No pop for you! Bloomberg to ban Big Gulps.

[Jacob]

Bloomberg proposes banning the sale of all drinks over 16 oz if hey contain sugar. And he has the audacity to claim: "I don’t think you can make the case that we’re taking things away."

How can he get away with this crap?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1wSYid4gQ

And the law wouldn't even require the approval of the voters or their elected officials:

Because the rule will come in the form of an amendment to the city's health code and not a law, it will not have to be approved by the City Council or any governing body aside from the Board of Health before it is put into effect.

[Uncle Ted]

Bloomberg proposes banning the sale of all drinks over 16 oz if hey contain sugar. And he has the audacity to claim: "I don’t think you can make the case that we’re taking things away."

How can he get away with this crap?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1wSYid4gQ

And the law wouldn't even require the approval of the voters or their elected officials:

I wouldn't be surprised if 7-Eleven (and others) are the ones actually pushing for this given their profit margins are better on 16 oz soft drinks. Of course, they wouldn't limit the number of 16 oz drinks one could buy.

[Jacob]

I wouldn't be surprised if 7-Eleven (and others) are the ones actually pushing for this given their profit margins are better on 16 oz soft drinks. Of course, they wouldn't limit the number of 16 oz drinks one could buy.

Sort of. The likely results is that the consumer simply has to pay more for the same amount of drink they want.

But I don't think you are quite right about the margin. Not sure anyway. The soda costs the gas station so little, that they'd prefer to sell you a 32 oz drink rather than a 16 oz drink, even if the price increase is only 25%.

[Pheidippides]

Wrong approach. Tax the hell out of it and smaller sizes as well. NYC already does that with cigarettes.

[Moliere]

So now a person will just buy two 16oz drinks and a 32oz cup and pour the drinks into the larger cup the second they walk out the door of the 7-11. Politicians are so stupid.

Niku has it right. If you want to ban sugary drinks, tax the sale of them not matter the size.

[falafel]

How easy is it to change the tax code in a state? Does it need notice and comment?

Also, this would leave it up to the 7-11 employee to police whether your 32 ounce soda is diet or regular coke. Can't do that with just an eye test. In other words, this isn't being enforced.

[Pheidippides]

How easy is it to change the tax code in a state? Does it need notice and comment?

Also, this would leave it up to the 7-11 employee to police whether your 32 ounce soda is diet or regular coke. Can't do that with just an eye test. In other words, this isn't being enforced.

NYC can probably change their own city taxes. They did on cigarettes, as any smoker there knows. No need for the state. No clue what the process is but they change taxes all the time in places, so that's not really an argument against it.

Tax the hell out of it and similar stuff, and put the money to use in health care. This would be an appropriate response to that particular externality.

[falafel]

NYC can probably change their own city taxes. They did on cigarettes, as any smoker there knows. No need for the state. No clue what the process is but they change taxes all the time in places, so that's not really an argument against it.

Tax the hell out of it and similar stuff, and put the money to use in health care. This would be an appropriate response to that particular externality.

Do you only tax sugar sodas? Same enforcement problem. Is that Coke or Diet Coke? I saw you splash a little Coke at the top, buddy!

[Jacob]

NYC can probably change their own city taxes. They did on cigarettes, as any smoker there knows. No need for the state. No clue what the process is but they change taxes all the time in places, so that's not really an argument against it.

Tax the hell out of it and similar stuff, and put the money to use in health care. This would be an appropriate response to that particular externality.

An appropriate response, really? Is there good reason to think that banning sugary sodas would have a significant effect on obesity in the population or health care costs in general? I doubt it.

If you are concerned about obesity, I assume it is because the obese are contributing to significant increases in health care costs. Assuming that's the externality you are referring to, wouldn't a more effective way to offset that cost be to allow insurance companies to charge obese people more for health coverage, rather than passing a law that, in effect, taxes thin/healthy people to subsidize the health care costs of the obese (again, assuming I've understood the externality you are talking about).

[Pheidippides]

Do you only tax sugar sodas? Same enforcement problem. Is that Coke or Diet Coke? I saw you splash a little Coke at the top, buddy!

Why don't you sit down and write a letter with all of your lawyerly bullshit concerns and send them to Bloomberg? He will probably care more.

[Pheidippides]

An appropriate response, really? Is there good reason to think that banning sugary sodas would have a significant effect on obesity in the population or health care costs in general? I doubt it.

If you are concerned about obesity, I assume it is because the obese are contributing to significant increases in health care costs. Assuming that's the externality you are referring to, wouldn't a more effective way to offset that cost be to allow insurance companies to charge obese people more for health coverage, rather than passing a law that, in effect, taxes thin/healthy people to subsidize the health care costs of the obese (again, assuming I've understood the externality you are talking about).

You doubt it. I don't. I think you're wrong, as usual, which is fine because i expect you reciprocate. Also, and please take your time to get back to me on this, how many thin and healthy people do you think drink sugary or even other sodas and in what quantities when compared to obese people? Please consider your answer in light of the apparent fact that soda comprises a larger percentage of the American diet, as measured by calories, than any other food, and the general overall weight of the population.

I don't particularly dislike your insurance idea, though, other than the fact that it's politically difficult to do (IMO) and insurance is broken in ways that are beyond my feeble brain's ability to understand.

[falafel]

Why don't you sit down and write a letter with all of your lawyerly bullshit concerns and send them to Bloomberg? He will probably care more.

I wasn't trying to attack your points. I thought we were having a discussion about the problems with the law in general.

[Paperback Writer]

An appropriate response, really? Is there good reason to think that banning sugary sodas would have a significant effect on obesity in the population or health care costs in general? I doubt it.

If you are concerned about obesity, I assume it is because the obese are contributing to significant increases in health care costs. Assuming that's the externality you are referring to, wouldn't a more effective way to offset that cost be to allow insurance companies to charge obese people more for health coverage, rather than passing a law that, in effect, taxes thin/healthy people to subsidize the health care costs of the obese (again, assuming I've understood the externality you are talking about).

Basically, what's being proposed is a "fat tax". I shouldn't have to point out that the whole purpose of health insurance is for the "healthy" to subsidize the "unhealthy". Rather than just single out the obese, why not require genetic profiles so that higher insurance rates can be charged not only to the obese but to those who are genetically unlucky. It's also known that women and children spend more health care dollars than others so why shouldn't they pay more?

[Katy Lied]

Maybe Niku's having a rough day.


I think inactivity is a huge contributor to obesity. Even more than too much food. In line with banning large sodas, we should also do the following:

Install treadmills in every obese person's home, and force them to log 1-6 hours a day, or throw em in jail.
Outlaw busses and cars. Everyone can walk.
Outlaw all elevators. Take the stairs.
Institute a poll tax of $1 per pound. Paid annually.
No benches or chairs in public places. Everyone can squat or stand.

[smokymountainrain]

Maybe Niku's having a rough day.


I think inactivity is a huge contributor to obesity. Even more than too much food. In line with banning large sodas, we should also do the following:

Install treadmills in every obese person's home, and force them to log 1-6 hours a day, or throw em in jail.
Outlaw busses and cars. Everyone can walk.
Outlaw all elevators. Take the stairs.
Institute a poll tax of $1 per pound. Paid annually.
No benches or chairs in public places. Everyone can squat or stand.

As a guy who could stand to lose a few, I wouldn't mind a few of these ideas as a kick in the pants. I can back those in bold. A free treadmill would be a good start for my fat ass.