Well I see what you're saying, but in reality and practical terms, if tomorrow all drugs became legal, over the long term what would be the result? And no prohibition or repealing it isn't the same correlation. Hard drug use would increase and as a result, crime would shift from selling and trafficking related crime to individual crime and addiction would rise. Slippery slope doesn't account for real life examples.. but mere assumption or projection of things based on nothing but fear.. not fact.
Well sorry to rain on the parade, but in our society, that isn't practical or realistic. Poverty, violence and crime would all result over the long haul. So unless we want civil unrest and the downfall of our society, I don't think that's the best scenario or option to select.
"Do what thou wilt and hurt none shall be the whole of the law."
why does legal drug use = civil unrest and the downfall of our society? kind of a slippery slope argument there
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
.
One could definitely argue that the involvement by government is a good thing, but I don't think you can argue that the government isn't more involved now than it was before
you are right, society has changed, but that doesn't really disprove that the government has become more involved in our daily lives. Some like it, some just aren't bothered by it, and some see it as a problem...but you cannot deny that it is happening.[/quote]
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Jesus christ I don't understand people anymore. Lets just make everything illegal or controlled somehow...
if you don't want to eat salty foods, buy fresh meat, fruit, vegetables, starches, etc. Shop for stuff that has zero or low sodium. There is plenty of it out there. We don't need to tell Tubby McButterpants that he can't have a double cheeseburger and a gallon of fries with 20,000 mg of sodium. If that is what he wants to eat, fine. NONE of our business.
If that is what he eats, THAT is why there is a market for it. No need to punish the vendor either, unless you're all for social engineering. You know, like Hitler.
:evil:
I guess some people need to be told how to eat and live
Do you not see the correlation between people's health (or not taking care of themselves) and why our entire national healthcare system is messed up? It's one of the largest factors. So simply saying your below comment, isn't a true or realistic reflection of this situation.
I guess some people need to be told how to eat and live
Godfather.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Well I see what you're saying, but in reality and practical terms, if tomorrow all drugs became legal, over the long term what would be the result? And no prohibition or repealing it isn't the same correlation. Hard drug use would increase and as a result, crime would shift from selling and trafficking related crime to individual crime and addiction would rise. Slippery slope doesn't account for real life examples.. but mere assumption or projection of things based on nothing but fear.. not fact.
Well sorry to rain on the parade, but in our society, that isn't practical or realistic. Poverty, violence and crime would all result over the long haul. So unless we want civil unrest and the downfall of our society, I don't think that's the best scenario or option to select.
why does legal drug use = civil unrest and the downfall of our society? kind of a slippery slope argument there
right but everything you said is based on fear and assumption. You have no idea if addiction would increase nor do you know that using would increase any more than I do. It is an assumption. Individual crime may increase, but so would police department resources to fight said individual crimes so who knows what the end result would be. Imagine how many more resources we would have on the streets if the feds didn't have a WHOLE AGENCY devoted to drug enfrcement.
I don't think drugs are the worst thing society has to worry about, nor do I care if my neighbor is a coke head. It isn't my life so I really don't care, I say enjoy the coke. I think alcohol addiction causes as many problems as any drug addiction would if it were legal.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Do you not see the correlation between people's health (or not taking care of themselves) and why our entire national healthcare system is messed up? It's one of the largest factors. So simply saying your below comment, isn't a true or realistic reflection of this situation.
I guess some people need to be told how to eat and live
Godfather.
I was joking.
but I do think we have taken this in a whole other direction, people that want more salt will get it
just because there could be government restriction on salt amounts used in processed food doesn't mean that
people will not add their own once cooked.
Not really though - any city or area where there has been a rise in drug use or addiction things like crime and poverty follow. I don't think my correlation between the two was that much of a stretch at all. And if you don't think having more drug addicts in society is an issue, I don't know what to tell you. And yes alcohol is no better or worse, just merely socially/morally more acceptable for whatever the reason. Also and to bring us full circle, if laws pertaining, drinking age or drinking and driving or limits, etc weren't on the record, don't you think there would be more alcohol related problems in society? I think we could probably all agree yes, so it the singular actions of individuals does effect the greater group.
right but everything you said is based on fear and assumption. You have no idea if addiction would increase nor do you know that using would increase any more than I do. It is an assumption. Individual crime may increase, but so would police department resources to fight said individual crimes so who knows what the end result would be. Imagine how many more resources we would have on the streets if the feds didn't have a WHOLE AGENCY devoted to drug enfrcement.
I don't think drugs are the worst thing society has to worry about, nor do I care if my neighbor is a coke head. It isn't my life so I really don't care, I say enjoy the coke. I think alcohol addiction causes as many problems as any drug addiction would if it were legal.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I was joking.
but I do think we have taken this in a whole other direction, people that want more salt will get it
just because there could be government restriction on salt amounts used in processed food doesn't mean that
people will not add their own once cooked.
Godfather.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
So let me get this straight - from people who actually know - please. Is "the government" proposing to...
...require the manufacturers of processed foods to make the public aware of how much salt they add to the food they make available to us?
...require restaurants to make the public aware of how much salt they add to food they serve?
...limit the amount of salt corporations can add to the processed foods they make available to us?
...limit the amount of salt that restaurants can add to the food they serve?
...limit the amount of salt you can add to your own food at a restaurant?
...limit the amount of salt you can add to your own food in your own home?
...limit the amount of salt you can purchase at the store?
The government is requiring nothing at this time. They asked manufacturers to voluntarily reduce the sodium very gradually over time.
What nerve! How dare this fascist administration ask manufactureres to voluntarily make their foods healthier!! :roll:
I just heard on the radio that the government wants to put a limit on the salt you use...Resturantes,ETC.
anybody hear anything else on that, is it another one of those "RIGHTS" going down the toilet thing's cause our government thinks we're too stupid to take care of our selfs ?.....what's their angle on this, fines new taxes what ? sounds like bullshit to me.
Apparently New York wants to make it illegal for any restaurant to use salt as an ingredient in ANY DISH! Can you imagine being a pastry chef, but not being allowed to use salt in the recipe? The customers would have to add their own salt after the dessert is already finished. Eww...
Not really though - any city or area where there has been a rise in drug use or addiction things like crime and poverty follow. I don't think my correlation between the two was that much of a stretch at all. And if you don't think having more drug addicts in society is an issue, I don't know what to tell you. And yes alcohol is no better or worse, just merely socially/morally more acceptable for whatever the reason. Also and to bring us full circle, if laws pertaining, drinking age or drinking and driving or limits, etc weren't on the record, don't you think there would be more alcohol related problems in society? I think we could probably all agree yes, so it the singular actions of individuals does effect the greater group.
Well I see what you're saying, but in reality and practical terms, if tomorrow all drugs became legal, over the long term what would be the result? And no prohibition or repealing it isn't the same correlation. Hard drug use would increase and as a result, crime would shift from selling and trafficking related crime to individual crime and addiction would rise. Slippery slope doesn't account for real life examples.. but mere assumption or projection of things based on nothing but fear.. not fact.
yet you give us nothing but conjecture, projections and fear-based assumptions.
Your statements are 100% opinion – no facts. You sound like a DARE cop with your statements about prohibition. The claims you make are hardly uncontested. In fact, most of the data I’ve seen contradict them.
But forget the stupid fucking stats, they never get this argument anywhere…
You say that the slippery slope doesn’t account for real life….exactly what is real life about your practice of holding people to a standard of zero toxins in their diets and personal habits? It will NEVER happen. In every one of these threads you seem to think if a person does not follow your own personal, rigid lifestyle guideline, they are a detriment to society and unwilling to accept personal responsibility. I don’t know why your rhetoric surprises me tho, since you wished cancer on all smokers before, then spent multiple posts defending that position. Talk about extremism.
As for the OP - I have no problem with food standards....but think there are better ways of going about this. First - make food labels more efficient and easier to read. The average person has no clue what any of that means to them. Get rid of the nutrient chart....break them into groups and give each nutrient/toxin a grade or colour code (hey, works for terror alerts!)...make it easier for people to make an informed decision.
"New York" does not want to make it illegal. That's a pretty big generalization. One nutty legislator wrote it up because his father isn't supposed to eat salt. Any legislator can propose any bill they want for attention, it doesn't mean the whole state "wants it". This'll get voted down quickly.
Your statements are 100% opinion – no facts. You sound like a DARE cop with your statements about prohibition. The claims you make are hardly uncontested. In fact, most of the data I’ve seen contradict them.
But forget the stupid fucking stats, they never get this argument anywhere…
You say that the slippery slope doesn’t account for real life….exactly what is real life about your practice of holding people to a standard of zero toxins in their diets and personal habits? It will NEVER happen. In every one of these threads you seem to think if a person does not follow your own personal, rigid lifestyle guideline, they are a detriment to society and unwilling to accept personal responsibility. I don’t know why your rhetoric surprises me tho, since you wished cancer on all smokers before, then spent multiple posts defending that position. Talk about extremism.
As for the OP - I have no problem with food standards....but think there are better ways of going about this. First - make food labels more efficient and easier to read. The average person has no clue what any of that means to them. Get rid of the nutrient chart....break them into groups and give each nutrient/toxin a grade or colour code (hey, works for terror alerts!)...make it easier for people to make an informed decision.
agreed...
the only thing i can think of that the government should do is to forbid companies to advertise that their food is healthy! when it is shit. Like advertising the hell out of "NO TRANS FAT!"... 'FEWER CALORIES THAN PREVIOUS!"... "LOW FAT" (but high as hell in sugar)... etc etc.
Go to the grocery store and look. Tell me how many food items you can find that aren't advertised as being "healthy" in some regard. Even the damn cookies and potato chips.
People are stupid. People get misled. It doesn't mean we should make everything illegal, but maybe stoping advertisers from cashing in on stupidity is a good move.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
I think it'd be pretty silly to use this as an example of government infringing on rights. This is the government giving you rights back. When the salt is already added to your food, you have no choice. We should definitely cut back to more moderate levels and let people shake salt over their food if they want to kill themselves more quickly.
I agree with you the salt intake thing but why is the goverment getting involved ? they don't do anything
with out a tax or some kind of money changing hands.
Godfather.
uh.....maybe because they believe health care costs could decline by instituting such a thing?
come on man
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Well I see what you're saying, but in reality and practical terms, if tomorrow all drugs became legal, over the long term what would be the result? And no prohibition or repealing it isn't the same correlation. Hard drug use would increase and as a result, crime would shift from selling and trafficking related crime to individual crime and addiction would rise. Slippery slope doesn't account for real life examples.. but mere assumption or projection of things based on nothing but fear.. not fact.
yet you give us nothing but conjecture, projections and fear-based assumptions.
Your statements are 100% opinion – no facts. You sound like a DARE cop with your statements about prohibition. The claims you make are hardly uncontested. In fact, most of the data I’ve seen contradict them.
Moreover, Portugal has decriminalized almost all drugs for nearly the entirety of the past decade, and they have not only reduced the load on their law enforcement and justice systems, overall drug use has gone down.
"It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
I was joking.
but I do think we have taken this in a whole other direction, people that want more salt will get it
just because there could be government restriction on salt amounts used in processed food doesn't mean that
people will not add their own once cooked.
Personally, I'd be really happy to have less salt pre-included with foods. I often get foods that I think are either way too salty or way too sweet. (I wouldn't mind a sugar limit on foods, either, to be honest.) I figure if you personally feel you'd like a bucket of salt with your food, you can do it yourself. And even then, your bucket of salt will add less salt than foods actually infused with the stuff.
I think it'd be pretty silly to use this as an example of government infringing on rights. This is the government giving you rights back. When the salt is already added to your food, you have no choice. We should definitely cut back to more moderate levels and let people shake salt over their food if they want to kill themselves more quickly.
I agree with you the salt intake thing but why is the goverment getting involved ? they don't do anything
with out a tax or some kind of money changing hands.
Godfather.
uh.....maybe because they believe health care costs could decline by instituting such a thing?
come on man
you could be right but ...salt ? that's like micro management in health care when there are far greater concerns with other thing's being sold on the market,what's next sugar ? crap how about caffine ?
I don't know man it just don't sound right to me.
you could be right but ...salt ? that's like micro management in health care when there are far greater concerns with other thing's being sold on the market,what's next sugar ? crap how about caffine ?
I don't know man it just don't sound right to me.
Godfather.
yes SALT. did you read my explanation on why salt is bad for you? and how if these processed foodmakers would limit salt it would make everyone a little healthier? and like i said yes sugar too, sugar causes diabetes, but not as much as high fructose corn syrup, which is being used much more often than sugar these days. do you know why diabetes is bad for you? how about hypertension?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I agree with whoever said this would only give MORE power to the consumer to decide how much salt they want in their food. With all the complaints about our power being taken away, shouldn't we be happy with something that would give us more power? I think it's funny how we only get upset about our power supposedly being taken away by the government, but not by big business. I think it's even more funny/sad that we are so adamant about protecting big business's "right" to fuck us.
Comments
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
you are right, society has changed, but that doesn't really disprove that the government has become more involved in our daily lives. Some like it, some just aren't bothered by it, and some see it as a problem...but you cannot deny that it is happening.[/quote]
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I guess some people need to be told how to eat and live
Godfather.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
right but everything you said is based on fear and assumption. You have no idea if addiction would increase nor do you know that using would increase any more than I do. It is an assumption. Individual crime may increase, but so would police department resources to fight said individual crimes so who knows what the end result would be. Imagine how many more resources we would have on the streets if the feds didn't have a WHOLE AGENCY devoted to drug enfrcement.
I don't think drugs are the worst thing society has to worry about, nor do I care if my neighbor is a coke head. It isn't my life so I really don't care, I say enjoy the coke. I think alcohol addiction causes as many problems as any drug addiction would if it were legal.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I was joking.
but I do think we have taken this in a whole other direction, people that want more salt will get it
just because there could be government restriction on salt amounts used in processed food doesn't mean that
people will not add their own once cooked.
Godfather.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
What nerve! How dare this fascist administration ask manufactureres to voluntarily make their foods healthier!! :roll:
It's a "fines and new taxes thing:" http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2010/03/11/chefs-proposed-new-york-salt-ban-absurd/
Apparently New York wants to make it illegal for any restaurant to use salt as an ingredient in ANY DISH! Can you imagine being a pastry chef, but not being allowed to use salt in the recipe? The customers would have to add their own salt after the dessert is already finished. Eww...
Your statements are 100% opinion – no facts. You sound like a DARE cop with your statements about prohibition. The claims you make are hardly uncontested. In fact, most of the data I’ve seen contradict them.
But forget the stupid fucking stats, they never get this argument anywhere…
You say that the slippery slope doesn’t account for real life….exactly what is real life about your practice of holding people to a standard of zero toxins in their diets and personal habits? It will NEVER happen. In every one of these threads you seem to think if a person does not follow your own personal, rigid lifestyle guideline, they are a detriment to society and unwilling to accept personal responsibility. I don’t know why your rhetoric surprises me tho, since you wished cancer on all smokers before, then spent multiple posts defending that position. Talk about extremism.
As for the OP - I have no problem with food standards....but think there are better ways of going about this. First - make food labels more efficient and easier to read. The average person has no clue what any of that means to them. Get rid of the nutrient chart....break them into groups and give each nutrient/toxin a grade or colour code (hey, works for terror alerts!)...make it easier for people to make an informed decision.
agreed...
the only thing i can think of that the government should do is to forbid companies to advertise that their food is healthy! when it is shit. Like advertising the hell out of "NO TRANS FAT!"... 'FEWER CALORIES THAN PREVIOUS!"... "LOW FAT" (but high as hell in sugar)... etc etc.
Go to the grocery store and look. Tell me how many food items you can find that aren't advertised as being "healthy" in some regard. Even the damn cookies and potato chips.
People are stupid. People get misled. It doesn't mean we should make everything illegal, but maybe stoping advertisers from cashing in on stupidity is a good move.
uh.....maybe because they believe health care costs could decline by instituting such a thing?
come on man
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Moreover, Portugal has decriminalized almost all drugs for nearly the entirety of the past decade, and they have not only reduced the load on their law enforcement and justice systems, overall drug use has gone down.
ha ha I'm in !
Godfather.
you could be right but ...salt ? that's like micro management in health care when there are far greater concerns with other thing's being sold on the market,what's next sugar ? crap how about caffine ?
I don't know man it just don't sound right to me.
Godfather.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."