Bush Administration prefers profits over fitness??

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
did anyone see the episode of CNN's crossfire with james carville and some republican ( he was in congress or from the heritage foundation ) ?

You had caville with an ORGANICALY GROWN TOMATO and the "R" had a box of mcdonalds fires.

the "R" kept aguing that the box of fries was better for you than carvilles tomato. after a few minutes of talking carville gave up. it was the first time i have ever seen him give up.

honestly why are soo many "R"'s keep craming this down our throats ( yes pardon the pun )?

Why don't you get with the program you pinko bastard? Those were American Freedom Fries, and you dare compare them to some fruity organic tomatoes? The tomatoes are even red, the color of Communism!

Zephyr
 

myusername

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2003
5,046
0
0
tuition to Lord Fontleroy's School for pretetious little Bastards!
Actually, Bush's tax cut has allowed me to funnel more money into the prentious little bastards trust funds..MUHAHAHHAHA

and it's Little Lord Fauntleroy's School of Prentious Bastards - please, get it right.

don't you mean "pretentious"?
 
Feb 3, 2001
5,156
0
0
Hey, what you eat is up to you. If you're stupid enough to buy into the idiotic commercials and the crap that fast food places sell, too bad for you. I don't think the government has *any* place telling them what kind of food to sell so long as they comply with basic health regulations. Parents need to take responsibility for what their kids eat. They kids don't have the money to make the choice, let alone the sense of what's good for them.

Not that most adults seem to know or care any better ;)

Jason
 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,833
515
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: glugglug
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
US questions global obesity planThis only about WHO pushing for lower recommended daily levels of sugar, salt and fat. It's not forcing anybody to abide by them! I mean if you want to be a fat obese slob who looks ridiculous when out in public because the seat of your pants looks like there are two cats fighting in them when you walk down the street the Government isn't going to prevent you!

Nor should they. What's your point?
That this Administration is reluctant to endorse WHO's recommendation out of fear that it may alienate the lobbyist for the Fast Food Industry


Hehe, if this administration said "drink milk, its good for you" Then everyone would scream that they are pandering to the dairy industry. If they said "dont smoke, it's bad for you" people would scream that it was just an attempt to cull votes with the anti smoking people.

It doesnt matter what anyone does anymore, theres always gonna be someone crying and pretending thay are psychic and "know" what someone's motives are.

Want less fat people? Get rid of tv, computers and video games. People knew a lot less about nutrition when I was a kid and there were a lot less fat lazy kids.

Hell, I remember when kids actually rode bicycles to school! Imagine that! Now I go to pick up my kids and they have no racks and there are usually 2 or 3 bikes chained to a fence. It's freakin sad.
 

Ultima

Platinum Member
Oct 16, 1999
2,893
0
0
Hehe, if this administration said "drink milk, its good for you" Then everyone would scream that they are pandering to the dairy industry. If they said "dont smoke, it's bad for you" people would scream that it was just an attempt to cull votes with the anti smoking people.

It doesnt matter what anyone does anymore, theres always gonna be someone crying and pretending thay are psychic and "know" what someone's motives are.

Want less fat people? Get rid of tv, computers and video games. People knew a lot less about nutrition when I was a kid and there were a lot less fat lazy kids.

Hell, I remember when kids actually rode bicycles to school! Imagine that! Now I go to pick up my kids and they have no racks and there are usually 2 or 3 bikes chained to a fence. It's freakin sad.

So why don't you buy your kids bikes? I biked to school only 10 yrs ago, I doubt things have changed drastically since then.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Ultima:

I'm afraid they have in most parts of the country. I'd put one of my kids on a Computrainer or wind trainer, but keep them off the roads. Americans gave up being civil on the highways about 20 years ago and it gets worse daily.

By way of example, I stopped riding on the roads here in Florida about 4 years ago with the exception of the bike lane around my development. (a 5K ride) However, in the space of two days last year I was hit on Friday while in the bike lane and almost killed by one of my neighbors the following day. Since then my training has been limited to the Computrainer, Van Fleet Trail, and racing. My training partner still rides the same loop but rides in the middle of the lane, not the bike lane. You cannot cede one inch to motorists or they WILL kill you.

Don't let your kids on the highway on a bike unless you know it is safe and Jankowicz (sp?) is nowhere around. :)

-Robert, who has been hit 6 times in Florida alone. :(

Edit: Oh, I see you live in Canada. You respect bikers up there from what I hear. Many nice bike paths. Not so here.

 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
chess9:

I see you are in Orlando.
Orlando has the worst drivers in the world, no contest. Even in a car it's the most frustrating drive anywhere. On the plus side, you are not likely to be killed because almost noone there goes above 30mph on the highway, or 10mph or other streets. My insurance prices went down moving from Orlando to Brooklyn, even though the coverage requirements here are 18 times higher, because statistically Orlando apparently has more than 18x more accidents per capita.

Most areas are nowhere near as bad.
 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,833
515
126
Originally posted by: Ultima
Hehe, if this administration said "drink milk, its good for you" Then everyone would scream that they are pandering to the dairy industry. If they said "dont smoke, it's bad for you" people would scream that it was just an attempt to cull votes with the anti smoking people.

It doesnt matter what anyone does anymore, theres always gonna be someone crying and pretending thay are psychic and "know" what someone's motives are.

Want less fat people? Get rid of tv, computers and video games. People knew a lot less about nutrition when I was a kid and there were a lot less fat lazy kids.

Hell, I remember when kids actually rode bicycles to school! Imagine that! Now I go to pick up my kids and they have no racks and there are usually 2 or 3 bikes chained to a fence. It's freakin sad.

So why don't you buy your kids bikes? I biked to school only 10 yrs ago, I doubt things have changed drastically since then.


You want my 5 year old to cross major thoroughfares on a bicycle?

Tuesday Ill take pics of where the bikes are parked at my kids school. Tomorrow they get a day off.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Fat America costs money
ATLANTA (Reuters) - The cost of treating health problems caused by the U.S. obesity epidemic reached an estimated $75 billion last year, with taxpayers picking up about half the tab, according to a study released on Tuesday.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study was made public on the same day that the United States succeeded in stalling a global obesity-control plan promoted by the World Health Organization (news - web sites).

Backed by its powerful food industry, the United States called on Tuesday for more study of the U.N. agency's plan, which urges cutting the intake of sugar, salt and artery-clogging trans-fatty acids and suggests governments promote healthier eating through subsidies and the tax system.
Hmm abstinence good, marriage good, gorging on unhealthy food is . . . good?

 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,833
515
126
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Fat America costs money
ATLANTA (Reuters) - The cost of treating health problems caused by the U.S. obesity epidemic reached an estimated $75 billion last year, with taxpayers picking up about half the tab, according to a study released on Tuesday.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study was made public on the same day that the United States succeeded in stalling a global obesity-control plan promoted by the World Health Organization (news - web sites).

Backed by its powerful food industry, the United States called on Tuesday for more study of the U.N. agency's plan, which urges cutting the intake of sugar, salt and artery-clogging trans-fatty acids and suggests governments promote healthier eating through subsidies and the tax system.
Hmm abstinence good, marriage good, gorging on unhealthy food is . . . good?


hahaha

Sooo, people that eat crappy food will be deterred by taxes? Thats total crap. If people are so stupid they cant decide to take care of themselves by eating right do they deserve to be contributing to the genepool?

Next thing you know they will earmark the money for healthcare. But the money will supposedly be coming from taxes that are there to deter people from buying the crap. So any expected monies raised will be based on a theoretically declining tax base.

I'm confused.