6 ms·

May we be allowed cake and ice cream or would you ban those as well? Maybe you can get a special license if it's a birthday?

conception 7y ago
Just tax sugar.
- NegativeLatency 7y ago
  Or stop subsidizing corn
  - conception 7y ago
    Why don't we have both? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- sharpneli 7y ago
  Small funny story about that. In Finland we do (or did, it might have changed on 2017) tax sugar. Then they added artificial sweeteners and even mineral water under the tax because it’s ”fair” that way. Thus negating the original point.
  - bonoboTP 7y ago
    Yeah, just drink tap water. Bottled water is quite a big waste with all the plastic, transport etc. Especially in countries with great water supply like Finland, it shouldn't exist were it not for marketing.
  - chopin 7y ago
    That's not entirely true. Artificial sweeteners are suspect of (indirectly) causing diabetes, too. For mineral water, on the other hand...
gambiting 7y ago
You need to judge a social impact of something before you ban it. The reason why soft drinks are under fire is because there is a lot of people who drink them literally every day. I know several people who drink 8-12 cans of diet coke every single day. On the other hand people usually don't eat cake or ice-cream everyday. I mean, I have no doubt that you could find someone who does, but it's not a widespread behaviour, so there is no reason to ban it.
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  > I know several people who drink 8-12 cans of diet coke every single day. Interesting. That's not even sugar water. We're going to need some pretty elaborate regulations at this rate.
- solipsism 7y ago
  I guess you'd be for banning alcohol then? The aggregate negative effects on society due to alcohol are incredible, extending far beyond simple healthcare questions.
- brokenkebab 7y ago
  It's very shaky reasoning. For starters, I'm sure you are seriously underestimating how much per time unit, and how much people do eat sweets. Second: if someone likes taste of sugar, and you deny that person sweet drinks, you likely to see increased consumption of sweets, or just plain sugar added to other drinks (coffee anyone?) How deep are you ready to go with prohibitions in that light?
- justforyou 7y ago
  If we're basing this on anecdotal evidence, I've worked with entire departments who ate cake or ice-cream every day. That doesn't mean cake and cookies should be banned, nor should soda. It's nanny state nonsense, and one of the more steeply graded slippery slopes... If you're really concerned for people's wellbeing, ensuring access to healthcare goes a lot further than denying people snacks..
  - ameister14 7y ago
ndiscussion 7y ago
You can have it - just don't expect me to pay for your coronary. A long and painful death that costs millions. Was it worth it?
- aantix 7y ago
  Thank god, an argument against universal healthcare. I’ll eat the snacks I want. I’ll pay for the healthcare I want and need. You do what you need. And neither one of us is responsible for the other. Now leave me be.
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    Problem with this argument is: what do you do when someone who can't pay shows up at the ER. They will die without treatment. They can be saved, but not for free. What action, if any, do you recommend?
    - aeternus 7y ago
      Leave it up to the hospital. They are best equipped to assess the cost and likelihood of being able to save the person. They also are most responsible for the repercussions in terms of positive/negative publicity and reputation.
      - CamperBob2 7y ago
        Won't this lead to a situation where some hospitals are known for doing free work, while others aren't? The former will quickly go bankrupt if they aren't subsidized by a charity or religious organization, which has serious drawbacks in itself. As for the rest, the doctors, nurses, and paramedics are now going to be required to do something that's against their training and likely their nature, by letting people die on the sidewalk out front. Do you suppose this policy will be workable in the long run?
        aantix 7y ago
anbop 7y ago
Eat all the sugar you want... just make sure your bank account is full when you have your heart attack.
brokenkebab 7y ago
May we be allowed cake and ice cream or would you ban those as well? Maybe you can get a special license if it's a birthday? Absolutely reasonable question. How about coffee? Soda-prohibiters usually ignore it, because, I guess, they like it themselves, or expect a huge backlash. However, it's a very common way of excessive sugar consumption world-wide.
- magduf 7y ago
  You don't have to drink coffee with sugar, and in fact, many people do drink it "black".
  - brokenkebab 7y ago
    You missed the message in my comment. Soda don't have to be too sweet either.
    - magduf 7y ago
      Yes, it does. You don't get to choose how much sugar is in a can or fountain drink when you buy it, it's pre-made. You could buy reduced-sweetness soda I suppose, but I don't know where you're going to find that. Even the boutique brands are very sweet. You can also buy artificially-sweetened soda, but lots of studies are now showing that crap isn't any healthier for you.
      - brokenkebab 7y ago
        No, it doesn't, not sure where you live, but I see low-calorie soda drinks in every supermarket I visit. You also, believe it, or not, are free to not buy any soda at all, in the same way you may decide not to put any sugar in your coffee. Probably, it's true to say that majority of buyers still prefer sugary sodas, because simply put people like sweet tastes a lot. Logically, it means that forced unavailability of sodas will be compensated by other means, including oversweetened coffee, chocolates etc. and I'm just asking where this I-save-you-whether-you-like-it-or-not zeal will end: would you regulate a number of grams of sugar allowed to buy per day as the next logical step?

conception 7y ago

Just tax sugar.

NegativeLatency 7y ago
Or stop subsidizing corn
- conception 7y ago
  Why don't we have both? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
sharpneli 7y ago
Small funny story about that. In Finland we do (or did, it might have changed on 2017) tax sugar. Then they added artificial sweeteners and even mineral water under the tax because it’s ”fair” that way. Thus negating the original point.
- bonoboTP 7y ago
  Yeah, just drink tap water. Bottled water is quite a big waste with all the plastic, transport etc. Especially in countries with great water supply like Finland, it shouldn't exist were it not for marketing.
- chopin 7y ago
  That's not entirely true. Artificial sweeteners are suspect of (indirectly) causing diabetes, too. For mineral water, on the other hand...

gambiting 7y ago

You need to judge a social impact of something before you ban it. The reason why soft drinks are under fire is because there is a lot of people who drink them literally every day. I know several people who drink 8-12 cans of diet coke every single day. On the other hand people usually don't eat cake or ice-cream everyday. I mean, I have no doubt that you could find someone who does, but it's not a widespread behaviour, so there is no reason to ban it.

rootusrootus 7y ago
> I know several people who drink 8-12 cans of diet coke every single day. Interesting. That's not even sugar water. We're going to need some pretty elaborate regulations at this rate.
solipsism 7y ago
I guess you'd be for banning alcohol then? The aggregate negative effects on society due to alcohol are incredible, extending far beyond simple healthcare questions.
brokenkebab 7y ago
It's very shaky reasoning. For starters, I'm sure you are seriously underestimating how much per time unit, and how much people do eat sweets. Second: if someone likes taste of sugar, and you deny that person sweet drinks, you likely to see increased consumption of sweets, or just plain sugar added to other drinks (coffee anyone?) How deep are you ready to go with prohibitions in that light?
justforyou 7y ago
If we're basing this on anecdotal evidence, I've worked with entire departments who ate cake or ice-cream every day. That doesn't mean cake and cookies should be banned, nor should soda. It's nanny state nonsense, and one of the more steeply graded slippery slopes... If you're really concerned for people's wellbeing, ensuring access to healthcare goes a lot further than denying people snacks..
- ameister14 7y ago

ndiscussion 7y ago

You can have it - just don't expect me to pay for your coronary. A long and painful death that costs millions. Was it worth it?

aantix 7y ago
Thank god, an argument against universal healthcare. I’ll eat the snacks I want. I’ll pay for the healthcare I want and need. You do what you need. And neither one of us is responsible for the other. Now leave me be.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  Problem with this argument is: what do you do when someone who can't pay shows up at the ER. They will die without treatment. They can be saved, but not for free. What action, if any, do you recommend?
  - aeternus 7y ago
    Leave it up to the hospital. They are best equipped to assess the cost and likelihood of being able to save the person. They also are most responsible for the repercussions in terms of positive/negative publicity and reputation.
    - CamperBob2 7y ago
      Won't this lead to a situation where some hospitals are known for doing free work, while others aren't? The former will quickly go bankrupt if they aren't subsidized by a charity or religious organization, which has serious drawbacks in itself. As for the rest, the doctors, nurses, and paramedics are now going to be required to do something that's against their training and likely their nature, by letting people die on the sidewalk out front. Do you suppose this policy will be workable in the long run?
      - aantix 7y ago

anbop 7y ago

Eat all the sugar you want... just make sure your bank account is full when you have your heart attack.

brokenkebab 7y ago

May we be allowed cake and ice cream or would you ban those as well? Maybe you can get a special license if it's a birthday? Absolutely reasonable question. How about coffee? Soda-prohibiters usually ignore it, because, I guess, they like it themselves, or expect a huge backlash. However, it's a very common way of excessive sugar consumption world-wide.

magduf 7y ago
You don't have to drink coffee with sugar, and in fact, many people do drink it "black".
- brokenkebab 7y ago
  You missed the message in my comment. Soda don't have to be too sweet either.
  - magduf 7y ago
    Yes, it does. You don't get to choose how much sugar is in a can or fountain drink when you buy it, it's pre-made. You could buy reduced-sweetness soda I suppose, but I don't know where you're going to find that. Even the boutique brands are very sweet. You can also buy artificially-sweetened soda, but lots of studies are now showing that crap isn't any healthier for you.
    - brokenkebab 7y ago
      No, it doesn't, not sure where you live, but I see low-calorie soda drinks in every supermarket I visit. You also, believe it, or not, are free to not buy any soda at all, in the same way you may decide not to put any sugar in your coffee. Probably, it's true to say that majority of buyers still prefer sugary sodas, because simply put people like sweet tastes a lot. Logically, it means that forced unavailability of sodas will be compensated by other means, including oversweetened coffee, chocolates etc. and I'm just asking where this I-save-you-whether-you-like-it-or-not zeal will end: would you regulate a number of grams of sugar allowed to buy per day as the next logical step?