Calories on Menus

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Minstrel said:
This is begging the question, though maybe my initial question was unclear. You support drugs being illegal, but I'm asking why making that illegal isn't "nanny state."



There's been no real evidence that anyone caused an accident from excessive pot usage, though. Essentially the only ill effects on society from marijuana usage is to the individual.

Yet, no one is suggesting making french fries illegal. You feel mandating posting the calorie count for them is excessive government regulation, but outright banning marijuana isn't. That seems surprising to me.
Click to expand...

I've gone over my drug stance before, so I won't repeat it here. I'll just say that marijuana is probably the mildest drug and not really the one I was addressing. However, anything that slows your reflexes or alters your perception when you're behind the wheel isn't a good thing.

I'm not saying my drug/alcohol stance is entirely consistent--there are too many issues at stake.
 
speeds said:
Perhaps not consciously. Salads on menus, especially chicken Caesars and the like, can have surprisingly huge calorie totals. So can meals geared towards children.

Besides, many of these chains are already putting low-cal, low-carb sections on their menus. The changeover will hardly be noticeable.

The more information unhidden the better.
Click to expand...

I'm with speeds on this one.

Where's the harm? It costs the restaurants next to nothing and it provides consumers with information to make better decisions.

Too bad it costs us $1T in new taxes and a bunch of other worthless and misguided stuff to get something like this done.
 
Denny Crane said:
I'm with speeds on this one.

Where's the harm? It costs the restaurants next to nothing and it provides consumers with information to make better decisions.

Too bad it costs us $1T in new taxes and a bunch of other worthless and misguided stuff to get something like this done.
Click to expand...

There's all kinds of stuff that the government does that isn't harmful. However, that doesn't mean they should do it. Gee, Denny didn't you just chastize me for not being enough of a Libertarian?
 
The constitution fully considers that we have a congress with the power to make laws. I don't see one iota of harm to either personal or economic Liberty here, so where's the beef (and how many calories in it?)

In fact, I see more personal and economic Liberty with this law because people can be more informed consumers.
 
Denny Crane said:
The constitution fully considers that we have a congress with the power to make laws. I don't see one iota of harm to either personal or economic Liberty here, so where's the beef (and how many calories in it?)

In fact, I see more personal and economic Liberty with this law because people can be more informed consumers.
Click to expand...

I operate on the idea that laws are the last refuge to solve a problem. I prefer fewer laws to more laws. I also look at this as a burden to restaurants to calculate what the content is. Twenty outlets sounds like a lot, but there are loads of restaurant groups that size. Furthermore, those that own franchises have an extra cost to calculate that count. Finally, there is a legal cost to make sure the count is accurate. What if someone sues?

To me, it's akin to banning smoking from restaurants. If there were a hue and cry from the population, then let the market settle it. Restaurants that wanted the non-smoker business would ban smoking; those that wanted it would continue to allow smoking.

If restaurants think they can gain customers from calculating calories, then let them do it. But don't force restaurants to do it. This is supposed to be a free society, where you have to accept the consequences of your actions. If you keep trying to protect the stupid, you only enable them further.
 
I operate on the idea that laws are made by Citizens in government to promote the General Welfare of We the People. Those laws should be colorblind and otherwise non-discriminatory in any way.

I don't see the calories means squat to the restaurants. You like the food, you eat there. If you care about counting calories, you pick stuff on the menu that fits your diet.
 
i dont see the big deal....OMG THE NUMBER OF CALORIES ARE LISTED OMG WE ARE COMMIES OMG
 
ehizzy3 said:
i dont see the big deal....OMG THE NUMBER OF CALORIES ARE LISTED OMG WE ARE COMMIES OMG
Click to expand...

In isolation it's not a big deal. My point is it's none of the government's business. And I'm a proponent of small government. When we look to the government to solve our problems, we reject personal responsibility and give up a little bit of our freedom.
 
well, its now the government's business to keep everyone healthy now that they will be a stakeholder in healthcare.
 
westnob said:
What about parents that feed their kids too much greasy food?
Click to expand...

Exactly right. Where does the nanny state stop? I think the first question the government should ask itself before beginning any legislation is, "Is this any of our business?"
 
maxiep said:
Exactly right. Where does the nanny state stop? I think the first question the government should ask itself before beginning any legislation is, "Is this any of our business?"
Click to expand...

Well you said yourself, that an obese person is harming themselves. Would encouraging your children to be obese, a harmful state, not be bad?
 
westnob said:
Well you said yourself, that an obese person is harming themselves. Would encouraging your children to be obese, a harmful state, not be bad?
Click to expand...

Sure it's bad, but it's not the business of the government to make that judgment.
 
maxiep said:
Sure it's bad, but it's not the business of the government to make that judgment.
Click to expand...

I suppose smoking is still legal. But providing cigarettes to a minor is illegal, nay? I can imagine a state where one must be 18 to eat "greasy/salty food"
 
westnob said:
I suppose smoking is still legal. But providing cigarettes to a minor is illegal, nay? I can imagine a state where one must be 18 to eat "greasy/salty food"
Click to expand...

I don't want to imagine a state where the government assumes the role of the parent. If parents make poor choices for their kids, that's their right to do so.
 
maxiep said:
I don't want to imagine a state where the government assumes the role of the parent. If parents make poor choices for their kids, that's their right to do so.
Click to expand...

How about if the poor choices kill the kid? Meaning not greasy food, but religious disbelief in medical care. Had a recent case of that here in PDX, I believe the parents got jail time for killing the kid.

Personally, I'm not sure. A little natural selection might be good for the species.

barfo
 
barfo said:
How about if the poor choices kill the kid? Meaning not greasy food, but religious disbelief in medical care. Had a recent case of that here in PDX, I believe the parents got jail time for killing the kid.

Personally, I'm not sure. A little natural selection might be good for the species.

barfo
Click to expand...

There has to be a clear line. IMO, that line is only imminent death and physical abuse. Christian Scientists aren't murderers; they're people of faith. They love their kids, too.

It would be my hope that the community or their neighbors step in far before the government does. We've lost the idea that the informal social structures in a community help support it. Churches, fraternal organizations, etc. used to provide the majority of the help people needed. Now, it's all about the government. IMO, we're a poorer nation for it.
 
maxiep said:
There has to be a clear line. IMO, that line is only imminent death and physical abuse. Christian Scientists aren't murderers; they're people of faith. They love their kids, too.

It would be my hope that the community or their neighbors step in far before the government does. We've lost the idea that the informal social structures in a community help support it. Churches, fraternal organizations, etc. used to provide the majority of the help people needed. Now, it's all about the government. IMO, we're a poorer nation for it.
Click to expand...

These people were in a church, and their fellow churchmembers not only didn't stop it, they encouraged them to continue.

barfo
 
barfo said:
These people were in a church, and their fellow churchmembers not only didn't stop it, they encouraged them to continue.

barfo
Click to expand...

Hence, the "imminent death" part of my post.
 
I think this great news. You can't even find nutritional information at half of the fast foods places I go to. Requiring the restaurants to post the information lets me make informed decisions on the products I'm buying.
 
I want a law that says everybody in Congress has to make public their weight, BMI, blood pressure, HDL levels, blood sugar, pulse rate, etc. They should also have to inform us of the prescription medines they take, how many cocktails they drink, whether or not they smoke, and what they have for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Without this information, how can we know if our representative form of government is actually "healthy" or not?
 
Last edited:
J~Rush said:
I think this great news. You can't even find nutritional information at half of the fast foods places I go to. Requiring the restaurants to post the information lets me make informed decisions on the products I'm buying.
Click to expand...
I think the government should also force car manufacturers to post information about the rubber in their tires--what country it came from, how many acres of forest had to be cleared to produce it, how many indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands because of it, how much wildlife was destroyed . . .

How else can I make an "informed" decision when I purchase my car?
 
Shooter said:
I think the government should also force car manufacturers to post information about the rubber in their tires--what country it came from, how many acres of forest had to be cleared to produce it, how many indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands because of it, how much wildlife was destroyed . . .

How else can I make an "informed" decision when I purchase my car?
Click to expand...

along the lines of this silly idea, I had thought a good website would be listing how local are various products/restaurants. That way you can find out which companies you can support because they are helping our local economy. Seems patriotic to me.
 
Shooter said:
I think the government should also force car manufacturers to post information about the rubber in their tires--what country it came from, how many acres of forest had to be cleared to produce it, how many indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands because of it, how much wildlife was destroyed . . .

How else can I make an "informed" decision when I purchase my car?
Click to expand...
Sounds like a fantastic idea.
 
Shooter said:
I think the government should also force car manufacturers to post information about the rubber in their tires--what country it came from, how many acres of forest had to be cleared to produce it, how many indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands because of it, how much wildlife was destroyed . . .

How else can I make an "informed" decision when I purchase my car?
Click to expand...

Good idea. They could put it online and people could look it up if it mattered to them. I suppose it could all be printed on the tires, but then you'd have to bend down to read it...and when you bend over, that's when the government...
 
Shooter said:
I think the government should also force car manufacturers to post information about the rubber in their tires--what country it came from, how many acres of forest had to be cleared to produce it, how many indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands because of it, how much wildlife was destroyed . . .

How else can I make an "informed" decision when I purchase my car?
Click to expand...

That's an excellent idea. Personally I ride my bike everywhere. If people had more data at their disposal to see what kind of effect they were making when they purchase a new car they might be more inclined to buy a used car, a bike, or even a bus pass instead. It's a win for everyone involved.
 
They should stop putting the calories on canned food, and the ingredients too. That's just government control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top