San Francisco: Taking the Happy Out of Happy Meals

http://health.usnews.com/health-new...law-may-ban-toys-in-unhealthy-kids-meals.html

I love this comment:

Thank you government. Now I don't have to act like a parent. You get to be the bad guy when my kids get fucked out of a a toy at McDonald's. Thanks again.

If I wrote this kind of shit in a book 50 years ago, nobody would have believed it.

San Francisco hates children!

1. They don't want children to have toys.
2. They don't want the children making the toys in other countries to be able to save up and improve their lot in life - they want them unemployed!

San Francisco: Where Sodomy is Encouraged, But Cheap Toys Kids in Thrid World Countries Would Kill For Are Outlawed

How about we put them in plain brown boxes and call them 'Contentment Snacks'? Or we could just kick every fifth child in the face.

What the fuck San Francisco?

I never thought I'd see the day when the world of Demolition Man would really happen.

It's enough to make me want to MurderDeathKill someone.

I do believe that this is a



Linky

to San Francisco.

Is it really that hard allow parents to be fucking parents? For fuck's sake, the Happy Meal already comes with more heath-friendly options these like like juice and milk instead of soda and chicken nuggets over hamburgers. If the parents choose to buy the bad shit to get their brat to shut the fuck up for an hour, that's hardly the business of California.

Call me when this state fixes a real problem, like how to get the state budget balance.

:deathofcaesar:

If Nancy ain't happy, all the little children of the world ain't gonna be happy... so there!

While I agree that the government needs to butt the fuck out, parents need to stop taking their goddamn kids to McDonalds in the first place! The food is pure shit and poison to growing little bodies.

McDonald's shrewdly puts toys in their Happy Meals cause they know the little greedy brats are going to bug mommy and daddy insane until they take them to get their toy, which also includes greasy fries that don't decompose and a hockey puck hamgurger.

Any parent who willingly takes their child to McDonald's should be beaten severly.

Hang on a minute, the deal is make the meal healthier for children and the toy stays....and people are saying this is bad??

Making meals healthier for children isn't bad. The government mandating it is terrible.

Interfering with voluntary transactions and protecting people from their own irresponsible behavior are always bad.

McDonalds allows people to buy most Happy Meal toy items separately from a meal nowadays.

At any rate,between parents plunking their brats down in front of the TV after school and schools having all but removed recess and P.E. out of the schoolday, McDonalds is far from the biggest guilty party about the childhood obesity problem.

But a child is not of the same capacity of an adult...and if, as has been discussed in other threads, there is serious bad parenting, what other way is there of looking out for the health of the country's children?

According to your scientists America's latest generation is likely to live a shorter life then their parents due to poor diet. So if the parents don't do anything about it, what other choice is there but to target food ratilers?

Impose serious consequences for being a negligent parent. Go after individuals. Remove the kids and throw the parents in prison for the more extreme cases. Don't take the lazy way out and fuck with everyone's freedom.

Like I said, punish the parents, take control of the kids. Make nutrition a strong part of any education. But after a certain point-say roughly the age of sexual consent just for argument's sake-an individual should be expected to make wise use of the information they were provided and not kill themselves slowly with fast food. If they won't do that, fuck 'em (not to circle back to sexual consent or anything). Let Darwin sort them out.

How do you punish the parents?

Your kid's a fat fuck. Enjoy the next five years in State-Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prision.

It is not the government's place to dictate our health or lack thereof. Period. "Think of the children!" is just an excuse for a nanny state.

Natural selection.

How do we punish anyone who harms another human being out of malice or negligence? Fines, community service, and incarceration.

Before you ask that next question, re-read what I've already posted.

Ooh! Good point! We could have a parent license. And people that get their parent license revoked have their kids confiscated to be raised by the State in government-run programs.

Passing laws like this ought to be a capital offense with the idiot gov't officials hung the day they pass shit like this.

Does that not amount to state involvement in parenting? In other words you are criticising the state for telling a corporation to sell healthier food, but advocating the state telling people how to raise their children.

Now, I don't agree with state involvement in either scenario, but between dictating to parents and dictating to corporations the latter seems by far the lesser of two evils and more morally sound than the former.

Agreed, but that better be some kind of demonstrable harm, and not just a tubby kid. That isn't really punishment worthy.

But if you're going to legislate where a child's weight is concerned, less is better. If there are health problems which are consequences of a bad diet, which resulted from parental negligence, then they have to pay for those out of pocket, and/or suffer the higher private insurance premiums that go along with their lifestyle choices. No "on the dole" help.

That's the problem with having the government underwrite healthcare. It's an open door to dictating everything about your health, including where you can and cannot eat lunch.

Unhealthy food = voluntary transaction.
Negligent parenting = child abuse.

Invalid comparison. You do not have the right to actively harm your kids, but you absolutely do have the right to buy and sell unhealthy food.

That's because you succumb to the temptation to villify corporations, because they're faceless and have deeper pockets.

The mandate to do right by your children exists independent of any formal legal code.

There is nothing "moral" about interfering in voluntary transactions in the attempt to protect some children from the negligence of their parents. If some parents are fucking up, go after them and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

But they have no problems profiting off of parent's stupidity, and it's the kids who suffer.

But if the transaction is involutary how does it then amount to the government telling people how to live?

So, a parent has a mandate to do right by it's child, but society does not have to do right by its citizens?

Oh and why do I succumb to the temptation to villify corporations? I support the free market. I'm a fucking Tory for shit's sake!

You really need to get out of the habit of drawing baseless conclusions. But then, I suppose telesales isn't a job that much angages the brain during the average working day.

SF, has some of the most extreme left leaning people in the nation I think.

I think it would be funny if McDonald's created the Unhappy Meal which met all the demands of SF. Then post notices that McDonald's in surrounding areas still carry Happy Meals.

I think it should also be noted, that this is the same area that has provided the country with people like Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi.