Do you think a city should have a say in the diets of its citizens?

Question

A city is banning fast food restaurants in an impoverished area in L.A. I'm wondering if this is fair because sometimes fast food is all lower-income people can afford. The healthier alternatives always seem to be more expensive. Your thoughts?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080730/ap_on_re_us/fast_food_ban;_ylt=AuAIDjpjcQSWMoLUXxFujwpG2ocA

Answer 1

Only in one situation.  If they're cannibal murderers the authorities should probably stop that.  Otherwise I dont' care if they eat razorblades and rat poison.  It's each citizen's individual right to eat what he sees fit.

Answer 2

No not at all, I don't want a Nanny Government, that tells me what I can and can't eat.  I don't want the government telling palces they can't use Trasn Fats, that is stupid.  People have no rights anymore at all.

Did anyone ever see Demolition man?



Edgar Friendly: You got ball-balls cop, comin' down here after the show you put on.

-----

Edgar Friendly: [A]ccording to Cocteau's plan, I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal?

-----

Lenina Huxley: [A]nything not good for you is bad, hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat . . .

John Spartan: Are you sh**ing me?

A computer: John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute.

John Spartan: What the h**l is that?

A computer: John Spartan, you are fined one credit . . .

Lenina Huxley: Bad language, child play, gasoline, uneducational toys, and anything spicy. Abortion is also illegal. But, then again so is pregnancy, if you don't have a license.



Seriously....

Answer 3

No. This does not address the issue at all. You need to educate people about what constitutes a healthy diet - not prevent them from having access to unhealthy food. They are people capable of making an informed decision. Just becasue they are poor does not mean they are dumb.

Most lower income people do not spend a lot of money at restaurants, fast food or otherwise. They do most of their eating at home because they cannot afford to eat out all the time.

This is a slapdash "solution" that just gives the appearance of addressing an issue. I would be paying more attention to who starts buying up the properties once the fast food restaurants have been shut down

Answer 4

I understand what they are trying to do but at the same time healthier restaurants (Subway) are not jumping at the opportunity to enter impoverished area's.

Furthermore, sit down restaurants are NOT jumping at this and do not see this as an opportunity to enter this market.  

A lot of studies go into play (geographics, community income) if a certain type of store opens up there.  Ex. Ever seen a Ferrari dealership in Compton?  Doubt it.

Answer 5

I think it is terrible. Who gives the politicians the right to tell them what to eat? The people of L.A. should be up in arms about this. So they can have a gun shop and liquor store in there but not a Mcdonald's?????/

Answer 6

I think banning fast food in impoverished LA is cruel. I mean if someone is homeless or living in a place without appliances how are they supposed to eat something from a store? On the other hand if they can scrape together a buck they can get a double cheeseburger from McDonalds or heaven forbid sit in the air conditioning and refill their soda for a couple of hours or get a milkshake to fill them up and cool them off for a while.

Are they really trying to control the weight and cholesterol of impoverished people?  Wow.

I also disagree with the trans-fats ban at New York restaurants. I would rather eat restaurant food made by a chef than government issue food any day. People who eat out know that they are splurging on a pastry or fried something. And I trust a New York chef`s discernment on what sort of cooking oil will make their sweets and fats taste good more than the government.

Why not require the restaurants to offer x% salad and fresh foods on their menus so people have a choice.

I mean our local bakery has TRIED to offer fat free muffins and other alternatives for the health =conscious and IT DOESN`T work because even the health nuts -- if they are going into the bakery -- go for a once in a while treat and if they order a Danish they surely know that they are pretty much eating a half stick of butter.

Restaurants don`t kill people. People who overindulge kill themselves. Banning things won`t solve the problem. Continuing to educate about nutrition might.

Answer 7

I think if the city wants to ban fast food restaurants, it also has to make sure there are affordable healthy alternatives in the area to replace those restaurants.  It sort of makes sense, because unhealthy citizens (particularly low-income ones) end up costing government money when they get sick.  

It's like how governments try to fund a lot of after school programs and schooling for low-income areas, since if you keep kids from going into crime young, you end up saving money later when you have fewer criminals.  

Of course, it's unfair to ban fast food without providing alternatives in the same price range.

Answer 8

No, this is big government overstepping its boundaries. This is exactly what Obama proposes....government healthcare that will tell you what you can and cannot put into your body, also what doctor you can or cannot see.  Pretty scary stuff!

Answer 9

While I do agree that something must be done about the fast food in poor areas, this is definitely wrong. All that was needed was to limit business loans and licenses to fast food restaurants in poor areas but this is stupid. Besides, people just want to eat what they want to eat. If I can afford it and it tastes good I should be able to eat it.

Answer 10

they should.

Answer 11

No, absolutely not.