http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2232475620080723?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

Quote :

"LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A moratorium on the opening of new fast food restaurants in one of the poorest areas of Los Angeles moved one step closer to reality on Tuesday in a measure aimed at countering obesity. A Los Angeles city council planning committee unanimously approved a one-year ban, which could be extended for a further year, on new fast food outlets in a 32-square-mile (82-sq-km) area of Los Angeles. The measure, the latest in efforts by U.S. cities to promote healthier eating, will go to the full council for a vote next month."

obviously its the fast food restaurants' faults that people are obese, and has nothing to do with anything else

does anyone actually think this is a good idea and that the government should step in to ban new fast food restaurant construction for a year in this particular area of LA?

7/24/2008 10:04:41 AM

Food fascists.

7/24/2008 10:12:27 AM

Thank God the gov't is stepping in to tell us how to live our lives.

7/24/2008 10:29:41 AM

This is goddamn retarded. If you want to get right down to it, most restaurant food is horrible for you from a fat and calorie perspective.

7/24/2008 10:42:08 AM

I do not see this as much of an issue since this is a mandate from the local city council. Had it been an executive order from the governor or president i may bach at the attempt of try to nanny LA.

The way i see it this is no different then any other zoning ordinance that local city governments pass all the time. I can't build a steel factory next to the neighborhood in Cary w/ 300k nor can i build a strip club next to athen drive high.

They are not closing down any current fast food joints. They are just merely altering the zoning statues against further fast food expansion.

ZOMG i may have to walk my poor fat lazy ass a whole 1/2 mile to get my triple cheese baconator thick burger instead of hobbling 2 blocks!

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 10:45 AM. Reason : l]

7/24/2008 10:42:56 AM

Quote :

"I can't build a steel factory next to the neighborhood in Cary w/ 300k nor can i build a strip club next to athen drive high."

a better analogy would be you can't build a steel factory in a neighborhood that already has a number of steel factories, and you can't build a strip club in an area of the city that already has a bunch of strip clubs...it has nothing at all to do with zoning

7/24/2008 10:44:13 AM

what about building a liquor selling store in mission valley next to ruckus. In this case the STATE i am sure would be upset with trying to compete with its liquor monopoly.

I am more concerned about state mandates like our ABC program which is clearly a case of "nannying" more so then local gov't

7/24/2008 10:47:19 AM

there is an obesity epidemic

you know, if there was a modern day plague outbreak, it's the right wingers who would be the first to want to institute draconian measures (... I would be right beside them, though)

but try to institute preventive measures, which might pinch the pockets of corporations, to make the entire populous healthier, and they cry bloody murder

...

why do people hate the idea of putting nasty fast food and restaurant companies to task?

why is there so much loyalty to them? I would not think that reveling in the hatred of fat people or minorities is enough justify the gross economic impact that such a fat fucking nation is having on all of us. There needs to be real solutions to this problem.

7/24/2008 10:47:37 AM

This is one area where I'm willing to say if you're stupid enough to eat enough Whoppers that you get obese you deserve what you get

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 10:48 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 10:48:28 AM

but it hurts all of us

do people not understand this

7/24/2008 10:49:25 AM

^^^i know you're not trying to compare fat people to an outbreak of the bubonic plague are you?

Quote :

"try to institute preventive measures, which might pinch the pockets of corporations, to make the entire populous healthier"

first of all, there are already over 400 fast food restaurants in the area...therefore I don't see how this will even scratch the surface of making the entire populous healthier

but more importantly, the local government seems to hold the position that fast food restaurants are the cause of obesity...which would imply that someone is kidnapped and forced at gunpoint to eat fast food all the time, which is obviously absurd...its their crazy local government saying "you are so stupid you aren't capable of deciding what to eat, so we'll take steps to decide for you"

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 10:53 AM. Reason : ^^^]

7/24/2008 10:52:46 AM

^^Well I guess but this doesn't really make any sense as far as being a preventative measure to promote healthier eating. There are probably a thousand fast food places in this 32 square mile area, and preventing more from opening isn't going to prevent people from eating unhealthy food from the fast food places that currently exist.

I mean, I don't see a solution to this besides educating people on obesity, but I think everyone pretty much knows about it and it doesn't stop them from doing it to themselves.

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 10:56 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 10:55:57 AM

i think fayetteville should put a moratorium on building new drug stores for next 20 years

7/24/2008 11:01:53 AM

how do you define fast food for this moratorium? do deli's count? burrito places? asian? pizza? italian? chili's offers take out...will they ban subway and keep jason's deli, or do they go the full measure and ban places like doc greens as well?

7/24/2008 11:01:56 AM

eveyone seems to be in the do nothing and bitch about fat people mentality

yes, fat people suck for their complete fatness. no one doubts this.

but you people are just whiners who offer nothing towards real solutions

its a good thing to prevent new fast food growth. it certainly isn't going to hurt.

7/24/2008 11:04:48 AM

Quote :

"There is an obesity epidemic you know, if there was a modern day plague outbreak, it's the right wingers who would be the first to want to institute draconian measures (... I would be right beside them, though) but try to institute preventive measures, which might pinch the pockets of corporations, to make the entire populous healthier, and they cry bloody murder"

Give me a call when they isolate the pathogen that allows someone to cough on me and catch fatty. Otherwise, I'm going to go with the working assumption that it's a lifestyle issue.

7/24/2008 11:05:29 AM

of course it's a lifestyle issue

what is the SOLUTION?

other than bitching about how fat and fucking stupid fat people are

7/24/2008 11:06:20 AM

Heartattacks?

Not to be glib but there isn't really a solution to this. People know if they get fat they're going to have loads of potentially fatal health issues and no one will want to have sex with them but they do it anyway. If that doesn't change your lifestyle I don't know what will.

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:08 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:06:54 AM

other than the poor attempt at the funny do you have anything else?

7/24/2008 11:07:32 AM

who in this thread bitched about fat people?

i'm bitching about the govt stepping in and telling people what restaurants they have the CHOICE to go to

7/24/2008 11:08:10 AM

Quote :

"of course it's a lifestyle issue what is the SOLUTION? other than bitching about how fat and fucking stupid fat people are"

Uh, I'll take, "Not subsidizing unhealthy lifestyle choices for $400, Alex?"

I think there's a whole lot of stupid around here. It's an epidemic! Just look at how much stupid costs us every year!

Yeah. Nice way to demand complete control over other peoples' lives. In some countries, that's considered rude. Or simply tyrannical.

7/24/2008 11:08:58 AM

^^ so, you don't care that 26% of adults are considered "obese"

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:09:22 AM

i mean, i guess i wish that percentage was lower, but it doesnt seem like Los Angeles' effort is going to help anything

7/24/2008 11:10:35 AM

^^^ how do they subsidize unhealthy lifestyles?

your solution is to take the safety net out from under the poor, right?

that might be a solution... a cruel one, but certainly one that fits in with the right-wing mindset

I always know that the hatred for the fat is really a hatred for the poor

and, of course, the hatred for the poor is always a hatred for black people

I feel this is true, but fundamentally unproductive towards solving the problem.

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:12 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:11:45 AM

If they were truly diabolical, they'd place a fat tax on fast food.

Amateurs.

7/24/2008 11:13:10 AM

in-n-out burger is disgusting fwiw

7/24/2008 11:13:18 AM

Quote :

"I always know that the hatred for the fat is really a hatred for the poor and, of course, the hatred for the poor is always a hatred for black people "

what the fuck are you talking about?

7/24/2008 11:13:25 AM

^^^^ but is it going to hurt anything

it's not going to make people fatter, is it?

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:13 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:13:31 AM

^^

Quote :

""Not subsidizing unhealthy lifestyle choices for $400, Alex?""

well, where did this come from

don't question me, question the original poster

7/24/2008 11:14:18 AM

Quote :

"but is it going to hurt anything it's not going to make people fatter, is it?"

it might hurt things by not creating some new jobs...but more relevant, i think not only will it not make people fatter...it wont make people less fat either

7/24/2008 11:15:11 AM

Quote :

"I always know that the hatred for the fat is really a hatred for the poor and, of course, the hatred for the poor is always a hatred for black people"

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

7/24/2008 11:15:23 AM

well

why do you think 90% of black people vote for the left

why do you think the first example when talking about welfare is some single mother with a black name having # of kids and abusing the system

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:17 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:16:22 AM

Quote :

"If passed, it would affect about half a million Angelenos living in an area that supporters say already has about 400 fast-food eateries and few grocery stores."

This is city/community planning at it's best. The same people in this thread crying about this probably love the fact that they don't live in some run down shit hole of an area because their city management past and present had a little bit of forethought when they laid the development out.

Rather than saying limiting new fast food isn't going to do shit to the obesity problem where 400 already exist (and, btw, show some proof of that), how about we say 400 fucking fast food joints and little grocery stores is a god damn nuff.

Sure, the poor fatties might just stroll into their neighborhood Food Kitty and buy out all the candy bars rather than walk an extra 3 miles to the fast food joint, but at least they have an option.

You're talking about educating people on healthy eating, well, I guess we should pay for them to move too so they are geographically close to a grocery store. Or, we could let the grocery stores come to them.

7/24/2008 11:17:04 AM

There are plenty of fat people who aren't black or poor though ???

7/24/2008 11:17:11 AM

Quote :

"why do you think 90% of black people vote for the left"

maybe there wouldnt be such a shortage of grocery stores and healthy restaurants if the blacks didnt destroy them in their most recent bout of Los Angeles riots

hey look i can spew bullshit too, but it doesnt help the thread topic

7/24/2008 11:17:58 AM

^^ of course there are, but when people take about the "projects" they're not talking about bob's trailer park down on I-70

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:18 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:18:33 AM

^^

yes, let your racism out

it feeds your hate and strengthens your fucked up resolve [/vader]

7/24/2008 11:19:20 AM

its clear nastoute is trying to make this a racial issue, when it has absolutely nothing at all to do with race or political party or anything like that

i still havent seen anyone in this thread showing "hatred for fat people" like you claim, let alone nobody but you seems to be making this a racial issue

7/24/2008 11:20:03 AM

First things first.

Quote :

"your solution is to take the safety net out from under the poor, right?"

Not really. But you sure do assume a lot. Kind of the way you yap on a lot without actually ever stopping to see what people are actually going to say. If you're going to do that, why even bother putting things in the form of a question?

Quote :

"^^^ how do they subsidize unhealthy lifestyles?"

Are you kidding me? Have you looked at our agriculture policy, for one? What we do (and do not) subsidize? The kinds of things we throw tariffs on?

To wit: Grain is generally subsidized. Produce is not. Grain then further goes to feed livestock, implicitly subsidizing livestock. The result is artificially cheap meat competing against regularly-priced produce.

Then, to make things better, we have an astonishing domestic tariff on sugar. So, how do most producers cope with it? High Fructose Corn Syrup, which benefits from the double-whammy of cheap corn and an expensive competing product (sugar). I'm not one of those conspiracy theorists who points to HFCS as the end-all-be-all of the obesity epidemic, but it tends to be really bad for you.

Next, let's move over to healthcare policy. We prohibit differential pricing based upon weight. So, assuming obesity is a health risk factor (as compared to simply being overweight, whereas only the former category is shown to have a serious negative health impact), one would imagine it would have the same effect on healthcare pricing as does any other negative lifestyle choice - smoking, drinking to excess, death sports, etc. Well, it doesn't. Call it another subsidy for unhealthy lifestyle choices.

Then we get into one of your favorite subjects - zoning laws which push out large supermarkets/superstores like Wal-Mart, etc. from inner cities. Yes, I know everything would be swell if some farmer's co-op's just magically sprung out from the head of Zeus in Hyde Park, but experience shows it ain't happening. Meanwhile, those best at getting high-quality produce and cheap food out to mass consumers are generally prohibited from areas where they are needed most - thanks in large part to your own rabid anti-corporate advocacy.

So, I suppose we can just sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for that magical day when International Socialism triumphs at last and farmer's markets flow through the cities like wine, but in the meantime, the result is a vast food desert which is generally under-served and over-priced. Thanks namely to shutting out competition.

But, in case you didn't feel like reading all of that, feel free to summarize it as simply, "Fuck those poor bizatches." Because that's what I'm really saying.

Quote :

"that might be a solution... a cruel one, but certainly one that fits in with the right-wing mindset I always know that the hatred for the fat is really a hatred for the poor and, of course, the hatred for the poor is always a hatred for black people I feel this is true, and fundamentally towards solving the problem, unproductive."

Classic! It's like I don't even need to reply - you already know what I'm going to say!

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:25 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:21:51 AM

^^ this isn't a new argument or the first time this has been talked about

stop being dense

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:22 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:22:46 AM

I wish I owned one of the existing fast food restaurants in that area. Afterall, can anyone imagine a more generous gift than arresting my competition?

I suspect the city council dislikes the poor and wants to drive them out of the city and the only way to do it is to price them out of the market through zoning regulations such as this one.

Quote :

"I do not see this as much of an issue since this is a mandate from the local city council. Had it been an executive order from the governor or president i may bach at the attempt of try to nanny LA."

Wait, so in your mind a local city council has the right to take away whatever rights it wants by virtue of it being local? What about the right to life and self determination? It would work much faster if it just rounded up the poor and executed them, or maybe just forcibly deported them, rather than waiting years for zoning restrictions to drive prices and rents high enough to make them leave on their own. But then I guess people might catch on to the purpose of the laws and oppose them. Or maybe not, I doubt the city council does not represent the majority in this city which is probably white-men which view poor mexicans as driving down their property values. They are correct in their reasoning, but it is still immoral to use the force of government to rob the minority just to enrich the majority.

7/24/2008 11:24:19 AM

^^well maybe you could stop pulling the race card for a half second and try to see what this topic is actually about because so far you have no clue

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:24 AM. Reason : ^^]

7/24/2008 11:24:27 AM

^^^^ well, I agree with the restructuring of the food markets and insurance companies

so... i'm cool with that

and, I'm not a socialist, I just want effective government regulation to prevent serious unhealthy practices

my solutions towards the fast food situation has always been structural... portion control, removing of the combo concept, and restriction of advertising

it's totally in the governments power to do such things

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:27 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:27:33 AM

I'd have to agree with DrSteve's post almost entirely. I'm not a supporter of big corporations but every time I'm in a big downtown area of a city I look around and wonder where people are supposed to go to buy groceries.

Also I hate our goddamn agricultural policy and it really needs to be reworked from the ground up. We could convert these giant disgusting Monsanto farms that poison the soil and acidify the ocean to many sustainable small farms and have higher quality food with a market that would pretty quickly work its way to the current level of prices. And then we probably would see more farmer's markets show up in cities, or at least these co-op deals where people put a bunch of cash together for a large shipment of small-farm produce and meat might become more affordable to people besides yuppies.

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:29 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:28:58 AM

Nastoute had at least one good point in this thread. The fact of the matter is that an obese population hurts all of us. It's not because we have to look at fat people in disgust. It's because it is starting to drive up the price of healthcare. Does the government need to do something about it? No. Do insurance companies, or people in general need to do something it? Yes. The free market is not going to make people live healthier. I don't have solutions, but an increasingly obese population is something that should be dealt with.

7/24/2008 11:29:55 AM

Quote :

"my solutions towards the fast food situation has always been structural... portion control, removing of the combo concept, and restriction of advertising it's totally in the governments power to do such things"

Portion control and willpower are also well within the power of the individual consumer, as well. Do you really think the same people who make crazy unhealthful eating choices are going to simply magically wake up one day and turn around their lives the minute they can't upsize for $0.49, get a Big Mac combo (being forced to order separately!), and when that damnable "I'm lovin' it" jingle is out of their heads?

Really?

7/24/2008 11:30:49 AM

Quote :

"I wish I owned one of the existing fast food restaurants in that area. Afterall, can anyone imagine a more generous gift than arresting my competition?"

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiigghhtttt. Because 450 fast food joints competing in 32 sq miles is just 50 too many to survive.

7/24/2008 11:32:50 AM

Quote :

"my solutions towards the fast food situation has always been structural... portion control, removing of the combo concept, and restriction of advertising it's totally in the governments power to do such things"

Zoning is one thing-- micromanaging businesses is entirely different, and is about a million times more likely to suck.

7/24/2008 11:34:31 AM

Quote :

"Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiigghhtttt. Because 450 fast food joints competing in 32 sq miles is just 50 too many to survive."

So, preventing any further competition in your market would have no impact upon your profitability. Especially if you prevent new players from entering once old players leave.

...probably a good thing you didn't go into business, now isn't it?

7/24/2008 11:35:03 AM

^^^^

yes, I do

when you have to make someone buy 3 orders of fried instead of one the percentiles of who get the larger number of fries will decrease

the evidence is the fact that they have increased portion sizes over the years

companies know they can make more money from selling larger portions to people because people will have a tendency not to buy multiple items of food

[Edited on July 24, 2008 at 11:36 AM. Reason : .]

7/24/2008 11:35:21 AM