Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
They didn't ban fast food restaurants. They blocked new fast food places from opening up for a year to see if they can attract healthier foods. There are still plenty of fast food places around that people can go to in those areas.
Right, like maybe they could put a Panera there and the poor people could start eating at Panera. Or ohhh! How about Quizno's! Or my favorite, Qdoba! mmmmm!
Poorer people tend to become obese because the cheaper food is generally the less healthy. Isn't that a darn shame?
Honestly, I could feed my family of 3 a dinner that costs less than a dollar. Three packs of ramen with a candy bar for dessert.
However, that would not be as healthy as a baked lemon pepper chicken with baked potatoes and green beans with an apple for dessert - which of course this meal (including necessary spices) would cost considerably more than the previous menu.
Why is soda cheaper than the healthier milk?
Another thing, in order to make more money, a person might have to work a second or third job. When you have parents doing this, when are they supposed to be cooking a meal from scratch?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mach50
Do you disagree with a drinking age set by the government? Why can't my kids drink responsibly at 12?
What about smoking age limits and bans? Why have them?
I don't disagree with a government set drinking age. However, I disagree with the current drinking age. Currently, the age of "majority" is 18. I think that once a person is of "majority age," then that person should be able to do whatever they want to their own body. Whether it be smoke, drink, shoot up their veins.
They just shouldn't expect me to care.
And for smoking bans, let's not delve too far into that controversial topic. But I will say that I wholeheartedly disagree with them. Private businesses are not public establishments and therefore business owners should be able to decide whether to allow smoking or not.
Quote:
Should we also legalize drugs, prostitution, gambling...etc.
Yes, Yes, and Yes. Next question?
But I will disgress that there are too many tangents for the obesity/poor issue.
In short, I'm glad I live far away from the Land of Fruits and Nuts - California. And no, I'm not just talking about the produce.
Tried Arby's lately? They have a turkey & swiss cheese with at least some whole grains in the bread. Doesn't look 100% whole wheat, but it'll do. I think its pretty tasty. They also offer some great salads. Heck, so does McDonald's, their Asian Chicken salad is tasty and relatively healthy.
As the one poster pointed out, you can make healthy choices at most fast food restaurants. The point is its about choice, free will, the power to choose. Something that apparently annoys LA government.
BTW those Arby's "Market Fresh" Sandwiches are worse than a Quarter Pounder from McDonalds:
And you honestly think our government is responsible enough to make those decisions? Did you fall down and bump your head really hard? If I want a turkey sandwich I either make it myself, or go somewhere that serves them. I don't agree with smoking bans although I do agree with drinking and driving laws. Prostitution is legal in Nevada as is gambling in several states, and marijuana is legal for medical use. Boundaries (that many of them) aren't required. That's what is great about this country. People are free to make bad choices if they want. You think cash hungry businesses are only wanting to Capitalize off poor decision makers? What about all this "green" stuff going on? Great, we get some new mercury filled light bulbs that have to be disposed of other than normally. The battery makers who make batteries for electric cars? Heavy pollution coming from those places. And these are supposed to be for people making smart choices but the products being pushed so they can feel like people can feel they are improving the atmosphere are actually still causing harm because the manufacturers aren't being environmentally sensitive. And anyone pushing for more government control is not for a free society. That's a contradiction.
Meh. I dont know about banning. Just put up a few dozen low cost grocery stores and farmers markets and educate the public in poorer areas about the cost savings of cooking at home vs eating out. Im pretty sure communities could find space and volunteers to offer cooking classes at a low cost. $5 for a meal at McDonalds is pretty expensive when you consider how much food you could cook with $5.
Once seat belt use became mandatory, I used to joke that the next thing the government would do was to tell you what you can and can't eat. It's "for your own good," after all. And now it's starting to happen for real. Good grief. What good is living in a free society if you aren't allowed to make your own choices, good or bad?
before everyone gets all huffy puffy about this...
they have not banned or outlawed any fast food restaurants. they just put a 1 year moratorium on NEW fast food chain restaurants.
this does not include subway or pastagina and other "healthy" alternative food places. they can still set up shop/ its the grease pits that cant.
a map in an article in todays LA times showed that the area in south central already had the highest concentration of fast food chains like McD's, J in the B, Carls Jr (hardys to everyone else), BK, Pollo loco, Taco Bell, KFC, etc etc, than any other part of the city.
THis area had a disporportianate amount of these fast food chains.
45% in "south LA" as opposed to 19% on the tonier Westside. even the Valley area of LA only had 26%.
the purpose of this action has various roots.
not only did they want to offer healthier alternatives to the residents of the area, which in my opinion is a good thing. but they want a healthier community all around. did you know that 30% of children in south LA are obese?!?! we need a healthy choice for us and for our children. sandwich shops are good options. salad places are also good options.
and another reason is because they also want to bring grocery chains like Fresh and Easy to these areas. here we have all the wonderful mexican grocery stores. the liqour/produce corner spots. we have Food 4 Less(ralphs family), maybe a nicer chain like vons(did i just say that?). but we dont have the WHOLE FOODS, the BRISTOL farms, the TRADER JOES, none of that. fresh and easy will be the first store to come to South Central and offer a wide range of healthy alternatives.
another reason they did this was because they also want to attract nicer sit-down restaurants that are weary of setting up shop in these areas. many sit down restaurants dont come to these areas because of the saturation of fast food places. as it stands, if i want to go somewhere fancy, like olive garden (did i just REALLY say that?) i would have to venture far out of my communities. i would have to take my money and spend it in another area. that sucks.
they want to show developers that the market for healthy food is here. they are tryin to change the way people eat and live.
this area needs good food and quality services. it has been inundated with uhealthy food choices for years and i support this new step. i also beleive that more nutritional EDUCATION is needed.
lots more stuf to do in order to foster a healthy nurtitional lifestyle in the hood.
im for these lil steps.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
