More evidence that private companies are smarter than government

[Jonesy77]

Originally Posted by Cosmic201

I love how we can have the same posters first complain about how overly complicated the government can be in laws and regulation and then be so ecstatic when companies pull **** like this.

This is the reason laws and regulations are overly complicated. This is the reason things like the tax code are a million pages long. Because companies will find and abuse any loop hole they can to get away with violating the spirit of a law, if not the letter.


This is in no way my opinion on the law it self. I think it's silly personally, but obesity is a serious issue in children and I think it's proven so far to not be effective to leave it only up to the parents.

All of societies' ills could be stopped with one law. Parents have to pass a test to get a "child" permit.

Corporations blame the government, and government blames the corporations, and nobody is stopping the real problem

[Cosmic201]

Originally Posted by Jeff Miller

i don't see anywhere in the US Constitution or any state constitution that the government has right become the defacto parent in any case that doesn't involve child abuse, which is a crime.

so if you let your kid play xbox for to long everyday you think the government should have a remote switch to turn off your tv? If you kid rides a bike without a helmet should the government require you put training wheels back on the bike?

Then it's a matter of what is child abuse.

If a child grows up with parents who don't install a sense of responsibility towards everyday life and the child's future, I can easily argue it being a case of child abuse. A child has no thought about its future beyond the immediate future. It is the parents responsibility to do that thinking for them.

If the parents are unable or unwilling to do so, should we as a society be content with condemning that child to a dead end future?

[Cosmic201]

Originally Posted by Jonesy77

All of societies' ills could be stopped with one law. Parents have to pass a test to get a "child" permit.

Corporations blame the government, and government blames the corporations, and nobody is stopping the real problem

Honestly I can agree with that first statement.

I have to jump through more legal hoops to get a pet then I do to produce a child. Children are a huge commitment, they are both a huge burden and a huge joy, but many people go into parenting completely unprepared.

Some, if not many, of those people come out in the end okay, but there are plenty who do not.

Personally I think at age 12 or so, girls (and boys if they invent something) should be fitted with an IUD and only removed after they turn 21 and request it, paired with ability to raise the child. Meaning no strung out drugie in love with her equally strung out boyfriend of 3 weeks should have their IUD removed.

[dtc]

Originally Posted by Jonesy77

Sounds to me like something parents need to not be feeding their children. Don't put free toys in a happy meal is government's solution to this?

It's San Franciscan's attempt at a solution.

Aren't they free, in your book, to vote for whatever sorts of laws they like?

[Jonesy77]

No, they are not free to vote for any law they would like.

[mister pc]

This is out of control, next thing you know the government is going to make cigarette companies stop using cartoon characters to advertise their product. Why should anyone have a problem with unhealthy food being marketed to children, I mean childhood obesity is only triple the rate now than it was one generation ago. Damn liberals in California!

[dtc]

Originally Posted by Jonesy77

No, they are not free to vote for any law they would like.

Is it Unconstitutional for them to restrict the give away of lead coated Chinese plastic that ultimately ends up forever in a landfill?

[champ76]

Originally Posted by guidomerkinsrules

hooray for cancer, obesity and toxic landfills
it's a banner day for same ol ****

God knows there was no cancer, obesity and toxic landfills before McDonalds.

[champ76]

Originally Posted by dtradin

It's San Franciscan's attempt at a solution.

Aren't they free, in your book, to vote for whatever sorts of laws they like?

And we are free to mock their attempts.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by Cosmic201

I love how we can have the same posters first complain about how overly complicated the government can be in laws and regulation and then be so ecstatic when companies pull **** like this.

This is the reason laws and regulations are overly complicated. This is the reason things like the tax code are a million pages long. Because companies will find and abuse any loop hole they can to get away with violating the spirit of a law, if not the letter.


This is in no way my opinion on the law it self. I think it's silly personally, but obesity is a serious issue in children and I think it's proven so far to not be effective to leave it only up to the parents.

Couldn't it also be argued that companies (and individuals) have to find loopholes to avoid "silly" laws that the government has no business passing? Stop passing silly laws and maybe people will stop looking for ways to avoid them.

Just because the government can pass a law doesn't mean it should.

[Jonesy77]

Originally Posted by dtradin

Is it Unconstitutional for them to restrict the give away of lead coated Chinese plastic that ultimately ends up forever in a landfill?

I wouldn't think so.

[OhioSaintsFan]

Originally Posted by mister pc

Why should anyone have a problem with unhealthy food being marketed to children, I mean childhood obesity is only triple the rate now than it was one generation ago.

Yeah. Let's make laws instead of blaming the people actually paying for the Happy Meal.

[Cosmic201]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Couldn't it also be argued that companies (and individuals) have to find loopholes to avoid "silly" laws that the government has no business passing? Stop passing silly laws and maybe people will stop looking for ways to avoid them.

Just because the government can pass a law doesn't mean it should.

A law being 'silly' is, like your opinion man.

You might find it silly, but others find it a legitimate avenue to be used to help address a serious issue. Advocating for companies to do everything they can to get around laws is not a good policy.

Just because you don't agree with a law, doesn't make it silly.

Originally Posted by OhioSaintsFan

Yeah. Let's make laws instead of blaming the people actually paying for the Happy Meal.

I do blame the parents. It is very much their responsability to raise their kids in a healthy and productive fashion.


.....

.....

.....


.....


Now what? Blaming the parents does nothing if they are unwilling or unable to see the damage they are doing to their children by feeding them nothing buy extremely unhealthy foods. Like most real issues in the world, there isn't one simple solution to the growing problem of childhood obesity. It will require the cooperation of parents, schools, government, and business in making it easier for kids to get the diet they need. Getting rid of toys used to bribe kids in wanting a happy meal is just one part of that overall plan.

[Cosmic201]

I Got 15 Kids & 3 Babydaddys-SOMEONE'S GONNA PAY FOR ME & MY KIDS!!! - YouTube

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by Cosmic201

A law being 'silly' is, like your opinion man.

You might find it silly, but others find it a legitimate avenue to be used to help address a serious issue. Advocating for companies to do everything they can to get around laws is not a good policy.

Just because you don't agree with a law, doesn't make it silly.

But we agreed it was silly. This is just between you and me here. We are in agreement that the law is silly. Rather than get mad at the company for avoiding the silly law, wouldn't the better practice be to avoid passing the silly law? You seem to want to blame the company when the government is too blame for passing a law that you admit is silly.

The issue here is parenting. I know my daughter was (and still is) into McDonalds. The toys were a big part of that. I took the opportunity to teach her that companies do stuff like that to sucker you in. I did this early and continue to teach this point because kids (adults too) are easily swayed by advertising. So rather than teach the kids how to evaluate advertising and how not to be suckered in, we teach them that the government will take care of us. Plain and simple, this is a silly law as evidenced by how easily it was avoided while making McDonalds look like the good guy for donating the proceeds to charity.