San Francisco overrides mayoral veto, bans Happy Meals with toys

[alp227]

Source: CNN

(CNN) -- The San Francisco, California, Board of Supervisor banned most McDonald's Happy Meals with toys Tuesday. Despite objections and ridicule from opponents, the vote overrode the mayor's veto and officially approved the ban.

The new ordinance, which requires Happy Meals and other fast food with toys to meet new nutritional standards or else be removed from menus, goes into effect December 1, 2011.

The law is the first of its kind for a major American city, and San Francisco officials said they hope other cities would follow. The ordinance seeks to battle a child obesity epidemic by forcing fast-food chains to make any meal with a toy more nutritious for kids.

McDonald's and the restaurant industry contended the government regulation was unwanted by parents. Supporters of the measure, however, said the use of free toys, often tied to characters or themes in new movies, pandered to kids, to get them to buy meals high in fat and calories.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/23/california.happy.meals.ban/index.html

---

So what'll happen to the local economy as sales of Happy Meals plunge yet public health might improve a slight bit as parents don't have that strong of incentive to buy the fast food for their kids anymore? Is it really a "civil right" to be able to buy custom fast food kids meals with toys as Happy Meal apologists (from both the left and right) will assert?

[Unvanguard]

1. Good for SF.

I really couldn't care less if it hurts sales at McDonald's.

[Pavulon]

3. it won't just makes them look like flaming idiots

if your kids are fat, dont feed them so much. grow up and be an adult, not the states job to police your bmi.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

14. right. god knows how many thousands of posts..

I have earned the right to call this stupidity out. Nutrition is math. If you dont want your kid to be fat dont feed him mcshit and sit him in front of a ps3. Very simple if I ride a century weekend and eat a big mac, i'm still many thousands of calories in the black. If i sit on my ass and eat tofu and raw greens, i'm in the red.

banning happy meals is the stupidest thing i have read on the internet today, i assume the city of SF has no problems left to solve and is doing this in spare time.

content, you post seems to be missing it.

[saigon68]

53. Have to agree with you on this one

talk about lack of self responsibility in parenting

The Nanny society

[defendandprotect]

75. Evidently our government is doing an equally poor job of getting info out to parents ....

about fast food as they did on Tobacco!

How many parents know now what unsaturated fat is or Aspartame and other

chemical sweetners in their foods --

or the impact that animal-factories are having on our planet?

Considering the cancer patients dying now and over the last decades from

cigarette smoking, it is obvious that there is a strong role for the government

to play in alerting citizens to health issues -- especially when taxpayers then

foot the bill for the medical care for the illnesses tobacco and unhealthful

foods create.

What we need is MORE evidence of government acting in the interests of their

citizens -- consumers -- and caring enough to pass MEDICARE FOR ALL and more

realistic medical care based on PREVENTION --

[Mojambo]

2. They can still offer toys, they just can't pair them with shitty food that makes you sick.

Sounds like a sensible regulation to me.

[Pavulon]

5. Or people can not eat there, but that assumes free will

something the proles dont have. amazingly stupid task for a government to undertake.

[Creative]

96. I wonder why people voluntarily choose to eat "shitty food that makes you sick."

[roody]

98. It is an addiction.

[Mojambo]

100. To get the toys, duh. n/t

[Creative]

104. Don't think that people who are willing to trade their health for a toy,

should be allowed to do so?

I know, I know--"it's for the children..."

Do you think that the City of San Francisco should also ban chocolate chip cookies?

After all, too many chocolate chip cookies can make you sick too.

[Akoto]

120. Why smoke when it gives you cancer, or drink when it ruins your liver?

Because you enjoy it.

[Creative]

123. Exactly...and there is nothing wrong with people enjoying things that only harms those

who are doing the "enjoying."

Careful though--they might ban tobacco and alcohol next.

[Politicub]

139. It's cheaper than healthy food n/t

[Creative]

142. Actually, it is more expensive.

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Aw, for Chrissake,

More nanny state.

Just give out low calore toys instead.

[namahage]

140. Give out low-calorie toys?

Why, that's precisely what the Supervisors are saying!

If restaurants want to offer toys as incentives, the meals must meet new nutrition standards, officials said.

Under the new regulations, food and beverages must contain fewer than 600 calories, and less than 35 percent of the total calories would be allowed to come from fat. The meal must contain half a cup of fruit and three-fourths a cup of vegetables, and offer less than 640 milligrams of sodium and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat. Breakfast will have the option of offering half cups of fruit or vegetables.

[bluestateguy]

6. Stupid Nanny State crap

Heaven forbid we expect parents to make responsible decisions, but Noooooooooooooooooooo, we need a bunch of clumsy government regulators to enforce a shiny new cumbersome law, with fines and penalties and everything!!!!

[ProudDad]

80. Nope...

It's a sensible Community response to a corporation promoting children to extort shit "food" out of their parents...

[lunasun]

141. I find it much like the cigarette tax even without public insurance

very fat diabetics and clogged heart patients are a toll on our business and health care's ecomony/and social security disability benefits, extra private accomidations etc.

Heavily tax these foods as the vice they are would be my preferred protection for the general public (through govnmt) not to have to incur at least part of the cost down the line for their stupid habits.

Joe Cool / Ronald McDonald's toys which is more overt at directing strictly to kids an addiction for profit?
Why can't one be around kids and the other one can?

[Jim Sagle]

7. Ahh yess..the New Age Woo Woo Left strikes again.

"Step away from that burger."

Do these clowns go for the capillary or what?

[Turborama]

87. Only the "New Age Woo Woo Left" (whoever the fuck they are) want kids to eat healthily?

Saying corporations should be free to do whatever the fuck they like, regardless of the consequences, is Right Wing Ayn Rand-ish Libertarianism that belongs in Kochistan.

[Jim Sagle]

95. Good luck micromanaging Mickey D's.

Meanwhile our jobs fly overseas and our Social Security's about to get "trimmed."

[Turborama]

112. Jobs flying overseas & Social Security about to get "trimmed" is related to happy meal toys?

That's a bit of a stretch!

[Jim Sagle]

113. There's only a finite amount of politcal power to go around.

These clowns in SF have squandered quite a bit of it.

[ProudDad]

131. "There's only a finite amount of politcal power to go around."

Another bullcrap meme that the Dominators would like you to believe because it makes their job easier...

Political power exercised by Communities for the public good are, like love, a bottomless resource...

[Jim Sagle]

137. What's a Dominator? Is that a New Age Woo Woo Scarey Villian?

Oogah Boogah!!!

[ProudDad]

129. In a way...

It's the same corporations buying the same politicians... :hi:

[ProudDad]

128. You're right

This law isn't enough...

The next ordinance must outlaw any "restaurant" who cannot demonstrate that on balance the "food" they promote is nutritious and safe...

Or which siphons local resources out of community and sends them far, far away as corporate "profits"...

And by the way, it's major global corporations like mcd's who are the ones who are having "your jobs fly overseas and our Social Security getting trimmed". And nearly all of them are doing evil along the way...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me

[boppers]

9. And the rest of the country replies:

[liberalmuse]

10. Well, that's it...

if I can't get a toy, I'm no longer eating food that's bad for me. :eyes:

[Ginto]

11. They should ban all playgrounds in McDonalds as well or any "fun" imagery.

When I was a child, it wasn't the toy that drew you to McDonald's. It was the delicious french fries and the fun colors and characters.

[Chan790]

20. and the cookies.

I remember when Happy Meals came with animal-cracker style cookies. They can keep the junky toy, I'd rather have the cookies back.

[Ginto]

34. I remember the cookies. Guess the meals weren't as "happy" back then. nt

[defendandprotect]

74. French fries loaded with salt which is addictive ... and uniform in size everywhere because....

evidently, they take a potato -- create a rectangle of it -- and throw the rest away.

Uniform sized potatoes of equally uniform thickness/thinness are then made from that

rectangular block.

The quantities they buy from farmers also creates monopoly pressure on farmers which,

I presume, keeps the price down? At least the price the farmer gets.

[Ginto]

101. Or you have the option of getting the apple slices.

Sounds like they should ban all french fries. Personally, I like mine fried in peanut oil.

[defendandprotect]

116. And ... maybe putting an apple on the counters -- for sale?

[AngryAmish]

145. Used to cook them in beef tallow back in the day

That is when they were good. Then someone said beef tallow was unhealthy, switched to transfats. How did that work out? Then the veggies said a wee bit of beef tallow was bad somehow....

Craven corporations always cave to loudmouths.

[Iggo]

12. Does that mean no more 12 yr olds with D-cups?

(And that's just the boys...lol.)

[pipoman]

29. :coffee on keyboard:

[Turborama]

84. !

:rofl:

[Rage for Order]

13. What will this solve?

If I owned a McDonald's I'd offer the toy separate from the meal for free. One free toy per child per day, whether you buy any food or not. Problem solved, and the kids will still get their parents to bring them to McDonald's, and while they're there they just might buy something to eat or drink. It's not very hard to think up workarounds to this ordinance. Oh well, at least the city council could pat themselves on the back for a few days.

:eyes:

[alittlelark]

15. I LIKE IT - I'll be the uncool one here.

Any restaurant that needs toys to entice kids to eat their SHIT should be stopped from doing so.


FOOD is FOOD.

Toys are Toys.



Why would ANYONE support enticing the eating of NASTY 'food' w/ a toy?


SERIOUSLY.
WHY!

[EFerrari]

26. I never knew so many people objected to nutritional standards for kids!

LOL

[pipoman]

31. Nutritional standards?

Who said anything about nutritional standards? This is about nutritional regulation. Two completely different things. The .gov has had nutritional standards for years, they haven't made laws to regulate what you can eat or what I, as a restaurateur, can offer.

[EFerrari]

58. And when a corporation is trying to sell unhealthy crap to kids

by luring them with plastic toys, I'm fine with that. Just like the liquor people and the tobacco companies get dinged for marketing to minors.

[pipoman]

69. And when this law is absoloutely

and completely ineffective at solving anything. It will have no impact at all on obesity or anything else, except maybe happy meal sales. What will the next law to slay the imaginary dragon be? Hope it doesn't effect anything you value or enjoy.

[Abq_Sarah]

121. I'm pretty sure it's the parents

Who are buying happy meals, not the kids. If mom or dad want to buy Jr a happy meal with a free toy, it's their choice.

[pipoman]

30. As long as everything you do in your life

and with your kids passes the sniff test for health. Next on the hit list, fun foods...no more cotton candy at circuses, Frankenberry? Gone. Oreo cookies...history. Christmas cookies...forget it if they are shaped like anything. Just let me decide what's good for you. If you don't like it, well fuck you, it's for your own good. How about promoting personal responsibility and leave food decisions to parents?

I don't oppose this restriction because I think kids should eat happy meals, I oppose it because the .gov really should be reigned in and forced to actually repair real problems...the things they are actually there to do, and that doesn't include parenting people's children.

[primavera]

37. Unfortunately, parents aren't making good decisions

The problem I have with the standard libertarian saw of asserting that government should leave people alone to make their own decisions is that, so often, people making their own decisions results in harm to others. Yes, Americans should have the right to make decisions for themselves, as long as those decisions do not harm anyone else. But how do you decide what constitutes a harm? Obesity is one of the single largest contributors to poor public health we face in this country. It is responsible for higher health care costs, which get passed along in higher premiums for health insurance for everyone else. You want to feed your kid a happy meal? Well, as a consequence, I have to pay more for my health insurance. What gives you the right to jack up my health insurance premiums?

Of course, the impact of that one single, solitary decision to feed one, single, solitary kid one single, solitary happy meal is infinitesimally small. But when millions of people are making the same decision, day after day, the impact ceases to be negligible. How do you tell one person that it's okay to make an infinitesimally small contribution to a public harm, but then tell the millions of other people doing the same thing that it's not okay for them, because, collectively, they're producing a substantial harm to others?

[pipoman]

68. Yea

and people who live in metropolitan areas have more health problems than those of us who live rurally, thus I pay higher health insurance for your decision to live in a metro area. There are endless life choices which result in higher incidence of illness, property damage, and other actuarially unwise activities. Which one will be next? Maybe one you enjoy or value?

[alittlelark]

77. Cotton candy is an obvious TREAT

Oreos are for dessert. X-mas cookies are an indulgence.

A lunch or dinner should be REAL FOOD.

I don't care how many disagree w/ me.

I think it is obvious.

If we teach children to eat right they will not have obesity related health problems.
Toys in GARBAGE are a nasty way to get overworked/stressed parents to ignore the sewage their children are eating.


PS - I'm not even a vegetarian - I just know that 'happy meals' are shit.

[Ginto]

102. Sounds like they should ban all non-real food then, like fried chicken and burgers. nt

[jancantor]

16. Screw these morons

and good for Newsom

[David__77]

17. Ack the "New Left" is terrible...

There's a raging class struggle and they are passing this kind of thing??

[petronius]

18. If the toy really is the motive for choosing the Happy Meal, I wonder if this rule

will just encourage kids to forego the HM entirely and order from the full-size menu. I mean, why limit yourself to a teeny little hamburger and a small fries when you don't even get a cool toy to make up for it?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

19. Politicians against pandering?

and Unhappy Meals?

[woo me with science]

21. Oh for god's sake.

One more lunacy that will be aimed at Nancy Pelosi.

[24601]

143. If the Foo shits....n/t

[Mz Pip]

22. This is just stupid

People really buy their kids Happy Meals just because of the piece of plastic crap in the box? Seriously? They can buy a piece of plastic crap at the local Dollar Store and forgo MC Donalds entirely.

This is just stupid. Do the politicians really believe that this will make one iota of difference in childhood obesity?

[The Northerner]

23. +1

[EFerrari]

24. It's not stupid in the least. They're leveraging McD's own PR.

Kids don't want the stupid plastic crap from the corner store. They want the stupid plastic crap that comes with that meal. Just like young smokers wanted all that Joe Camel cr@p.

[proteus_lives]

27. Really?

They were still doing the Joe Camel stuff when I started smoking and to this day the only people I've ever seen collecting Camel points or the like are the elderly.

And I remember throwing away happy meal toys. They usually sucked. I wanted the fries and nuggets.

[EFerrari]

45. Do you really believe these people spend millions marketing to kids

because it doesn't work?

[Mz Pip]

43. Toy or no toy

This will do nothing in solving the problem of childhood obesity. People aren't going to stop eating at McDonalds because the toy is no longer there.

Kids are obese because they sit in front of the tv or computer and do little to burn off those calories.

[EFerrari]

46. Have you ever encountered the concept of harm reduction?

[Mz Pip]

47. Sure

but this isn't it. It's perceived harm reduction. People will still feed their kids crap regardless of whether or not there is a toy in it.

There may be a government solution for child obesity, but this isn't it.

[EFerrari]

48. Harm reduction has nothing to do with solutions but with reduction. n/t

[Bombero1956]

25. how long?

Now that they've banned toys in Happy Meals when will they go after the cereal companies that stick toys in sugary cereals? How about processed foods like Kid Cuisine meals? In my opinion the ordinance will make nary a ripple in childhood obesity rates because kids spend too much time in front of video game consoles, computers and TV's. These people wasted their time with this ill conceived ordinance. Lastly these people have reinforced the perception that if liberals don't like it, they ban it.

[proteus_lives]

28. Nanny-State garbage.

:thumbsdown:

[primavera]

38. If the shoe fits...

If people don't want to be treated as children, perhaps they should try behaving like adults.

[pipoman]

32. Happy Meals $2.19,,,add a toy for only $.10

There fixed it while your city is paying out $tens of thousands in legal challenges over a $.10 fix.

[Nihil]

33. It's interesting to look down the list of replies ...

... to see who is throwing their toys out complaining about the ban ...

:hide:

[marshall]

35. Will toys in cereal boxes be next?

Many kids don't even know what cereal they are picking out--they just want the toy.

[Fumesucker]

36. Personally I'd like to see them bring back candy cigarettes..

;)

:hide:

[Iggo]

44. And Joe Camel, too. (n/t)

[saigon68]

86. Joe Camel was cool

So was Spuds McKenzie

[Luminous Animal]

136. And the Dutch Boy! I miss my freedom to buy lead paint.

[snooper2]

39. I think they should just go all the way with this...

If you are caught with your little obese kid walking around...You get arrested..

The kid gets sent to fat camp and will stay there until he/she is back to a normal size..

You then get supervised visitation for a year, and are trained on proper nutrition, exercise and other parenting skills in relation to keeping your child healthy.

After that you will required to take a couple thousand dollars worth of written and oral tests.

If you pass everything, at that point you will get your child back.



Sounds like a Win-Win!!!

[24601]

144. Boy are you too damn easy - if you are caught with a kid exceeding

the body fat standards, then that kid must be processed into Soylent Green (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green) while the parents shall be herded into "reeducation" camps, tattooed with a camp number and forcibly sterilized. Any other children will be taken from the natural parents and reassigned to a responsible family.

Whatever it takes, dammit! Fat little fucker probably would have grown up and voted Repug anyway....

[xchrom]

40. fine with me. nt

[Luminous Animal]

41. Happy Meals are not banned.

Rather, starting in December 2011, they must meet nutritional guidelines and contain fruits or vegetables.

[hughee99]

50. Not fruits OR vegetables, fruits AND vegetables.

"Under the new regulations, food and beverages must contain fewer than 600 calories, and less than 35 percent of the total calories would be allowed to come from fat. The meal must contain half a cup of fruit and three-fourths a cup of vegetables, and offer less than 640 milligrams of sodium and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat. Breakfast will have the option of offering half cups of fruit or vegetables."

If I understand correctly, Mcdonald's could sell most of their current happy meals as they are now, and ADD apple slices, and be compliant. If they took the drink out of the happy meal and made people buy it separately, I think they could sell all their happy meals as they are now, adding apples to meet the "fruits and vegetables" requirement.

This, of course, completely leaves aside the issue that parents that take their kids to McDonalds often enough that McDonalds has a significant impact on their child's weight, probably aren't all that vigilant in ensuring a healthy diet in general, so you may just find kids adding an extra apple pie with their happy meal.

But forget all that... Hurray, we're making kids healthier! :sarcasm:

[John Kerry VonErich]

42. It WILL be deemed unconstitutional

nt

[EFerrari]

49. No it won't. And eventually, the Feds will also adopt a law

that says, if you market to children, your product can't be cr@p that makes kids sick.

[pipoman]

70. Nonsense

and hamburgers and french fries don't make kids sick or even fat.

[EFerrari]

94. I'd ask you to bet me if we could without getting Skinner in trouble.

Plus, I have Michele Obama on my side. Who do you have? (j/k)

[Maine-ah]

51. seriously, does anybody really think happy meals are to blame

for childhood obesity?

Perhaps we could look into more things like gym classes getting 86'd from school, or maybe the fact that kids sit on their asses playing video games instead of spending their energy outside running and playing. Maybe we could look at the food in the grocery stores that contain so much fucking crap in them.

or

there's this funny little thing called....

personal responsibility.

Don't feed your kid crap for every meal. Once and a while, sure go head with the fast food. It should not be an everyday kind of thing. Make your kid go play outside.

[EFerrari]

52. Heaven forbid anyone hold multinational corporations responsible

for marketing crap to children.

[Ginto]

54. Why is it crap? I love a burger and fries. Although I'm an adult now so I get it with bacon.

Seems that any ice cream shop could be accused of less nutritional value than McDonald's. They better get on it.

[EFerrari]

56. That's right. You're an adult, not a child.

And ice cream shops sell ice cream, not "meals", right?

I don't know why this is such a difficult concept for people. There are already regs about marketing alcohol and tabacco to minors. This is the same thing. If McDonalds wants to market to children, they have to provide a somewhat healthy meal . If they choose not to by withdrawing their plastic crap, then the hook they have with kids is also taken out. It's pretty simple.

[Ginto]

59. So I should be able to buy whatever meal I like for my child right?

Depends on the shop. At Friendly's or Braum's you can get a nice burger a pile of fries and a giant sundae. Many fond memories of Friendly's and Swensen's when I was a kid.

You're comparing alcohol and tobacco to McDonald's? That is a stretch at best unless you plan on putting serious restrictions on burgers, fries, and fried chicken. At what age should these dangerous products be allowed to be purchased? :)

You do realize that a child could eat 3 happy meals per day and they would lose weight. Not enough calories.

http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/Happy_Meals_Nutrition_List.pdf

[EFerrari]

61. Yes, you should be able to feed your child whatever you want

until the criminal code kicks in, lol.

And you still can in San Francisco. What you can't do is buy a toy with a POS Happy Meal any more. :)

[Ginto]

62. Add a toy for only 10 cents coming to San Francisco soon. The next best thing since super sizing.

At least you can still get a toy in your cracker jacks, frosted flakes, and cocoa puffs. You used to be able to get a lollipop at the bank too.

[EFerrari]

64. cracker jacks, frosted flakes and cocoa puffs, the three food groups of American breakfast.

:)

[Turborama]

91. This law doesn't stop people from being able to buy whatever meal they like for their kids

They just won't get a free toy with some of the meals.

[Ginto]

103. You do realize that they toy was never "free."

You also have the options of buying a burger, fries, and drink separately.

[Turborama]

110. "So I should be able to buy whatever meal I like for my child right?" Yes, and no one's stopping you

[ProudDad]

82. +1000

It's pretty damn amazing that so many on this board are sticking up for a corporation that's feeding poison to our kids!

Against a community that's decided enough extortion training is enough...

It makes one despair!

[defendandprotect]

76. The government has a responsibility to citizens -- as they did in regard to TOBACCO --

to alert them when it becomes obvious that the citizen/consumer doesn't

understand the health risks involved in feeding their children salt saturated

foods -- and an abundance of animal fat -- washed down with sugar laden soft drinks.

[Ginto]

114. If that were the case, they would just ban burgers and fried chicken.

And fries too. Then they'd be forced to make the "right" decisions.

[defendandprotect]

115. Took them a long time, but eventually tobacco is more or less "banned."

Think people find it harder to understand they can also be poisoned and

made ill by food!

[Ginto]

146. Please list the other foods besides burgers, fries, and fried chicken that you would ban. nt

[Ter]

55. If the law is illegal and unjust, McDonald's should break it

Keep selling them, screw the dictators. How insanely leftist does the city council have to be if Gavin Newsom vetoed it?

[EFerrari]

57. Gavin Newsom is no measure of the left in any way.

He married some gay couples, that's it. He's a corporate Dem in just about every other respect.

[NuttyFluffers]

90. thank you. lefties from other states look @ me in utter confusion when i say the same.

they say the same thing, too, "you guys must be really out there. that's the mayor that married a few gay couples, he's like far out lefty! and you say he's not all that left?"

he's Mayor Goodhair Brightsmile. great looks, but like candy, so little substance that he'll give you indigestion afterwards. not a bad man, but nowhere near the substance we need for times like this.

[EFerrari]

92. Yep. Not a bad man but not a progressive in any sense of the world.

I'm happy he married those people but that was the very limit of his attention span to the problems in our city.

[ProudDad]

132. Newsom is the "Downtown Developer's Mayor"

Another rich boy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple...

In spite of being somewhat socially-liberal, he's at heart just another capitalist tool...

And your reason for defending one of the most evil corporations on Earth is?

[cottonseed]

60. Coming next: banning kids from school until school lunches meet the same standards...

I bet we can get it through... community involvement at its finest.

[EFerrari]

63. Already happening. And Michele Obama is very active in this movement..

A Federal Effort to Push Junk Food Out of Schools

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/health/nutrition/08junk.html

[pinniped]

65. The Board of Stupidvisors strike again.

These shitheads are really good at coming up with shit to ban.

And that Newsom character once supported this hair-brained scheme. He lightened up his act before running for Lt. gov. The Maldonado guy referred to him as the food police.

All of these useless fucks need to be Total Recalled, but it wouldn't matter because their replacements would be just as nutty.

So, can I get a preban Happy Meal complete with toy if I order it for myself? Will the food police arrest me if I turned around and gave it to a little kid?

[Mz Pip]

73. So much crap

so little time...

I guess crap is in the eyes of the beholder. That crap toy in burger combo merits so much scrutiny and outrage is mind boggling.

Crap is everywhere. This measure doesn't even scratch the crap surface. It's just a waste of time.

[ProudDad]

79. Wow!

Save it for <you know who>...

What part of corporate extortion do you like so much, that gets you so hot?

[ProudDad]

133. Yep

For attempted murder...

"can I get a preban Happy Meal complete with toy"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me

[KamaAina]

66. Maybe now the supes can do something about the Mickey D's in the Haight

that throws homeless people off its front steps even after they've ordered something, and took away the dollar menu because too many of the said homeless people were ordering from it.

[bitchkitty]

67. Doubt it will affect the economy, hon, but it is kind of stupid.

I'm thinking that the money spent on the time and manpower to craft this would have been better spent elsewhere - like on schools?

[roamer65]

71. I don't want a happy meal, I want an angry meal!

I can't remember what comedian said it but I loved it.

[defendandprotect]

72. Good for them ... we need to put corporations and this crap we call food back into the garbage can..

[ProudDad]

78. Good for San Francisco!

Poisoning kids with MacFranken"food" SHOULD be illegal...

[saigon68]

88. They need to tackle this problem too with the adults

[Ginto]

107. Why make me look at this on Thanskgiving?

You are a bad person.

[ProudDad]

81. Ban ALL nutritionless crap food!

This law doesn't go far enough...

But it's a good start...

Might save a few kid's lives!

[Ginto]

105. What would you deem as nutritionless?

Maybe we could start eating little colored cube like in Star Trek.

[ProudDad]

117. If you have to ask

we need a HELL of a lot more laws like this...

And start teaching REAL nutrition in the schools...



But to directly answer your strawman, here's one of our solutions:

Tucson CSA: http://www.tucsoncsa.org/

We now pay less for our food and are much healthier as a result of rarely visiting the "grocery stores" and NEVER, EVER, EVER buying "fast food-like crap"...

[HEyHEY]

83. Wait, so the TOYS have to be nutritious?

[Turborama]

85. Children have a right to free toys! It's in the constitution!!

The kid's constitution which I just made up.

I see nothing wrong with this, it's a fucking plastic toy used as bait to get kids to eat nutrition free shit. So what if purveyors of fast food have to meet nutritional standards to go with that bait?

They should focus their attention on providing healthy food in the schools, though.

[ProudDad]

118. In some (wacko left wing) pockets of the Bay Area...

They are:

http://www.edibleschoolyard.org/

[NuttyFluffers]

89. i think decoupling toys from happy meals is a great idea. remember Beanie Babies?

i used to get tearfully angry as i would see van after van buy half dozens (or even dozens) of happy meals just to corner the regional market for a particular Beanie Baby of the month. and all that food couldn't be donated directly to a shelter, so often minivan moms would drop it off en masse to the nearest homeless (i guess that's nice...) or just throw it away. the amount of trash and food waste was so sickening -- it was like an orgy of consumption and waste.

yes, it's sad a kid doesn't get a toy inside their happy meal, but they can still have it purchased separately. at least the parent doesn't have to fight their kids into eating a sliced apple & yogurt snack versus a happy meal. i remember how parents would ask for the in-demand collectible toy separately (years ago) and couldn't buy it unless they got a happy meal. you could see the frustration, especially of parents who were not interested in buying another meal just to have their kid complete a set.

it sounds bad now, but after my many years watching happy meal consumption over the years, i am glad the toys are being decoupled from the happy meal itself. the toy is still available, it's just not attached to the food.

[EFerrari]

93. That toy was a big fat barbed hook for the kids.

"Decoupling" is exactly the term. It's an undoing of the mechanism that drives kids to a "food" for the wrong reasons. :thumbsup:

[Ginto]

106. Parents have the option of getting the burger, apple slices, and low fat milk.

They also can get the components of the "classic" happy meal without actually getting the happy meal. They are powerless against their children though.

[EFerrari]

108. Just because you can mop up a flood doesn't mean the water wasn't wet.

:)

[Ginto]

109. Next ban: charging for water. :). nt

[Imajika]

97. So McDonalds can just make the toy optional....

...and cost 10 cents extra and go completely around this silly ban.

A complete waste of time even if it does deprive kids of a Happy Meal toy. Won't make a single bit of difference and is nannystateism at its worst.

[Mz Pip]

99. Kids already have so much

crap in their lives. I doubt banning the Happy Meal toy will make any difference, either. what next? The candy bar rack at the grocery check out stand? The candy/popcorn counter at the movies? Trick or treating?

[robcon]

111. Awful result for a free country.

n/t

[ProudDad]

119. Ah, yes.

I remember that one from the Libertarian Manifesto...

"Freedom to poison my children if I want to...'cause THEY'RE MINE!"

Yep, "free country"...

[Mz Pip]

122. A hamburger

is now "poison?" Drano is poison, ammonia is poison. A hamburger and fries, not poison.

[ProudDad]

124. The way mickey-D does 'em, it's poison...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me

And quite a bit quicker than cigarettes too...

[Mz Pip]

125. There are probably lots of

foods that if you ate them 3 times a day for a month that would screw up your system. Doesn't make it poison.

But whatever. I'm sure removing the toy will keep all those parents from feeding their kids McDonalds for all three meals day in and day out. :eyes:

[ProudDad]

126. Nearly ALL of the food I eat

can be eaten 3 times a day for years without causing these ANY negative consequences...

mickie-d adds addictive substances to nutrition-less food-substitutes for huge corporate profits...

And in their advertising, teaches children the techniques of extortion to make their parents contribute to the McD corporate profits...

This is good for us...How?

[Mz Pip]

130. Did I say it was good for us?

If parents are so foolish as to be coerced by their children's "extortion" then they have a whole lot more problems than banning toy can possibly address.

[ProudDad]

134. Ah, gee, can't you see

it's a gesture in the right direction...

With an ordinance meant to point out a problem...

If we connect the dots, it's the corporate capitalist "economic" system with its concurrent propaganda machine that's the problem...

And a majority of the S.F. Board of Sups get that to some degree or another it seems...

And banning the "happy meal with toy" is a wonderful counter-propaganda tool...

The corporation is a corrupting influence on the Community, the advertising is corrupting the Community, the "meal" is essentially nutrition-less empty calories poisoning the Community...

What's YOUR problem? Are you just another "offended" libertarian?

[Mz Pip]

138. I see..

I don't agree with you so I must have a problem or be an "offended" libertarian. Whatever. :eyes:

I don't think it's a wonderful propaganda tool. I think it's just silly. Banning the toy will be nothing more than a minor annoyance to McDonalds and do little to change their menu or the eating habits of those who need to change their eating habits.

[Luminous Animal]

135. Yeah. I was really bummned when they banned lead from paint.

[slackmaster]

127. You will jog for the master race

And always wear the happy face.