Appeals court upholds ruling striking down NYC’s large soda ban
A state appeals court Tuesday upheld a lower court decision blocking the mayor’s controversial ban on sugary drinks over 16 ounces, ruling that the Bloomberg-controlled Board of Health had overstepped its powers.He's not too happy, is apron strings Mike.
Bloomberg, in a statement, called the Appellate ruling a “temporary setback” and vowed to appeal the matter to the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals.You have to wonder about the mental state of someone like this. To doggedly persist with hugely unpopular Alice in Wonderland-esque rules while also being publicly humiliated by the US court system is, well, the behaviour of a deranged psychopath, surely?
Still, what with plain packs being shelved, minimum pricing being ditched south of the border, and the Danish fat tax disaster finally being scrapped back in April, 2013 is becoming an incredibly bad year for increasingly absurd prohibitionist extremists. Happy days for us though.
Oh yeah, talking of the Danish fat tax, news just in from New Zealand.
Auckland University nutrition expert Professor Cliona Ni Mhurchu told the Science Media Centre that Denmark's saturated fat tax, which was in place for a year, reduced consumption of targeted fats by 10 to 15 per cent, but such schemes had to be carefully studied before introduction. "It is important to assess substitution effects to know whether or not food taxes have positive effects on the whole diet as opposed to just the targeted foods."I presume they mean the huge fall in sales after the tax ... prompted by huge hoarding prior to the tax.
 |
| Yes, it's another public health lie (do they ever tell the truth?) |
Prof Cliona seems to have forgotten, however, to mention that the Danish fat tax was one of the most comprehensive legislated fiscal and societal disasters from any developed nation in the past few decades.
Insane. Quite unutterably insane, the lot of them.
5 comments:
They still haven't adequately explained why they think everyone else's diet is any of the government's damned business in the first place. So we might end up healthier. What's that to them? Am I missing something here? Do politicians get bonus points for a healthy electorate?
I mean, okay, in Britain, the general health of the public is the taxpayers' business thanks to the stupid communist way the healthcare business is organized here. (You might almost think that this was the whole idea.) That's just an argument for doing it more sensibly, though. It might end up killing fewer people, too. But what's Bloomberg's angle? Does he think he'll get more babes if he makes everyone in New York miserable, bored, and poor but, goddamit, healthy, or what? (“Hey, honey... see all those people on the unemployment line scowling at each other? I forced 'em to be healthy. Oh yeah, that was me.”) I just can't figure out how these people's minds work.
Yep, just another disaster amongst the many that just goes to prove, the lunatics really have taken over the asylum!
You and me both.
The Australian Gov keeps saying that the smoking rate is down to 15%, and yet I keep reading that Australia has one of the worst smoking rates in the world. Does anyone know which is the truth?
Whatever.
There i
Dear Government
Please stay the hell out of my fridge and leave well alone my right to shove whatever I like down my craw in whatever quantity I see fit. It's food, it isn't crack or PCP but food, it is probably the one last enjoyable thing that *isn't* illegal at least not yet.
Yours sincerely,
A rational adult capable of feeding myself and forming an opinion about what I should and shouldn't eat without the need for a nanny or state legislation on how to do so.
When I did my tax return recently, dietary advice was not
high on the list of things I wanted for Xmas..
Pork barreling is supposed to be about extra pork not taxing pork because it is tasty and full of delicious fatty goodness.
Post a Comment