The U.K. Uses COVID-19 to Justify More Nanny State Junk Food Crackdowns

First topic message reminder :

The U.K. now plans a nationwide ban on television advertisements for what it calls "junk food" before 9 p.m. And that's not the only new regulation. Also on the list:

Retailers will not be permitted to offer "buy one, get one free" promotions (or similar offers) for foods the government deems unhealthy.

Retails will not be permitted to display these unhealthy foods for promotioal purposes near checkout counters, near the front of the store, or on the ends of aisles.

Retailers will not be permitted to promote unhealthy foods on the entry or landing pages of their websites.

Free refills of sugary drinks will be banned at restaurants.

https://reason.com/2020/12/29/the-u-k-uses-covid-19-to-justify-more-nanny-state-junk-food-crackdowns/

I remember saying this was around the corner years ago.
When the government is paying for your medical expenses, they will eventually interject themselves into your life in terms of how you maintain yourself.

I’m glad they’re banning adverts for junk food!

Why wouldn’t that be a good thing?

eddie wrote:I’m glad they’re banning adverts for junk food!

Why wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Because it could hurt the bottom line of people who sell junk food infringes upon the consumer's freedom of choice, of course.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I’m glad they’re banning adverts for junk food!

Why wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Because it could hurt the bottom line of people who sell junk food infringes upon the consumer's freedom of choice, of course.

Exactly. Too much money to be made from sugar.

eddie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Because it could hurt the bottom line of people who sell junk food infringes upon the consumer's freedom of choice, of course.

Exactly. Too much money to be made from sugar.

Especially when its distilled.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I’m glad they’re banning adverts for junk food!

Why wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Because it could hurt the bottom line of people who sell junk food infringes upon the consumer's freedom of choice, of course.

Meh, freedom is just another word for fuckin' up the world.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Because it could hurt the bottom line of people who sell junk food infringes upon the consumer's freedom of choice, of course.

Meh, freedom is just another word for fuckin' up the world.  

Heck yeah comrade.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Meh, freedom is just another word for fuckin' up the world.  

Heck yeah comrade.  

A better word would be 'disciplined'.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Heck yeah comrade.  

A better word would be 'disciplined'.

Wrong, disciplined people can handle freedom and make the correct decisions.

You're a fucking elitist who looks down on others as too damn undisciplined to handle their own affairs while sanctimonious pricks like you spend your time trying to interject into the lives of the "savages " beneath you.

If everyone was disciplined we would have no need for governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws, because we would all be able to regulate ourselves and deal with others fairly in a civilised manner.

If only....

Syl wrote:If everyone was disciplined we would have no need for governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws, because we would all be able to regulate ourselves  and deal with others fairly in a civilised manner.

If only....

And the lack of discipline by the few is used by moral busy bodies to oppress people for their own good, which brings us right back to my signature and the desire of one group of adults to treat another like children.

Now go eat some spinach and trash all your sweets.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

A better word would be 'disciplined'.

Wrong, disciplined people can handle freedom and make the correct decisions.

That's my point. Undisciplined freedom leads to people like Trump, making a mess of the world, and grabbing all the good stuff for himself. Discipline means applying values (equality, charity and distribution) to facts (food, housing, medical care, and down the line, education and equal opportunity) with regularity.

Maddog wrote:You're a fucking elitist who looks down on others as too damn undisciplined to handle their own affairs while sanctimonious pricks like you spend your time trying to interject into the lives of the "savages " beneath you.

Everyone is an elitist at something. So, it’s not a bad thing. But I’m not even speaking about my profession. When I argue for disciplined freedom, I’m including exercise of my freedom to think for myself and the general interest. It’s the same right that we all have.

Unmitigated freedom allows in the evil with the good. It allows in blatant selfishness, as well as stupidity. It allows in the Trumps of this world, who is no doubt the puppet of the enemies of state. Unlimited freedom is a bad state of affairs.

Disciplined freedom is not. It requires thought before action. It excluded the spoilt thoughts of privileged children, such as Trump, in favor of those considered values that I mentioned.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Wrong, disciplined people can handle freedom and make the correct decisions.  

That's my point.  Undisciplined freedom leads to people like Trump, making a mess of the world, and grabbing all the good stuff for himself.  Discipline means applying values (equality, charity and distribution) to facts (food, housing, medical care, and down the line, education and equal opportunity) with regularity.

Maddog wrote:You're a fucking elitist who looks down on others as too damn undisciplined to handle their own affairs while sanctimonious pricks like you spend your time trying to interject into the lives of the "savages " beneath you.

Everyone is an elitist at something.  So, it’s not a bad thing.  But I’m not even speaking about my profession.  When I argue for disciplined freedom, I’m including exercise of my freedom to think for myself and the general interest.  It’s the same right that we all have.

Unmitigated freedom allows in the evil with the good.  It allows in blatant selfishness, as well as stupidity.  It allows in the Trumps of this world, who is no doubt the puppet of the enemies of state.  Unlimited freedom is a bad state of affairs.

Disciplined freedom is not.  It requires thought before action.  It excluded the spoilt thoughts of privileged children, such as Trump, in favor of those considered values that I mentioned.

Probably shouldn't even have elections anymore. Free people might pick the wrong leader.

Syl wrote:If everyone was disciplined we would have no need for governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws, because we would all be able to regulate ourselves  and deal with others fairly in a civilised manner.

If only....

Yeah, but lay aside the pipe dreams. It's because mankind is not disciplined that we have need of "governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws" and so forth. They are the compromise that mankind reaches, in order to achieve a peaceful existence.

And I'm not an elitist at all. Quit trying to justify your moral shortcomings by saying everyone has them.

You're a very special case which is why I find you such a despicable human.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:If everyone was disciplined we would have no need for governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws, because we would all be able to regulate ourselves  and deal with others fairly in a civilised manner.

If only....

Yeah, but lay aside the pipe dreams.  It's because mankind is not disciplined that we have need of "governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws" and so forth.  They are the compromise that mankind reaches, in order to achieve a peaceful existence.

I think that's what I said Quill.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:If everyone was disciplined we would have no need for governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws, because we would all be able to regulate ourselves  and deal with others fairly in a civilised manner.

If only....

And the lack of discipline by the few is used by moral busy bodies to oppress people for their own good, which brings us right back to my signature and the desire of one group of adults to treat another like children.

Now go eat some spinach and trash all your sweets.

Broccoli actually.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's my point.  Undisciplined freedom leads to people like Trump, making a mess of the world, and grabbing all the good stuff for himself.  Discipline means applying values (equality, charity and distribution) to facts (food, housing, medical care, and down the line, education and equal opportunity) with regularity.



Everyone is an elitist at something.  So, it’s not a bad thing.  But I’m not even speaking about my profession.  When I argue for disciplined freedom, I’m including exercise of my freedom to think for myself and the general interest.  It’s the same right that we all have.

Unmitigated freedom allows in the evil with the good.  It allows in blatant selfishness, as well as stupidity.  It allows in the Trumps of this world, who is no doubt the puppet of the enemies of state.  Unlimited freedom is a bad state of affairs.

Disciplined freedom is not.  It requires thought before action.  It excluded the spoilt thoughts of privileged children, such as Trump, in favor of those considered values that I mentioned.

Probably shouldn't even have elections anymore. Free people might pick the wrong leader.  

Gd. point. You see, even today, how the Republicans are trying to bastardize the meaning of elections. If they get the wrong result, keep rejecting the process.

But there is an ulterior motive in that. Republicans are autocrats, and elections are for people who believe in democracy. So, they are willing to toss it all out.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You're a fookin' southern racists, admit it. I am dangerous to you because I call you out at your game.

You're lucky I only want to get you out of my country. Amexit!

You're a paternilistic prick. You're not dangerous to me you misguided, old fool.

Naughty, naughty. You're half-way to Trump already...divisive and abusive. But the world tolerates people like you, because most of the time your ilk is punching at air.

Occasionally however some autocrats get in, and we've just seen one in the person of Trump. That means there are holes in the containment. Holes, that need patching.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, but lay aside the pipe dreams.  It's because mankind is not disciplined that we have need of "governments, police forces, prisons, rules and laws" and so forth.  They are the compromise that mankind reaches, in order to achieve a peaceful existence.

I think that's what I said Quill.

I know. I'm just trying to merge what you said with the principles of the discussion we have been having.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

And the lack of discipline by the few is used by moral busy bodies to oppress people for their own good, which brings us right back to my signature and the desire of one group of adults to treat another like children.

Now go eat some spinach and trash all your sweets.

Broccoli actually.

Are there still sweets in your house? I'm with the Food Gestapo and will need to look around.

For your own good of course.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

You're a paternilistic prick. You're not dangerous to me you misguided, old fool.

Naughty, naughty.  You're half-way to Trump already...divisive and abusive.  But the world tolerates people like you, because most of the time your ilk is punching at air.

Occasionally however some autocrats get in, and we've just seen one in the person of Trump.  That means there are holes in the containment.  Holes, that need patching.

I want to be divided and abusive towards you. Its how I deal with low lifes.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Naughty, naughty.  You're half-way to Trump already...divisive and abusive.  But the world tolerates people like you, because most of the time your ilk is punching at air.

Occasionally however some autocrats get in, and we've just seen one in the person of Trump.  That means there are holes in the containment.  Holes, that need patching.

I want to be divided and abusive towards you.  Its how I deal with low lifes.  

Yes...the lower species view the world as enemies.  That's the origin of sociopathic types:



Your issue is you are unpracticed in reasonable discussion, so you view reason as a kind of hostility.  You either view it as polarizing, or as insulting.  Either way, it's a challenge to your sense of participation in a social setting, as you are more comfortable with your own authoritarianism.  You find it easier making enemies, than accepting thoughtful ideas.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I want to be divided and abusive towards you.  Its how I deal with low lifes.  

Yes...the lower species view the world as enemies.  That's the origin of sociopathic types:



Your issue is you are unpracticed in reasonable discussion, so you view reason as a kind of hostility.  You either view it as polarizing, or as insulting.  Either way, it's a challenge to your sense of participation in a social setting, as you are more comfortable with your own authoritarianism.  You find it easier making enemies, than accepting thoughtful ideas.

Are you saying you're the only person capable of reasonable discussion around here?

Because you're the only person I have issues with.

Everyone else are decent people, with different opinions.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes...the lower species view the world as enemies.  That's the origin of sociopathic types:



Your issue is you are unpracticed in reasonable discussion, so you view reason as a kind of hostility.  You either view it as polarizing, or as insulting.  Either way, it's a challenge to your sense of participation in a social setting, as you are more comfortable with your own authoritarianism.  You find it easier making enemies, than accepting thoughtful ideas.

Are you saying you're the only person capable of reasonable discussion around here?

I'm the one who talks back. Others are too polite, I reckon, and are too kind to point out your irrationality.  

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Broccoli actually.

Are there still sweets in your house? I'm with the Food Gestapo and will need to look around.  

For your own good of course.

You will have to be quick, the post Christmas  munchies  are very strong.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Are you saying you're the only person capable of reasonable discussion around here?

I'm the one who talks back.  Others are too polite, I reckon, and are too kind to point out your irrationality.  

Or they're not sanctimonious pricks.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'm the one who talks back. Others are too polite, I reckon, and are too kind to point out your irrationality.

Or they're not sanctimonious pricks.

I didn't say they were. I think they just don't want to talk to you when you are on one of your outbursts. You are rude and offensive to those who disagree with you...it's the 'form' of communication of a sociopath. As Psychology Today says, in an article "5 Things Psychopaths and Narcissists Will Do in Conversation":

Kaja Perina wrote:The psychopath’s default attitude toward others is one of disdain. This person does not like you, and he is in fact inwardly mocking you throughout the conversation. Unkind remarks are but the first clue. Stick around and these statements will come faster and more furiously.

Just as we have seen with you...

This is why I liken your demeanor to that of Trump. He is a clear example of psychopathic behavior, and you exhibit the same symptoms.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Or they're not sanctimonious pricks.  

I didn't say they were.  I think they just don't want to talk to you when you are on one of your outbursts.  You are rude and offensive to those who disagree with you...it's the 'form' of communication of a sociopath.  As Psychology Today says, in an article "5 Things Psychopaths and Narcissists Will Do in Conversation":

Kaja Perina wrote:The psychopath’s default attitude toward others is one of disdain. This person does not like you, and he is in fact inwardly mocking you throughout the conversation. Unkind remarks are but the first clue. Stick around and these statements will come faster and more furiously.

Just as we have seen with you...

This is why I liken your demeanor to that of Trump.  He is a clear example of psychopathic behavior, and you exhibit the same symptoms.

Plenty of people here disagree with me.

I'm rude to you.

You're special, but you already knew that didn't you?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I didn't say they were.  I think they just don't want to talk to you when you are on one of your outbursts.  You are rude and offensive to those who disagree with you...it's the 'form' of communication of a sociopath.  As Psychology Today says, in an article "5 Things Psychopaths and Narcissists Will Do in Conversation":



Just as we have seen with you...

This is why I liken your demeanor to that of Trump.  He is a clear example of psychopathic behavior, and you exhibit the same symptoms.

Plenty of people here disagree with me.

I'm rude to you.

You're special, but you already knew that didn't you?

I suspect that you haven't limited your sociopathy. We might learn a lot from some frank discussions with those who have known you closely. Generally, that is the case.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:


Plenty of people here disagree with me.

I'm rude to you.

You're special, but you already knew that didn't you?

I suspect that you haven't limited your sociopathy.  We might learn a lot from some frank discussions with those who have known you closely.  Generally, that is the case.

It's limited to you.

Don't you feel special?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I suspect that you haven't limited your sociopathy.  We might learn a lot from some frank discussions with those who have known you closely.  Generally, that is the case.

It's limited to you.

Don't you feel special?  

I'd sure like to talk to your wife. She left rather abruptly, didn't she?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It's limited to you.

Don't you feel special?  

I'd sure like to talk to your wife.  She left rather abruptly, didn't she?

Not really. We didn't even file for divorce until a couple of years after we split.

If you really must know, we fucked a lot after the divorce. We were good in bed together, we just weren't very compatible outside of it.

Anything else you want to know about us you mealy mouthed little worm?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'd sure like to talk to your wife.  She left rather abruptly, didn't she?

Not really. We didn't even file for divorce until a couple of years after we split.

If you really must know, we fucked a lot after the divorce. We were good in bed together, we just weren't very compatible outside of it.  

Anything else you want to know about us you mealy mouthed little worm?

This is like listening in to some sort of weird therapy session.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Not really. We didn't even file for divorce until a couple of years after we split.

If you really must know, we fucked a lot after the divorce. We were good in bed together, we just weren't very compatible outside of it.  

Anything else you want to know about us you mealy mouthed little worm?

This is like listening in to some sort of weird therapy session.

He needs to know about one of my past relationships an awful lot. I just obliged him.

In the marketplace of goods, services, and ideas that exists in the UK, the market has chosen a government that will look out for their health as the food manufacturers will not. And as every good free-marketeer entrepreneur knows, the customer is always right.

Ben Reilly wrote:In the marketplace of goods, services, and ideas that exists in the UK, the market has chosen a government that will look out for their health as the food manufacturers will not. And as every good free-marketeer entrepreneur knows, the customer is always right.

In a marketplace, one can choose not to participate.