Some here continue to make the argument that it's irrelevant what the body needs because need is relative to work done. Sadly, this argument doesn't actually have the effect they think it does, given the nature of obesity is that the people who are fat are not working off more calouries than they are eating, which in turn is why they are fat in the first place.

I trust you understand enough about medical science to comprehend what fat is, why it accumulates, and what it means for the person's intake. If you don't, I will help you: fat deposits are stored calouries. When you don't use what you consume, and if you consume TOO MUCH (more than you use), you grow deposits of this stuff. Not only does it increase your risk of several types of cancers, it makes you a social pain the *** by increasing costs for everyone (e.g. healthcare). Consuming that food, given you aren't using it, is wasteful, and consuming so much raises demand for the product and transportation, which increases costs and uses more resources.

Fat people also take up more space and cost more to transport. All of this is completely unnecessary, irresponsible, and bad. You can have very good, happy, healthy lives without eating yourself into obesity, and at the same time, you can help a lot of other people simply be being intelligent and responsible consumers instead of thinking only about yourself in the short term. If people thought carefully, intelligently about what they did, we wouldn't have the epidemic of obesity. All this proves is that many people are selfish morons who can't even understand what their own self-interest is. It's so bad, they don't even know what's good for themselves, given they often heavily regret being obese later.

They should learn from this statistical data and come to the conclusion that they don't know what the hell they want, what they know is likely wrong, and that they should do what they are told by professional medical personnel--the law is for their own good. Of course, they won't do that: because they are stupid and short-sighted.

It's really that simple.

I never said precedent = good. The thing is good itself, but precedent makes it legally easier to push.

Unfair isn't necessarily bad. It's good if it has good consequences, just as lying is okay if for a good reason.

All of them are basically the same they are just different luxuries.
They should all be treated the same. They should all be taxed the same. A even sales tax on all goods with no exemptions.

It may vary I am not sure.

I see number 1 or two as better.
Besides with number three you will just lessen it by an unknown amount.

Nothing unfair about that. It most certainly would be unfair. I believe that the government should be equal to all, not pick favorites as it so loves to do.
The reason not to do it is because is oppressive and unfair. I am going to support being fair, keeping government small, and supporting choice.

For portion size, something that you mentioned regulating, it does. Those that do have those portions and burn them off are fine. Not to mention they could always just order more than one portion making such legislation pointless. Any law should have a very very good reason to be passed.

Ya same stuff I already addressed, along with with some stuff I already knew.


So? That is there choice. Maybe you can be happy but you do not represent all people. Sure we would many people enjoy eating. It is not about need it is about want, just like other luxuries. Of course they understand there own self-interest. There interest is to eat. Duh. Some peoples interest is thrills, jumping out of planes and what not, it may not be healthy but it is what makes them happy. Its not that they do not know, its that they do not care.


Did you ever thing they might not want to be healthy and live there life how they choose not how you want them to? They can choose what is in there own good. If they want to smoke, drink, do drugs, eat a ton and die at thirty then good for them.

The thing is bad in itself, as it is oppressive and unfair.

No unfair is not necessarily bad, in this case it is. YOUR philosophy dictate good or bad just by consequences, luckily mine do not.

People get to pick favorites, scientists get to pick favorites, hollywood actors get to pick favorites, why can't government? And don't say because government has the power to effect choice. A hollywood actor or professional athlete's favorite can and does have huge impacts of people's choices.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

No standard can impact everyone identically. Standards work and are set, regardless. It would be based on what medical professionals determine to be the norm portion size required. They can and--shock--have calculated it for MOST people. I don't care if it works for every single person. Boo hoo.

They could just order more. But then they would also pay for more. The increased cost will likely decrease consumption. Just as the increased cost of smokes did.

The government runs our entire country. It is public, where as the others are private. It should treat everyone as equals. Not treat health food companies better than junk food companies. Not treat minorities better than majority, affirmative action. Not treat whites better than blacks, slavery.

The idea they want to be jabba the hut doubles who're sickly and suffering is sufficiently rare. Often, they regret their short-sightedness, but they didn't realize it until it was too late. Other people simply lack the forethought.

I am sure some children don't want to eat the vegetables when told to, thinking it's "awesome" at the time.


This is a problem. They THINK they are acting in their own best interest at the time, but they really aren't. Reality isn't as perfect as ideal market theory pretends. People don't actually always act in their rational self interest. They are often wrong, misguided, and then regret it later. This is a distinct pattern of behaviour such that we don't need to care about every individual case.

Good, then you are now informed on it and understand then how obesity is a good example of waste and overconsumption.