17
   

Mayor Bloomberg proposes super-sized soda ban

 
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 07:57 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
the critics were never going to buy Coke.


Coke had been around for many generations and will be around for many more and it is hardly poison no matter what the people who think the government should be our mothers, opinion happen to be.
tsarstepan
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 08:18 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
the critics were never going to buy Coke.


Coke had been around for many generations and will be around for many more and it is hardly poison no matter what the people who think the government should be our mothers, opinion happen to be.

Do you even understand the word, moderation? This is exactly like the gun reform issue. No one is calling for the complete ban of all guns as No one is calling for a COMPLETE BAN on soda. Yet the critics of reform ARE LITERALLY MAKING THAT COUNTERARGUMENT. Government involvement needs to come in when the private sector is forcing its message of hedonistic gluttony, eg: A commercial where a single person guzzles from a 2 liter bottle like it's air.

Fine. If the person is an adult then go ahead drink a 4 or 5 or 6 liters a day if you must but when it bites you in the 150+ pounds overweight, don't come running to Medicaid or Medicare for help. BUT YOU KNOW IT AND I KNOW IT. This idiot who binges on this crap now and suffers later will not stay away. He'll be a terrible burden on the system and it's not like he hasn't been warned. Apparently if it were upto you, he wouldn't even be warned about the dangers of drinking too much crap sugar. You're argument is based MERELY on the fact that all government should stay clear of it all and let the soda industry go by unregulated. Let them say that 2 liters a day of Coke will prevent all illnesses including cancer. Sure, it's an outright lie but hey! It's the moral right of major corporations to explicitly lie if it helps their profit margin.

Also, the major point of this entire thread was the notion that even if the ban never passed and never came around that the government push on this issue helped bring the public health issue to the forefront of the news and the public eye. That an informed public is likely to lean towards moderation, (the ULTIMATE GOAL of this whole policy) then an uninformed public. I said this. Firefly said this. Others have said this. And you and the critics have not only ignored this, you pushed on with your erroneous claim that all government intervention means is a complete ban.

You're right. Coke, a MULTIBILLION dollar conglomerate will be around after the dust settles from this single city policy. They after all have emerging markets to exploit. New markets where they can create dependent superobese armies of sugarwater consumers. New markets where education is a very low priority, understanding of health issues is at premedievel levels, and the desire to become like those gluttonous westerners is pretty damn high. Coca-Cola will be fine as it likely remain a multibillion dollar profiteer for generations to come.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 08:30 am
@tsarstepan,
Quote:
Do you even understand the word, moderation?


You might wish to read my other postings on this thread where I had address the issue of too large amounts being consume of coke or even water for that matter.

However this is just an attacked on a company that had been putting out a non-poison product for generations because some people had used bad judgments on the amount they consume.

That does not reflect badly on the product however in any way any more then if some people drive a car at a 100 MPH is a reflection on that made of cars.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 10:14 am
@BillRM,
At least car manufacturers have the foresight to put engine governors on their cars to lower the maximum speeds of their cars.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 10:40 am
@tsarstepan,
Quote:
At least car manufacturers have the foresight to put engine governors on their cars to lower the maximum speeds of their cars.


Oh? There are cars you can buy from a dealership that will go a 140 MPH or so without doing anything to the engine just off the show room floor.

ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 11:00 am
@BillRM,
and little black boxes that can be tracked

it's really quite awesome what they're doing with cars these days
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 12:09 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
At least car manufacturers have the foresight to put engine governors on their cars to lower the maximum speeds of their cars.


Oh? There are cars you can buy from a dealership that will go a 140 MPH or so without doing anything to the engine just off the show room floor.



WOW! You're are easily duped by marketing. Laughing Just because a car has a speedometer that reads 140MPH doesn't mean it can ACTUALLY drive that fast. I've read plenty of car review magazines that indicate the difference between what the car's ACTUAL top speed and what the speedometer claims. I also bet you give 100% to what the car manufacturer claims as their car's respective fuel economy.

Engine governors are designed into the car's engine design. I believe their main raison d'etre is for raising a car's given fuel economy numbers rather then actually lowering the car's max speed which 99% of the people driving the cars will never have the opportunity to ever drive the speed at.
BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 12:33 pm
@tsarstepan,
http://www.thesupercars.org/fastest-cars/fastest-cars-in-the-world-top-10-list/

Here are 10 of the fastest street legal cars available in the market (production models, as opposed to concept or modified cars) these are tested, measured and verified top speeds (theoretical speeds do not count).World's Fastest Cars:

1. Bugatti Veyron Super Sport: 267 mph (429 km/h), 0-60 in 2.4 secs. Aluminum, Narrow Angle 8 Liter W16 Engine with 1200 hp, base price is $2,400,000. Although the Bugatti Veyron lost the title to SSC Ultimate Aero on March 2007, Bugatti challenged the record in Germany on July 10, 2010 with the new Super Sport and the Bugatti Veyron reclaimed the title of the fastest car in the world at 267 mph. The original Bugatti Veyron had a top speed of 253 mph, priced at $1,700,000 with 1001 hp.



#2 is a tie at 260 mph!

2. Hennessey Venom GT: 260 mph (418 km/h), 0-60 mph in 2.5 seconds, has a 6.2-liter LS9 Turbocharged V8 Twin Turbo V8 Engine producing 1200 hp, with a price tag of $950,000. The Venom GT has yet to be tested and proven, but could possibly hit a top speed of 275 mph. This might just be the Veyron Super Sport's closest challenger!



2. Koenigsegg Agera R: 260 mph (418 km/h), 0-60 mph in 2.9 secs. 5.0-liter V8 Engine with twin turbo’s, housing 1099 hp. Base price is $1,600,000. If you're into snow sports, the Agera R can be fitted with a Ski Box as well as winter tires. While the Agera R has a massive theoretical top speed, the current tested top speed is 260 mph. Expect this snow car to be the Bugatti's arch enemy for the next 5 years.

Also a tie for #3.

3. SSC Ultimate Aero: 257 mph (413 km/h), 0-60 in 2.7 secs. Twin-Turbo V8 Engine with 1183 hp, base price is $654,400. Tested in March 2007 by Guinness World Records, The SSC Ultimate Aero was the fastest car in the world from March 2007 to July 2010. On March 2011, the Koenigsegg Agera R also surpassed it, forcing this American made car to the #3 spot. Shelby SuperCars will continue their quest to reclaim the fastest car title, and their new SSC Tuatura might do the job (we'll just have to wait).



3. 9ff GT9-R: 257 mph (413 km/h), 0-60 in 2.9 secs. The 4.0 Liter flat-6 Twin-Turbo Engine with 1120 hp, comes with a base price is $695,000. Based on the Porsche 911, the 9ff GT9-R 1120 hp version is limited to 20 units and the exterior may be modified to suit the owner.



4. Saleen S7 Twin-Turbo: 248 mph (399 km/h), 0-60 in 2.8 secs. Twin Turbo All Aluminum V8 Engine with 750 hp, base price is $555,000. Smooth and bad-ass. It will make you want to show it off non-stop.



5. Koenigsegg CCX: 245 mph (394 km/h), 0-60 in 3.2 secs. 90 Degree V8 Engine 806 hp, base price is $545,568. Made in Sweden, it is the older brother of the Agera R, only losing to 4 other supercars in the world.



6. McLaren F1: 240 mph (386 km/h), 0-60 in 3.2 secs. BMW S70/2 60 Degree V12 Engine with 627 hp, base price is $970,000. The fastest car in the 20th century with doors that looks like bat wings. Maybe Batman needs to order one and paint it black

7. Zenvo ST1: 233 mph (374 km/h), 0-60 in 2.9 secs. Twin-Charged 7.0 liter V8 Engine forging 1,104 hp. Base price: $1,225,000. The first Supercar from Zenvo Automotive, a Danish sports car company in pursuit of speed and perfection. This 100% Danish made supercar is limited to 15 units and the company even promised "flying doctors" to keep your baby functioning.



There is a tie for 8th place at 225 mph.

8. Gumpert Apollo: 225 mph (362 km/h), 0-60 in 3.0 secs, 4.2 liter V8 Engine that houses 650 hp. Base price: $450,000. Gumpert claims that the Apollo was designed such that it could drive upside-down in a tunnel with speeds at 190 mph or above. Of course, no one has tested this yet.

8. Noble M600: 225 mph (362 km/h), 0-60 in 3.7 secs. Twin-turbocharged 4.4-liter V8 Engine with 650 hp. Base price is $330,000. The Noble M600 also happens to be a very cool car. Its inconspicuous design sports a slender and contoured body which does not scream out for attention at every second of the day.

There is a 3-way tie for #9!

9. Aston Martin One-77: 220 mph (354 km/h), 0-60 in 3.4 secs. 7.3 litre V12 Engine with 750 hp. Base price: $1,850,000. The production of this is limited to 77, hence the name One-77. This is beauty and power packed into One.



9. Ascari A10: 220 mph (354 km/h), 0-60 in 2.8 secs. 5.0 litre BMW V8 S62 Engine with 625 hp. Base price: $650,000. The company planned to produce 50 of these supercars at its factory in Banbury, England.

9. Lamborghini Aventador: 220 mph (354 km/h), 0-60 in 2.9 secs. V12 Engine with 700 hp, base price is $379,700. According to Lamborghini, Aventador is the name of a Bull that entered into battle at the Saragossa Arena on October 1993. This is the fastest bull in the world!



We have another 3-way a tie for 10th place:

10. Pagani Zonda Cinque Roadster: 217 mph (349 km/h), 0-60 in 3.4 secs. Twin turbocharged AMG V12 engine that produces 678 hp. Base price is $1,850,000. The Pagani Zonda Cinque Roadster is a limited-edition, with five ever produced. It is the quintessential exotic and exclusive supercar.

10. Ferrari Enzo: 217 mph (349 km/h), 0-60 in 3.4 secs. F140 Aluminum V12 Engine with 660 hp, base price is $670,000. Only 399 were ever produced; the price goes up every time someone crashes.

10. Jaguar XJ220: 217 mph (349 km/h), 0-60 in 3.8 secs. Twin Turbo V6 Engine with 542 hp, base price was $650,000. Made in 1992, this car still has what it takes to make the list.



Share this:

2K+


More
Comments
468 comments

tsarstepan
 
  4  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 12:37 pm
@BillRM,
You really are an idiot Bill. I wasn't talking about supersports cars. WHERE in my statement did I say EVERY car was restricted? Are you that autistic to have to read EVERYTHING in front of you in literal terms?

Clearly I was talking about the average mass produced car that the average driver would drive around in. I don't have the time and patience to delineate every single detail to every aspect of what I'm writing. You don't have to do too much reading between the lines, you just aren't supposed to go to the extremes and assume I am arguing from the other extreme.

Once again, you have proven my point by going to the goofy extreme and FAILED TO UNDERSTAND the definition and sentiment behind moderation. You're pretty thick.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 12:57 pm
@tsarstepan,
Quote:
Clearly I was talking about the average mass produced car that the average driver would drive around in. I don't have the time and patience to delineate every single detail to every aspect of what I'm writing.


There is no large scale build in restrictions on cars speeds at any price range and many many cars can break a 100 MHP or more.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 01:50 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
However this is just an attacked on a company that had been putting out a non-poison product for generations because some people had used bad judgments on the amount they consume.

It's not just the fact that some people are consuming excessive amounts, and are being encouraged by vendors to consume excessive amounts (and it's the vendors that NYC's super-sized soda ban is aimed at), so that they are taking in more calories, it's also the types of calories in these sugary beverages that have particularly undesirable effects in terms of public health. Their high glycemic load contributes to an increased risk of diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and heart disease--and such increased risk can be seen even when only one or two servings a day of sugary drinks are part of an otherwise healthy diet for a woman of healthy weight--Fung TT,Malik V, Rexrode KM, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sweetened beverageconsumption and risk of coronary heart disease in women. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2009;89:1037-1042.

Those sorts of research findings have already been posted in this thread, but you apparently haven't bothered to read them. You should familiarize yourself with the literature if you'd like to understand why there is so much focus on these sugary drinks. They really aren't good for you in any amounts, but you can limit the damage somewhat by restricting both frequency of intake, as well as serving size.

And you seem to have completely missed the point when you say that Coca-Cola is being attacked because some people used bad judgment in the amounts they consume. Well, it was Coca-Cola who encouraged consumption of those excessive amounts by greatly increasing the serving/bottle size of their product over the years, so they were certainly an active participant in promoting bad judgment in order to increase their profits.

And their current ad campaign, alleging their corporate commitment to healthy lifestyles and obesity reduction, really deserves to be attacked because it is deceitful. If they really wanted to be honest, about what's best for health, they'd have to advise people not to drink their sugary beverages, and probably their artificially sweetened ones as well, at all, or to have them as infrequently as possible, and in the smallest amounts possible.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 07:27 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
ell, it was Coca-Cola who encouraged consumption of those excessive amounts by greatly increasing the serving/bottle size of their product over the years, s


Sorry it was not coke that begin increasing the sizes of the soda bottles it happen to had been pepsi trying to get market share from coke that started that process in motion and coke was given the choice of matching pepsi or going out of business as that what the consumers desire.

Shame on companies giving the consumers what they desire and not acting like big brother like the major of NY.

Quote:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/09/new_york_city_soda_ban_when_did_soft_drinks_get_so_big_in_the_first_place_.html

In the 1930s. At the beginning of the Great Depression, the 6-ounce Coca-Cola bottle was the undisputed king of soft drinks. The situation began to change in 1934, when the smallish Pepsi-Cola company began selling 12-ounces bottles for the same nickel price as 6 ounces of Coke. The move was brilliant. Distribution, bottling, and advertising accounted for most of the company’s costs, so adding six free ounces hardly mattered. In addition, the 12-ounce size enabled Pepsi-Cola to use the same bottles as beer-makers, cutting container costs. The company pursued a similar strategy at the nation’s soda fountains, selling enough syrup to make 10 ounces for the same price as 6 ounces worth of Coca-Cola. Pepsi sales soared, and the company soon produced a jingle about their supersize bottles: “Pepsi-Cola hits the spot, 12 full ounces, that’s a lot. Twice as much for a nickel, too. Pepsi-Cola is the drink for you.” Pepsi’s value-for-volume gambit kicked off a decades-long industry trend.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jan, 2013 07:54 pm
@BillRM,
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2013 12:26 am
@firefly,
Quote:
It's not just the fact that some people are consuming excessive amounts, and are being encouraged by vendors to consume excessive amounts (and it's the vendors that NYC's super-sized soda ban is aimed at) so that they are taking in more calories, it's also the types of calories in these sugary beverages that have particularly undesirable effects in terms of public health.

and the entity that is whining about this is the government, this being the same government that has long encouraged us to consume much more government than anyone is willing to pay for, which has left us in desperate financial ill health.

That is so rich!

These bums should stick to their day jobs until/unless they get that figured out....

firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2013 10:36 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
and the entity that is whining about this is the government

Actually it's the public health/medical community that is most concerned, and most vocal, about the negative health risks of consumption of sugary beverages.

Governments, like NYC, are simply responding to the research findings, and the public health problem, by public education campaigns and initiatives like the super-size soda ban.

This isn't very different than what went on with cigarette smoking. The government acted on the basis of research findings, they put warning labels on cigarette packs, and raised taxes on the product. In addition, municipalities, like NYC, began instituting smoking bans to limit where smoking could take place--another Bloomberg initiative that became widely adopted all over the country. It was all done to discourage and decrease smoking because it constituted a public health hazard. And the efforts worked.

The government didn't just whine about cigarettes, they took action. And Bloomberg's not just whining about sugary beverages, he's taking action.

That leaves you to do the whining... about the government.

BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2013 12:12 pm
@firefly,
.
Quote:
And Bloomberg's not just whining about sugary beverages, he's taking action.



Yes treating adults citizens as children an acting like a parent to them.

Oh and using a government board that the voters can not vote out of power if they wish to.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jan, 2013 02:33 pm
Quote:
ONE of the puzzles of the modern world is why we humans are growing so tubby. Maybe these two mice offer a clue.

They’re genetically the same, raised in the same lab and given the same food and chance to exercise. Yet the bottom one is svelte, while the other looks like, well, an American.

The only difference is that the top one was exposed at birth to just one part per billion of an endocrine-disrupting chemical. The brief exposure programmed the mouse to put on fat, and although there were no significant differences in caloric intake or expenditure, it continued to put on flab long after the chemical was gone.

That experiment is one of a growing number of peer-reviewed scientific studies suggesting that one factor in the industrialized world’s obesity epidemic (along with Twinkies, soda and television) may be endocrine-disrupting chemicals. These chemicals are largely unregulated — they are in food, couches, machine receipts and shampoos — and a raft of new studies suggest that they can lead to the formation of more and larger fat cells.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/opinion/sunday/kristof-warnings-from-a-flabby-mouse.html?hp&_r=0

NO, NO, NO, NO......we can't have science mucking up governments excuse for controlling what we eat and drink!






or showing that government is incompetent.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Jan, 2013 08:08 pm
Soda Ban Opponents Now Include the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation
http://newyork.grubstreet.com/2013/01/soda-ban-opponents-incle-naacp-hispanic-federation.html?mid=grubstreet--20130123
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 10:29 am
UPDATE!
NYC soda ban hits restaurants Tuesday
NYC soda ban on large, sugary drinks goes into effect Tuesday, and restaurants are making the necessary adjustments. Some are ordering smaller glasses, while others are having customers sweeten their own coffee to comply with the NYC soda ban.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0311/NYC-soda-ban-hits-restaurants-Tuesday?nav=91-csm_category-leadStory
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:14 pm
@tsarstepan,
UPDATE ON A UPDATE:
[UPDATE] NYC Soda Ban Halted As Judge Obeys Thirst For Justice
http://gothamist.com/2013/03/11/judge_stops_bloombergs_soda_ban.php
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Immortality and Doctor Volkov - Discussion by edgarblythe
Sleep Paralysis - Discussion by Nick Ashley
On the edge and toppling off.... - Discussion by Izzie
Surgery--Again - Discussion by Roberta
PTSD, is it caused by a blow to the head? - Question by Rickoshay75
THE GIRL IS ILL - Discussion by Setanta
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 12:11:40