Comments on: More on Bloomberg’s drink ban, and liberty

By: n.n

n.n — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:31:15 +0000

The greatest challenge most people face during their lives is to understand their own mental and physical functions. People cannot reasonably exchange liberty for submission with benefits and hope to succeed in this fundamental task.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:33:36 +0000

Neo, your idea of the well meaning liberal in your last paragraph doesn’t really exist because you attach self sacrifice to their character traits.

When have you ever seen a person ask the government to protect them from their own vices? I only see this sort of controlling behavior extolled among the voting population when the vice belongs to someone else. I seriously doubt that the people in favor of banning large sodas actually buy large sodas.

It is only when government tramps on the rights which directly affect them that they sit up and say “wait”.

By: Simon

Simon — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 04:01:35 +0000

I find myself ambivalent on this issue, but I asked my wife and she said it was ridiculous. She’d rather have a tax on them, like cigarettes. Either that or get rid of corn subsidies. That makes sense to me.

By: Artfldgr

Artfldgr — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 02:50:16 +0000

And when someone makes a 15.9 oz container, how far down will they inch it to claim to be properly under 16oz?

By: progressoverpeace

progressoverpeace — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 02:45:39 +0000

I’d be amazed if Obama ever had a course in calculus. which is SO fundamental to modern technology.

Barky the Dog-Eater’s mention of “profit AND earnings ratios” showed that he doesn’t even understand the simple fact that division or ratios are NEVER translated to “AND”, which is something that pretty much any normal American 8th grader knows. Clearly, Barky has problems with simple arithmetic with fractions. His later idiotic claim that ObamaCare “will reduce monthly premiums by 3000%” showed that he has no clue, whatsoever, about percentages. Again, he showed that he has the mathematical sophistication of a slow 8th grader, if that.

Barky would have been lucky to even get close to 420 on the math section of his SATs. He is an idiot. A true idiot.

By: progressoverpeace

progressoverpeace — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 02:37:14 +0000

I’m talking about the more numerous well-meaning (oh, save us from the well-meaning!) liberals who think sacrificing their liberty to buy a supersized Coke is a very small price to pay for increased health,

Those “well-meaning” leftists who do buy supersized Cokes rarely want to limit that liberty. “Well-meaning” leftists seem to have the uncanny luck of only wanting to restrict those liberties they don’t often use, themselves.

People should have seen all this coming after the left went absolutely insane over smoking and trampled every right in the book (including the most important foundation of individual liberty – private property rights) in order to promote their smoking bans. The public health argument using asinine second-hand smoke stories (which was the 7th in the line of arguments used against smoking) was the most ridiculous, though most effective. Evidently, we can work in coal mines and by sewer lines but to work in a smoky bar is just beyond the pale.

I would note that your faith in “well-meaning” leftists is easily tested by finding out how many leftists who rant and rave about needing higher taxes send in extra money to the government(s) in order to make their own voluntary tax rates the level at which they are trying to force on others. Related to this is that your standard “well-meaning” leftist doesn’t even donate to private charity at anything near the rate that conservatives do, and the hated religious conservatives, most of all.

Leftism is almost always about control … when it’s not about plain ol’ nihilism. I leave you with the tag line for a leftist-inspired car commercial – I can’t remember the company or the exact line, but it ended with some idiotic line about environmental impact: “The best impact is having none at all.” This … is where the “species that not only adapts to its environment but that adapts its environment to its needs” has now been dragged. It’s sad.

The percentage of actual “well-meaning” leftists is insignificant. Most leftism is driven by nothing more than the petty emotions of deranged personalities.

By: Occam's Beard

Occam's Beard — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:44:02 +0000

J.J., that’s crazy talk.

Seriously, it sounds like an outbreak of common sense.

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:20:33 +0000

I R A Darth Aggie: LOL

By: I R A Darth Aggie

I R A Darth Aggie — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 22:57:51 +0000

SO…how will Nanny Bloomberg keep one of his wards from calling up Papa John’s and ordering an extra large meat lover’s pizza, and a 2 litre bottle of Coke? ban the sale of 2 litre bottles? put your food allotment on a card, and when you hit your allotment for the week or month, you’re cut off?

I can see it now: you’re walking in New York, and a shady looking dude approaches you and asks if you’d like to score a little coke.

Nose candy, or stomach candy?

😉

By: J.J. formerly Jimmy J.

J.J. formerly Jimmy J. — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 22:50:48 +0000

If everyone had to pay for their own healthcare, would that be an incentive to try to stay healthy? IMO, it would. Eat right, exercise, and try to follow good health practices (good dental hygiene, safe sex, etc.). If insurance companies were allowed to set premiums by how healthy a person is and people knew how much they could save by taking responsibility for better health, wouldn’t that lead to better outcomes? And without the loss of freedom and choice. The government could then concentrate on defense, law enforcement, protecting property rights, and other such trifles rather than controlling how much sugar we eat. But of course, all that would not allow the elites to control the bitter clingers. It’s just too much to ask.