r33d33
10-09-2010, 04:43 PM
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/happy_meal_san_francisco.php
From a couple days ago, but I thought it was interesting.
Supervisor Eric Mar's proposal to take the toys away from Happy Meal-like menu items that don't meet city-imposed nutrition standards ignited an Internet firestorm. Today we'll see if it can do the same in the flesh.
I think this is too much government but a friend of mine said this:
I find it hilarious that you guys can cite yourselves as good examples of responsible parents or people and run with that as a reason that foods from fast food restaurants like McDonald's shouldn't be regulated a little bit.
What's so wrong about putting something like a calorie limit on each item (which they actually scrapped, so it's a moot point)? Or requiring recyclable toys? Or healthier options?
Stop it with the "too much gobment" crap and think about the issue itself. Is McDonald's healthy? No. It's a part of a direct cause of obesity, not only in North America, but now globally. Can their menu be adjusted to be healthier? Yes. Are they taking the steps they need to? Yes and no. They've done some things, but they haven't gone far enough. Like most companies selling unhealthy foods, their adjustments have been marketing-heavy and results-light. In other words, the changes have mostly been made for profits sake (and you can't really expect more from a corporation). That's where government regulations are needed to help curb obesity and all the health related issues associated with that. Just think how much lower health care spending would be if the citizens weren't so damn obese. America is the fattest developed nation in the world and Canada, contrary to popular belief, is not that much better with 60% overweight and increasing.
Besides, it's not like the government is banning McDonald's itself. They're just trying to make McDonald's more responsible toward the health of citizens.
And it's not so much about people not knowing that McDonald's is bad for you, it's just that it's so affordable, you just end up eating there from time to time (or in some people's case, every friggin day). Keep in mind that affluence also changes where you can afford to dine. Poor people eat at McDonald's more often, with some even depending on their cheap menu and routinely eating meals there (usually lunch).
There's nothing wrong with making corporations more responsible.
From a couple days ago, but I thought it was interesting.
Supervisor Eric Mar's proposal to take the toys away from Happy Meal-like menu items that don't meet city-imposed nutrition standards ignited an Internet firestorm. Today we'll see if it can do the same in the flesh.
I think this is too much government but a friend of mine said this:
I find it hilarious that you guys can cite yourselves as good examples of responsible parents or people and run with that as a reason that foods from fast food restaurants like McDonald's shouldn't be regulated a little bit.
What's so wrong about putting something like a calorie limit on each item (which they actually scrapped, so it's a moot point)? Or requiring recyclable toys? Or healthier options?
Stop it with the "too much gobment" crap and think about the issue itself. Is McDonald's healthy? No. It's a part of a direct cause of obesity, not only in North America, but now globally. Can their menu be adjusted to be healthier? Yes. Are they taking the steps they need to? Yes and no. They've done some things, but they haven't gone far enough. Like most companies selling unhealthy foods, their adjustments have been marketing-heavy and results-light. In other words, the changes have mostly been made for profits sake (and you can't really expect more from a corporation). That's where government regulations are needed to help curb obesity and all the health related issues associated with that. Just think how much lower health care spending would be if the citizens weren't so damn obese. America is the fattest developed nation in the world and Canada, contrary to popular belief, is not that much better with 60% overweight and increasing.
Besides, it's not like the government is banning McDonald's itself. They're just trying to make McDonald's more responsible toward the health of citizens.
And it's not so much about people not knowing that McDonald's is bad for you, it's just that it's so affordable, you just end up eating there from time to time (or in some people's case, every friggin day). Keep in mind that affluence also changes where you can afford to dine. Poor people eat at McDonald's more often, with some even depending on their cheap menu and routinely eating meals there (usually lunch).
There's nothing wrong with making corporations more responsible.