlier in the thread...I think the law should apply to diets as well (if there has to be a law at all).
     
  21. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,495
    Likes Received:
    2,532

    Sep 16, 2012


    :lol: I'm about to head to the fridge for a Diet Coke right this second for the same reason!
     
  22. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Sep 16, 2012

    And let's not even talk about how much coffee is consumed... isn't caffeine a drug as well??

    But not even Mayor Bloomberg has the guts to tackle NY's coffee obsession.
     
  23. amakaye

    amakaye Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,397
    Likes Received:
    4

    Sep 16, 2012

    I just don't see how this is supposed to be effective. The same people who are drinking giant sodas often enough for it to seriously impact their health are more than likely going to be the same people who instead buy multiple smaller sodas, go to restaurants where they can get refills, or find another way to get the beverage they want.

    Yes, the portion sizes are ridiculous, but I don't agree that the government should be able to mandate this. Educate people, yes. Encourage the restaurant and convenience store industries to decrease portion sizes, yes. But making it illegal seems like a very slippery slope...
     
  24. Peachyness

    Peachyness Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,181
    Likes Received:
    1

    Sep 16, 2012

    I've been taking nutrition/health courses. Soda is bad. Diet is just as bad, and perhaps even worst (so please, for your own well-being, at least reduce how much diet you have or drink water instead, or fruit flavored water, please. MUCH better for you and your one and only body).

    So one of my health books addressed a similar topic in chapter one. It asked, "Should the Government Tax Soft Drinks?.... 'Lifestyle taxes' are taxes imposed on products that are deemed unhealthy, such as alcohol and tobacco. Such taxes have two functions- they raise revenue for governments and they are believed to discourage people from buying the unhealthy products....." It goes on to say that their is an obesity epidemic and it is a major health concern for the US, especially since so much money in medical cost is associated with obesity (exceeds 147 million annually, half of which is paid through Medicaid and Medicare). Consumption of soft drinks has doubled across all age groups in the US. The pros of implementing a "lifestyle tax" on soft drinks would be that it would hopefully reduce calorie consumption, recoup some of the costs that taxpayers and governments have to pay into health/medical expenses, and the tax revenue could be used to promote/implement health activities. The con is that it would unfairly impact people with lower income and people who are not obese, could lead to job loses and unemployment in the soda industry, and the fact that policy makers are inappropriate trying to implement social change through the tax system.

    Not the same scenario, but similar...

    I know soda is not the ONE and only reason why health care costs are so high.... but it is one small attempt to reduce how much soda we as a nation are consuming.

    I'm on the fence here. It's a change, but people don't like that. They don't want to be told what to do. They want the freedom to drink and eat what they want.

    It's hard.
     

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. futuremathsprof,
  2. CaliforniaRPCV,
  3. Clement K. Rudder,
  4. MissCeliaB,
  5. K1teach
Total: 263 (members: 6, guests: 233, robots: 24)
test