Mayor Bloomberg 's controversial ban on large, sugary sodas fell flat Monday when a judge shredded nearly every legal argument advanced by the mayor’s lawyers and tossed the regulation out.
The sweeping ruling, a day before the ban was to take effect, was a stinging setback for Bloomberg, who won national acclaim in pushing the regulation — and condemnation that he was creating a nanny state.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling dismissed the rule as “arbitrary and capricious,” with too many loopholes and exemptions, siding with soda companies and business groups that had taken the city to court.
Tracing the Board of Health’s powers more than 300 years to the late 1600s under Britain’s King James II, the judge said the city agency simply had no authority to issue it. Only the City Council had that power, he said. “One of the fundamental tenets of democratic governance here in New York, as well as throughout the nation, is the separation of powers. . . . No one person, agency, department or branch is above or beyond this,” the judge said.
Judge Milton A. Tingling put the kibosh on Mayor Bloomberg's ban one day before it was to go into effect.
The rule “would not only violate the separation of powers doctrine, it would eviscerate it,” the judge said.
The rule would have banned sales of sugary sodas larger than 16 ounces by restaurants, movie theaters, pushcarts and sports arenas. (read the whole article here)
Personally, I find it curious that, if Bloomberg wanted to limit the intake of sugary drinks, there was no exemption for sugar-free drinks.
They served and sacrificed for the many,
Because those who call their orders - not the generals, but those who REALLY call the shots higher up - wanted to sacrifice the many for the few. Themselves.
I'm also not a fan of platitudes.
I and many before me, sacrificed themselves for the many. My father sacrificed, and was at Normandy Landings in 1944 for the many.
All that tells me is that your objectivity is at jeopardy. I'm not saying what you did wasn't worthwhile or that it wasn't heroic by some standards, if you will, but in the end any war is fought for the sake of a few at the top who'd rather send their many expendable pawns to fight and die over land/money/oil/religion than themselves. The "sake of the many" is, more often than not, a pretense.
Actually, ich spreche flüßig Deutsch, mein Lieber.
This "you would be talking german/japanese/russian/etc if not for bla bla bla" is again, nothing more than a platitude.
Your heavy-handed assumption of my heritage and knowledge of languages is just a blatant insult and the Achilles' heel of your argument(, or lack thereof).
I generally have nothing against personal attacks, given as long as they come with actual content too, and not just on their own. You did sadly just that. Without being able to defend your points or debunk mine, you show there's nothing left to discuss then. I already told you I don't think of your father's sacrifice as null, but you're not content with that, what you clearly want, no demand, is worship. A generic army-boy who lacks objectivity, and thinks his daddy was the greatest hero in history.
As a side note for the future, google translate is not a reliable tool to make your point. Nimm's mir nicht Übel ;)
The point was you being able to learn German, in a free society, and that you don't have to speak German, because of the sacrifices of the few.
You had a point? I thought it was one of those generic redneck-reflex answers you throw at other Americans if they don't agree with you, like "if you don't like it why dontcha get out?!"
Again you're making assumptions about me, but let's leave that aside. Americans don't have to speak German. Yes, so? What's your point? That doesn't mean anything. You "have to speak" English because the English settled in America. Had the Russians settled first you'd have to speak Russian now, but it wouldn't bother you, would it? No, because you'd be Russian. If some Chinese had settled, you'd speak Chinese. If people from Sweden did, you'd be speaking Swedish. Had the Germans won you'd speak German, and? You'd most likely BE German, or be raised under their indoctrination, so it wouldn't bother you, just as your current indoctrination doesn't bother you speaking English.
There is nothing that makes your particular culture and your language superior to those of others, and claiming so makes you look like an arrogant racist.
You 're just one of those biased army-kids, who were never introduced to another ideology than whichever one their own household subscribed to and think their particular nation is best and coolest out there (which isn't?).
Buy a plane ticket and see some other cultures for once. The world doesn't just consist of your little microcosm of existence. The bubble is bigger.
Bad For Your Health
I know, it's dumb.
But "Now, for something completely different..."
Until you pay the taxes which go towards health care for these people.
Which could be you. No matter how healthy you seem to be, things can happen. Your insurance can deny your claim or you reach your insurance's limit, or you can't afford the copay you need to cough up before the insurance will start paying.
The public ends up paying for you whether through taxes or higher medical costs when they need help.
True, but as a distinction without much difference. As a group, obese people cost the health care system substantially more than fit people. Statistically and actuarially speaking, even individuals of the former group have a much higher probability of being supported by the latter than vice versa. This can happen either through taxes or insurance payments, but in essence it is the same thing as seen from the payer's perspective.
I do have a problem when public tax money is paying for healthcare, and opinions are, "it's my body my choice".
All the better reason to try very very hard not to get sucked into a situation like that. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Or to come at it from another angle, if you give up responsibility for something you necessarily give up authority/control over it too, even if it's something rather personal. (Any imbalance between the two will be temporary.) I would bet that if the government started down the road of health fascism with this rationale, at least half of the people screaming for single payer today would reverse course. But by then it will be too late; there won't be any choice but to accept health care--with all those strings attached--from the busybodies.
Yeah, right - drugs in every crevice of New York City, so let's ban large soft drinks, maybe we can win that one --
How about exempting people who are maintaining a good body weight and low blood pressure. They could have a license to drink whatever they want in whatever quantity they want. That at least would create an incentive to get in shape and be healthy. Some people can metabolize almost anything and maintain a low body weight.
I just had my first can of Coke in about 4 months. It was good. Much happy I am.