U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-09-2010, 04:03 AM
 
492 posts, read 716,053 times
Reputation: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPool1998 View Post
Tell me when YOU decided that water should be served from the fountains? When did you grant approval for the milk? The content of the soda machines.

I'm interested in your reply. Everything at your school is a function of the government, from the brand of toilet paper in the stalls to the foreign language curriculum.
no actually it's not, my kids drink bottled water (granted, not better quality but also not this junk that comes out of the sink). My kids drink chocolate milk in school. It is what I order. My kids have never tasted soda, and as far as i am concerned they never will. My kids eat sweets, chocolates, chips in moderation. Just like I have growing up. We're very lean. We're outdoors as much as we can. again, my kids are not government property.
I see obese kids at kids' school. My first thought is not wow how could government allow this? My first thought is: what are their parents thinking. Want government regulating something? How about take the business away from vaccine manufacturers? How about producing safe vaccines. Sure, vaccines do not cause autism, or so we think now. Let's meet 50 years from now and see what has been discovered. Just like lead in paint. It was 'safe' at one point. Now it's not. Want government regulating something? How about bringing the manufacturing of toys from China to our soil. Where we can keep an eye on what crap gets into them. Want more government regulations? How about let's talk about this when you make a dent in this economy, a dent for the better. Why are we talking about this? oR healthcare? Why not talk about unemployed people? People need jobs, not to be told what to eat. a family on brink of filling for bankruptcy doesn't want to hear about what kids should or should not eat. They want to know will they have food on the table since parents are unemployed. Did I answer you?
Oh and yes, I say what vaccine goes or doesn't go into my child's body. Nobody else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-09-2010, 04:32 AM
 
843 posts, read 1,134,274 times
Reputation: 309
Default That's easy...

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlorak View Post
Why are we talking about this? oR healthcare?
.
In essence, you admit that you've played no role in determining what foods are available to your children at school.

We are talking about this because people can discuss more than one thing at a time. We are multi-tasking here, I suppose.

Junk foods at schools and healthcare are related. Type II diabetes IN KIDS is the highest in the world. It is linked to the consumption of government subsidized carbohydrates, like HFC Syrup, white bread, pasta, potatoes. Your kids may not eat them (and that I don't believe), but your neighbor's kids do. If they are without jobs, they plop down at the emergency room when sick. When they don't pay, they bankrupt and their home forecloses. Your home values drop. You get charged indirectly in your taxes and/or hospital charges for your neer do well neighbor. You either pay, or like Saint Vincents, the hospital just pulls out. You have to go 20 more miles for a hospital, and your spouse dies along the way because they couldn't get him/her to an intensive care unit soon enough.

Yes, we need jobs. No, saddling the healthcare system with a lot of fatty time bombs, when small efforts might help reverse trends, doesn't seem like a bad idea. The "Big Government" bogeyman that forced NYC to post calorie counts on fast foods, has found that the result is parents serve their kids reduced calorie meals at these restaurants. Oh No! Big Government!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 06:50 AM
 
3,538 posts, read 4,262,420 times
Reputation: 2400
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72 View Post
with shoes made of cardboard, and we liked it, we LOVED IT, we couldn't get enough of it.
You had cardboard???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 07:10 AM
 
3,155 posts, read 3,555,747 times
Reputation: 1205
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhBeeHave View Post
When the government dictates that you can no longer eat certain foods in an effort to limit the harm you could do to yourself, do you find that acceptable?
this is obviously different from the government regulating what is sold in schools. You're making a pretty big leap here.



Quote:
According to what you've written, the government ought 'to limit the harm they can do to themselves and children' so when does the government step out of the lunchroom and into your shopping cart? Does it require 7-11 to card people in order to buy a buttered roll or candy bar?
another big leap. Do I really need to list all of the things the government already regulates for you? wake up...


Quote:
What about children 50 years ago? We were all out there running about, playing in the grass -- we wanted to be out of the house! We ate breakfast and ran out the door to play. Showed up for lunch and then back outside until dinnertime. Depending on the time of the year, we were outside after dinner, too. We didn't have video games (until later in my case -- Pong wasn't marketed until the mid 70's) or nearly as much access to the processed foods all too readily available today. Yet we see plenty of baby boomers who've had heart attacks (fatal, debilitating or mild), strokes, high blood pressure, diabetes, etc., some of these a result of genetics and the rest the results of unhealthy lifestyles. Does the name Jim Fixx mean anything?
I knew it was only a matter of time before the "back in my day" argument presented itself. I guess you missed the point about how much worse off kids today will be considering their STARTING OUT FAT compared to getting fat when they're older. There's a big difference.

Quote:
If the Obama administration wishes to promote healthy lifestyles, they should stress a longer school day/year to allow for increased physical education and health classes for all to reach any child whose parent is coming up short in promoting healthy choices and exercise.
a healthy diet is part of a healthy lifestyle.




Quote:
True, but what about private schools, parochial schools? Where is the line drawn? Do we ask for student ID at the local deli to buy a bag of pretzels?

If there is a great concern for promoting healthy lifestyles in our children in an effort to create healthier adults, should cigarettes be banned, liquor banished? We all know how well that went over, which is why these vices are heavily taxed.
are those items available to young children? It's kind of a key part of this whole discussion...lol.

Quote:
Why not increase taxes on junk foods, prepared foods, etc., and use those taxes to support health services for the future fatties cardiac infarction crew?
and how does this help kids eat any healthier? It doesn't....

got any other brilliant ideas?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 07:27 AM
 
417 posts, read 394,955 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPool1998 View Post
In essence, you admit that you've played no role in determining what foods are available to your children at school.

We are talking about this because people can discuss more than one thing at a time. We are multi-tasking here, I suppose.

Junk foods at schools and healthcare are related. Type II diabetes IN KIDS is the highest in the world. It is linked to the consumption of government subsidized carbohydrates, like HFC Syrup, white bread, pasta, potatoes. Your kids may not eat them (and that I don't believe), but your neighbor's kids do. If they are without jobs, they plop down at the emergency room when sick. When they don't pay, they bankrupt and their home forecloses. Your home values drop. You get charged indirectly in your taxes and/or hospital charges for your neer do well neighbor. You either pay, or like Saint Vincents, the hospital just pulls out. You have to go 20 more miles for a hospital, and your spouse dies along the way because they couldn't get him/her to an intensive care unit soon enough.

Yes, we need jobs. No, saddling the healthcare system with a lot of fatty time bombs, when small efforts might help reverse trends, doesn't seem like a bad idea. The "Big Government" bogeyman that forced NYC to post calorie counts on fast foods, has found that the result is parents serve their kids reduced calorie meals at these restaurants. Oh No! Big Government!
Did the Federal government require NYC to post calorie counts, or was it NYC on its own that decided to make this law? When people refer to the BIG GOVERNMENT bogey man, it's about the Federal Government's reach. Most people would agree that calorie counts are a good thing, and the decision was made at the right level. This school junk food ban was the right move at the wrong level of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 07:31 AM
 
123 posts, read 31,205 times
Reputation: 19
how much money do parents give thier kids to buy junkfood in school? when i went to school, there were no vending machines BUT we had a lot of fat kids. who was to blame back then? some of them were probably latch key kids and had no parental supervision for a few hours at home while they raided the cabinets. if kids cant buy junkfood at school, theyll get it elsewhere. its not hard to buy a candy bar. its not like its buying drugs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Maryland
2,651 posts, read 2,588,628 times
Reputation: 2259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gpsma View Post
Why do people believe certain foods automatically create fat kids. Fat kids are created by lazy parents who do not make sure their kids are active. To think computers and video games are not a leading contributor to obesity is ridiculous.

Oh, and a bit of advice to all the PC LI soccer moms...the kids can WALK instead of being transported in your new mini-van.
Hello, Gpsma, if the kids walk, then the PARENTS walk. Kids eat junk all day and go home and eat the same junk. How about we unplug the computer, WII or take the gameboy. How about we take our FAT kids for a walk or any activity.

I was a step-mom. Yes, the kids ate junk, but they were active. And, limited time on the computer. GO OUTSIDE!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 08:01 AM
 
6,046 posts, read 6,984,704 times
Reputation: 1860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gpsma View Post
They have help for anorexia.
Ummm...there IS a difference between anorexic and being fit/toned. For starters, I am 5ft. tall, so for me, slightly under 100lbs isn't a big deal. If I was 5'8", then yes, I would probably be anorexic.

But I eat right, and work out, so I have 18% body fat b/c of that...not b/c I am anorexic.

Junk food should be taken out of schools b/c whatever is being sold to kids, kids will buy it. They don't know any better. If schools ONLY have healthy options to sell, the kids really have no choice then, do they?

Most of the people who put down thin people, are fat and just jealous. I used to be heavy- I did something about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 08:13 AM
 
7,260 posts, read 7,404,623 times
Reputation: 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by firefighter55 View Post
Did the Federal government require NYC to post calorie counts, or was it NYC on its own that decided to make this law? When people refer to the BIG GOVERNMENT bogey man, it's about the Federal Government's reach. Most people would agree that calorie counts are a good thing, and the decision was made at the right level. This school junk food ban was the right move at the wrong level of government.
There's really very little difference between big Federal govt and New York state Govt or even NYC government..they are all gigantic bureaucracies. Mcdonalds and most fast food restaurants have had calorie count information available in pamphlets and on their websites for about 20 years now. Then NYC says, "No, we want to FORCE people to see what they are eating!!!"

It's silly. Anyway, 50 calories of white flour bread is far worse for you than 50 calories of chicken, but their little menu boards don't tell you that. People choose to eat things that are bad for them..I just ate a donut because someone brought them in to the office..I know they are terrible for me, but I made the choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Inis Fada
13,694 posts, read 15,379,442 times
Reputation: 4536
Quote:
Originally Posted by S.I.B. View Post
this is obviously different from the government regulating what is sold in schools. You're making a pretty big leap here.
When the government regulates one form of commerce, it's only a matter of time before that becomes established precedent and the government uses that to move onto something else.




Quote:
another big leap. Do I really need to list all of the things the government already regulates for you? wake up...
As you might be able to discern, I believe in a minimal amount of government regulation in our daily lives. As it is the government can't control itself -- do you really want it having more control over you and your children? People were angered by the Patriot Act as an intrusion into their personal lives, but have accepted FDA approved drugs (which have been fast tracked through with insufficient long term studies) that have led to greater health issues (Vioxx anyone?) The cost to us as taxpayers for treatment to individuals who have been sickened by these drugs is immeasurable. Yet some are willing to accept the government involving itself in the cafeteria. They already have gone that route -- back when they tried to count ketchup as a vegetable serving in order to save $1 billion on subsidized lunches!

The government should involve itself in the gymnasium, promoting longer physical ed classes and daily recreation.



Quote:
I knew it was only a matter of time before the "back in my day" argument presented itself. I guess you missed the point about how much worse off kids today will be considering their STARTING OUT FAT compared to getting fat when they're older. There's a big difference.
Apparently the only point you wish to make is an insult. That, and the fact that you have avoided the fact that not all people who are active are healthy (Jim Fixx, et al) and that genetics factor into this as well as food.

Why are these children starting off fat? They aren't suddenly fat in Kindergarden, are they? Chances are they were fat before they got there. Regulating the lunchroom is a band-aid on a hemorrhage.

Mom and dad have a responsibility for feeding their children healthy, nutritious foods and for seeing that they engage in recreational activities -- be it playing in a park, the beach, snow,peddling a trike, learning to ride a bike or roller skates, or in the backyard having mudpie fights. These are a few things children engage in before they've reached elementary school.

If mom and/or dad haven't done the right thing, the children need to be taught how to make healthy choices and introduced to activities which are part of a healthy lifestyle. That's where the government should come into play in the school.


Quote:
a healthy diet is part of a healthy lifestyle.
No one disputes this, but a proper foundation needs to be established upon which to build a healthy lifestyle.



Quote:
are those items available to young children? It's kind of a key part of this whole discussion...lol.
You can credit Deadpool1998 for bringing that into the discussion at post 19. Slap your head in that direction.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPool1998 View Post
"Parents should...Parents should...Parents should....Federal government frowns on selling cigarettes in schools too...


Quote:
and how does this help kids eat any healthier? It doesn't....

got any other brilliant ideas?
As always, you have something snarky to add, but nothing relevant to solving the actual issue.

Increasing taxes on junk food would be no different than increasing taxes on items such as cigarettes. Use the taxes to offset the costs of introducing healthy lifestyle curriculum in schools as well as defraying medical expenses of those who have obesity-related issues and no health insurance.

Healthy lifestyle education is a positive first step toward helping kids make choices to enable them to eat healthier.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:11 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top