Thank you! I was going to say something similar, but yours was so much pithier.

Ah yes, the ever-popular "If the poor people can't afford bread, why don't they eat steak?" argument. Ever thought of becoming a French aristocrat?

You're actually amusing.....last year I did feed my family very well on a food stamp budget - controlled carb actually - showed it can be done and that IMO more money wasn't the problem, but lack of education about how to shop and plan was. And education is something one can change - willful dependance, and the continued fostering of that dependance, on the other hand, not easy to fix.

Why do you think is it so difficult for a poor woman to feed her family well - seriously, the vast majority of the planet lives in utter poverty - none of them can do it? What's different in those that can and do from the victims you think need rescue?

I bought breakfast this morning for $1.28 and lunch this afternoon for $3.32. At McDonald's.

Interesting...I just looked up the stats, and I live in a city more poor than LA!

Los Angeles (2000 census data) = median household income $36,687; per capita income was $20,671

18.3% of families are below the poverty line.

Where I live (2000 census data) = median household income $33,729; per capita income $19,507

19.2% of the population are below the poverty line

But you don't have to pay $1,000,000 for your shack in Mizzou either.

Nope...but we have a lot of homes out here priced well over a million dollars - well above the average price of a home out here......but, throwing the million dollar home into the mix is kind of a red herring - south LA isn't filled with million dollar homes now is it? Nope...I just looked realtor.com and homes there, like here, are mostly in the range of $85,000 to $200,000.....and probably like here, the million dollar homes aren't sitting next to the ones going for $100,000.

NOW you are making sense 1000!

Regina...I think I love you

Yes, it may surprise the rest of the country that California is not all-Dem, hippie tree huggers. It would also surprise the rest of the country to learn that Midwesterners can also be educated and intelligent.

Although born in Cali, I lived a significant portion of my impressionable years in Colorado and Illinois. I've obvserved both sides of the stereotyping. So maybe that's the influence that turned me conservative, eh?

I think the issue here is really one of some think that fast good is acceptable and some think it is unhealthy. I think conservatives looking deep into their hearts cannot object to the local governments writing laws and governing a community. Communities and cities should follow the will of people as long as it is not unconstitutional.

First of all, I don't consider myself to be a conservative.

Second, I don't understand why it is that if you believe fast food is unhealthy, you need to impose that on me through the laws. If you don't want to eat fast food, don't eat it. Simple. The problem isn't that I would force you to consume something you don't like, but that you would attempt to limit my access to something I do want. The nice thing about my approach is that you get to do what you want to do, and I get to do what I want to do. Neither hurts the other.

Imagine that the "will of the people" in your city or community decided that something you enjoyed was unhealthy for those who consume it and therefore everyone in the community should have their access to that commodity restricted. Would you consider that fair? Wouldn't you even maybe think that the government was kind of acting like you were a little kid and it was your parent? Maybe a little "paternalistic"? "We know what's best for you, honey, and even if you don't agree, you'll have to do it our way, because you're a silly little girl who needs the 'will of the people' to decide what you should do."

I honestly can't see how anyone can argue in favor of this approach. The only thing I can think is that you simply can't imagine yourself having your own freedoms limited this way.

It reminds me of those who would impose prayer in schools on others. These prayer advocates would have us believe that the government forbids them to pray in school. But they're being disingenuous when they make this argument. They aren't so much worried that they are prevented from praying; they aren't. They simply wish to force others around them to pray too.

Same with this food thing. People wishing to prevent new stores from opening aren't concerned about their own health. They weren't going to eat there anyway. They're concerned that their neighbors might eat something unhealthy. Why does one need such a law?

And, third, I'm really not a conservative. Don't call me that.

I think people should be able to make regulations on a local level which suits their communities which are in accordance to their wishes. I was amused by the anti-local sentiment of the conservative faction when the issue was one of the availability of hamburgers in a community they don't even live in.

Do I think fast food is unhealthy eaten with 64 oz. Cokes and a big order of fries (the way most people eat)? Yes. Do I want to see it banned in my community? No. Do I care if another community that I don't live in bans it? No.

Okay folks, this thread is really getting off-topic.

Please keep in mind that discussion of politics, religion, racism etc etc is not permitted.

Please review our policy on this matter Why politics and other contentious debates are not permitted at Active Low-Carber


thanks for your cooperation,


Doreen

Hi Doreen:

My last post was posted before I read your message. I certainly understand your policy and respect it. Personally I have a very high tolerance for enthusiastic debate. But I understand it can become devisive and create a lot of work for the moderator.