Live data from Hacker News

As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

nytimes.com

111–120 of 144 posts

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#111
post #15

In 2011, as a condition for joining, the World Trade Organization ordered Samoa to eliminate the ban within a year. Eliminate a policy designed for the betterment of the population! So that's one of the aims of the WTO, to promote corporate interests, even when it's bad for the general population.

This is the whole purpose of the WTO. Last year India tried to invest on the development of solar energy and was hit by the WTO, as India cannot provide subsidies to their own companies due to the globalization rules they had to accept. Now India is trying to sue back the USA due to their own national subsidies for solar power. The expected defense of the USA: "our companies are global, yours aren't".

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#113
post #85
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In countries that provide publicly-funded healthcare you are arguably directly effecting other people's lives by the cost of the medical treatments you'll end up needing if you are obese - these treatments will be funded out of the taxpayer's pocket, when that money could be going to better schooling, infrastructure, or some other use.

Likewise, if an individual makes a choice that causes his or her taxable income to decrease, he or she has arguably (by the same argument) directly effected other people's lives by reducing the tax revenue of the country. Ought governments impose some incentive for individuals to earn as much taxable income as possible?

They already provide such an incentive by enforcing private property laws.

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#115

Why don't they raise taxes instead? At least if it doesn't work they'd make a hell lot of money. I mean, it seems efficient for tobacco in my country (France). I don't know why it couldn't work for junk food.

In a lot of countries, it is easier to enforce a public ban than it is to collect taxes.

A high tax on imports may simply lead to imports being smuggled in, and tax stamps being forged. A total ban can be trivially enforced---see a junk food container, its illegal.

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#116
post #113
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likewise, if an individual makes a choice that causes his or her taxable income to decrease, he or she has arguably (by the same argument) directly effected other people's lives by reducing the tax revenue of the country. Ought governments impose some incentive for individuals to earn as much taxable income as possible?

They already provide such an incentive by enforcing private property laws.

I was referring to a legal punishment for failing to maximize one's taxable income.

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#117
post #21
post #15

In 2011, as a condition for joining, the World Trade Organization ordered Samoa to eliminate the ban within a year. Eliminate a policy designed for the betterment of the population! So that's one of the aims of the WTO, to promote corporate interests, even when it's bad for the general population.

And people wonder why there's an anti-globalisation backlash.

Anti-globalization was always a hot topic for the left. Read Chomsky on NAFTA for example and free trade:

https://chomsky.info/secrets03/

Here is Bernie Sanders being visibly upset at raising immigration levels and instituting "open borders" policy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0

I am kind of interested how the current liberals become pro-globalization all of the sudden. They went from organizing large anti-globalization riots, and getting tear gased fighting it, to "What do you mean? We love globalization!".

I want to see a more specific analysis in how the shift happened, and maybe a more detailed timeline. Certainly an interesting topic.

Here is of course Zuckerberg with his letter worrying that people are not buying the globalization shtick very well anymore:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38998884

If you squint enough to not notice the liberal veneer he puts on you might think he is one of the Koch brothers.

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#118
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I've tried to argue for the French ban of unlimited soda refills, I was called a "Stalinist" so I probably won't say much on this one. I hope it will help to reduce their obesity rates.

The "Stalinism" isn't so much about the actual soda, but more about the attitude that the government should have the power to just step in and ban whatever the hell someone has decided is a bad idea this week. Once you move from the presumption of freedom to the presumption that anything that might have negative consequences should be banned, it's hard to get back. Personally I believe that whatever consenting adults…

"This is what I gathered. That in that country if a man falls into ill health, or catches any disorder, or fails bodily in any way before he is seventy years old, he is tried before a jury of his countrymen, and if convicted is held up to public scorn and sentenced more or less severely as the case may be. There are subdivisions of illnesses into crimes and misdemeanours as with offences amongst ourselves—a man being punished very heavily for serious illness, while failure of eyes or hearing in one over sixty-five, who has had good health hitherto, is dealt with by fine only, or imprisonment in default of payment. But if a man forges a cheque, or sets his house on fire, or robs with violence from the person, or does any other such things as are criminal in our own country, he is either taken to a hospital and most carefully tended at the public expense, or if he is in good circumstances, he lets it be known to all his friends that he is suffering from a severe fit of immorality, just as we do when we are ill, and they come and visit him with great solicitude, and inquire with interest how it all came about, what symptoms first showed themselves, and so forth,—questions which he will answer with perfect unreserve; for bad conduct, though considered no less deplorable than illness with ourselves, and as unquestionably indicating something seriously wrong with the individual who misbehaves, is nevertheless held to be the result of either pre-natal or post-natal misfortune."

-Samuel Butler, Erewhon.

Not satire as much these days, sadly.

Re: As Obesity Rises, Remote Pacific Islands Plan to Abandon Junk Food

#119
post #86
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having only one soda is definitely as bad as being in the gulag, I'm sure.

Can we drop the hyperbole, and no you don't definitely need to exaggerate.

He wasn't exaggerating he was being sarcastic. He was in fact poking fun at the notion that defending a soda ban was compared to stalinism. Your outrage is misplaced.
Post reply on HN