1. New to the forums? Check out our Mentorship Program!
    Our mentors will answer your questions and help you become a part of the community!
  2. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.

Happy meals banned in several counties in California

Discussion in 'Congregation of the Masses' started by lmitchell0012, Nov 11, 2010.

  1. lmitchell0012

    lmitchell0012 Wi-Fi Blacklisted

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,437
    http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20101104/happy-meals-101103/20101104/?hub=CalgaryHome
    You know those meals that you used to get when you were a kid over at McDonald's?? Well, in a couple counties in California (forgot which ones) ya can't get 'em anymore! Apparently, some politicians got together and decided that the Happy Meal was to blame for the high obesity rate in children. However, I pose to you another thought. Is it really the Happy Meal/McDonald's that's causing so many children to be overweight/diabetic etc, or is it the fault of parents being irresponsible and buying the children unhealthy food? Who should accept the responsibility of this increasing epidemic that plagues so many of our children every year??
  2. sensible

    sensible

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    188
    Burger King maybe?
  3. Kinneas

    Kinneas
    is an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,199
    If you ban happy meals the parents will just buy their kids regular sized meals.

    America 9.9
  4. tape-type

    tape-type

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,495
    Wasn't it something about the toys kinda (supposedly) making the kids want to eat more and more often the junk food or something?

    This is altogether pretty ridiculous
  5. tawp64

    tawp64

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    332
    This ^
  6. Athenodoros

    Athenodoros Official Smogon Know-It-All

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,936
    On the flip side, surely it shows that politicians are getting together and getting something done about it for the first time? Surely this is a positive step, even if just because it shows that there is some political will around.
  7. mixmaster.mewthree

    mixmaster.mewthree

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    307
    Anything that could possibly hinder McDonalds is a good thing, imo. McDonalds just feel so trashy to me I feel p. gross when I even drive by one.
  8. cantab

    cantab

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,300
    Most of the bad laws and regulations arose because people screamed "something must be done" and then didn't care what.

    I'm not generally opposed to business regulation. I feel organizations need to be regulated to protect the freedoms of individuals. But I do wonder what's the justification for banning McDonald's from selling Happy Meals. McD's are open and honest about what's in them, it's generally known that they're not very healthy, why is there any reason to ban them from being sold?
  9. Firestorm

    Firestorm I did my best, I have no regrets!
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Smogon Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon IRC AOp Alumnusis a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    7,306
    If you're discussing something you read / saw somewhere, please link to it when starting a thread on it.
  10. lmitchell0012

    lmitchell0012 Wi-Fi Blacklisted

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,437
    Before I say anything, I just wanted to say that I do not support McDonald's, but I do believe that business regulation is wrong. Businesses have rights too. As long as they follow the laws, they should be allowed to sell what they want.

    Also, there was no need to "protect the freedoms of individuals" because no freedoms were being violated in the first place. No one is forcing the parents to buy unhealthy meals for their children. They make those decisions on their own. And, frankly, if you talk to parents about this issue, a lot of parents will also agree that we DO NOT need the government telling us how to raise our children.
  11. Fatecrashers

    Fatecrashers acta est fabula
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis an Artist Alumnusis a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,997
    Childhood obesity is obviously a problem, especially in the United States.
    The politicians want to be seen as people who are tackling the problem.
    Putting more funding into health and physical education programmes for kids is arguably a better way of going about this, but that requires money, and the government doesn't have any to spare.
    So instead they choose an easy target, in this case McDonald's Happy Meals, and ban it.
    Will it work? I doubt it. McDonald's Happy Meals are certainly not the heart of the problem. If anything, they are the scapegoat.
    But at least to the public it looks like the politicians are doing something about the problem. And as long as they get re-elected, it's all good.
  12. AJers

    AJers <b>Your typical e-wench</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    358
    It's the parents fault; I don't think regulating McD's happy meals are going to do anything, it's not like banning McD's is going to make the parents go to the store and pick up some fresh fruit instead of the twinkies.

    Are we going to regulate everyone's diets and what's available for purchase?

    I also don't think targetting parents/adults for obesity will work either; we need to target the younger generations. Offer more affordable summer camps and after school programs that encourage just getting up and moving as opposed to staying indoors all the time. The adult habits are set and hard to break; a kid can still be molded to some extent by their surroundings.

    Just my opinion. :)
  13. lmitchell0012

    lmitchell0012 Wi-Fi Blacklisted

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,437
    Also, I think that school lunch programs can also be improved. Chicken nuggets and tri taters are not the best things for kids to be eating every day. The small pint of milk is pretty much the only thing good for the kids.
  14. VKCA

    VKCA (Virtual Circus Kareoky Act)

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    3,664
    Yes, they are supposedly being enticed by the toys.

    I was just reading an article in the newyorker, about father that hid mcdonalds from his son. When the kid finally found out about mcdonalds (1st grade) he demanded to go. His father took him. After the meal, he asked his son what his favorite part was. "the orange hotwheels car".
    I personally only enjoyed mcdonalds for the toys (and the frenchfries yum) when I was younger. I didn't really go there all that often, so it became a special treat. I don't think banning the happymeal outright was the best course of action, I think they should have just made them stop giving out toys.

    See if the kids still want to go to mcdonalds if they don't get a toy, then tell me this is an idiotic thing to do.
  15. Eraddd

    Eraddd One Pixel
    is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,340
    I hated McDonalds happy meal toys. However, I loved their cheeseburgers and fries. Honestly, I couldn't care less if the happy meal didn't include a toy, all I wanted was the food. However, in my case, my parents would restrict my going to McDonalds (I went around once a month in my childhood).

    I think the problem here is that the parents don't put enough emphasis on healthy dietary habits. It's not McDonald's problem, they're a business, and they've done everything in their power to promote better eating habits through putting out labels, and even putting those gay apple pieces instead of French Fries, while trying to minimize their losses through these actions. I say that the parents of these kids learn how to properly feed their kids.
  16. Chou Toshio

    Chou Toshio @Fighting Necktie
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris an Artist Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,204
    Protect their freedoms? Don't you mean protect them from their own stupidity? Assuming consentual agreement (and honest terms), purchases/trades do not occur unless desired by all concerned parties. It is assumable that desired outcomes are mutually benefitial outcomes-- and if not, that only means that someone is being stupid.


    In any case this thing about McDonalds is ridiculous. I would love how they made up this "law" without singling out McDonalds.

    "We are imposing a restriction on all child-oriented menue items that exceed x-calories of saturated fat and have colorful toys included."

    Truly laughable.



    If they really want to change the way Americans eat (and we really do need a change), it has got to be a cultural change. How do you make a cultural change?

    a) Greater Education/Awareness:
    I think America already is a more health-aware country than it was 20 years ago, but there is always room to improve! Parents and children across the country should be better informed of dietary consequences.

    b) Do something about junk food being so damn cheap!
    It's a sad truth-- Junk food is simply cheaper, sources of sugar and saturated fat are simply far cheaper per/calorie than healthy foods. As long as "feeding a family" makes more economic sense to do it the unhealthy way, people will always struggle to make those healthy decisions.

    I would say applying extra taxes or a tarrif to the sale of food items that do not a set of pre-decided "healthy" regulations makes a lot more economic/cultural sense (and would be more effective) than banning happy meals. :/
  17. Firestorm

    Firestorm I did my best, I have no regrets!
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Smogon Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon IRC AOp Alumnusis a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    7,306
    It may not apply here, but regulation is definitely something needed so we don't get screwed over when it comes to telecommunications.
  18. FSLAR

    FSLAR

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Messages:
    348
    I think the only justifiable reason to ban Happy Meals is since some toys have been harmful to kids' health. If it's been done over and over, it'd make sense. But as it's been stated, it's the parents' fault. It's going to encourage buying regular bigger meals anyway...I guess it is commendable that they're trying to do something about obesity.
  19. Killah

    Killah

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,878
    I don't agree with these kinds of business regulations; how is it protecting the freedom of the people who want to buy their kids happy meals? As Chou said, really they're only protecting people from their own stupidity. What's next, is California going to ban fast food in general? Oh wait.
  20. STEELDRAGON

    STEELDRAGON

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Messages:
    453
    Wow, this is outrageous. 1'd say it's unconstitutional. Junk food really isn't illegal, and it's is utterly disgusting that politicians would try to ban a specific item of the fast food market. In most cases, it's the parent's or guardian's fault if the the minor under their care has become obese or have developed some other diseases. It's in no way the fast food companies fault, because their just trying to make money, and provide for their customers. It's the parent's choice to go purchase items that may loaded with trans fat, AGEs, etc. Fast food chains are spread across the world, and you don't see other countries such as Japan, or France banning products like this.
  21. sensible

    sensible

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    188
    Marketing Tobacco to kids is illegal (Like that camel guy) because Tobacco is toxic. Happy meals are even more dangerous because children are not only enticed by the toys, but are also unaware of the serious risks that come from eating from McDonalds. Childhood obesity doesn't just lead to cardiovascular disease, but also leads to bullying and possibly suicide. They are pretty much just bribing children to buy their products with promises of toys, etc not unlike the Tobacco companies did with that Camel guy (forgot his name).
  22. lmitchell0012

    lmitchell0012 Wi-Fi Blacklisted

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,437
    You know, when I think about this whole issue, I start to think about World War II. Why, you ask?? Well, what exactly were we fighting for the whole time. We wanted to stop the spread of communism, right?? And what is communism?? Well, to put it simply it means government interferes with business. Now, with the US interfering with the way McDonald's runs their business, is this not communism?? In the US, the government has always believed that minimal government interference with business is the best way to go, as this encourages business growth. I find it ironic that the US is beginning to turn into the very thing it was fighting to stop.
  23. vonFiedler

    vonFiedler Visualize It
    is a Community Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,184
    No they aren't

    They are food


    Jesus
  24. Lanturn314

    Lanturn314

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    590
    I agree to some extent. The thing is, there are certain things that should be regulated so that individuals aren't screwed over-- for example, toy companies should not be able to sell toys with toxic chemicals like lead in them. Restaurants should not be able to sell meat from animals that have feasted on other animal brains, because this can cause prion diseases such as Mad Cow, which are incurable, and the customers wouldn't know until it's too late. Things that are acutely harmful should be banned outright. Things that are only acutely harmful to a certain part of the population (such as those allergic to a certain ingredient) should have to display adequate information to warn those people.

    Companies should not be allowed to sell things that they know are harmful with habitual use to their customers unless warning labels are clearly displayed, such as on cigarette packages, and in the case of McDonald's, displaying the nutrition facts about their food.

    Since McDonald's isn't being secretive about their food's saturated fat content, and since one burger never killed anyone, there is no reason for it to be banned outright. People who buy it know what they're getting, and it's the parents' fault for letting their children eat this crud all the time, not the company's.

    I agree with other people ITT who say that the way to go is raising awareness about the causes of obesity and trying to lower the costs of healthy food. This is difficult, of course, but if we could havecampaigns against junk food of the same quality as we have had against smoking, obesity would probably decrease a lot more. People should be made to see just how bad junk food is for them and how disgusting a habit it is to eat McDonald's every day. The movie SuperSize Me is a good illustration of this, and if this were displayed more, it would be a good start. Banning Happy Meals is just going to have people go "I want my junk food, dammit!" and go elsewhere for their carbs and saturated fats.

    It kind of sickens me that politicians would just go the lazy route like this and ban one form of food just to look like they're doing something, when it's probably not going to help at all.

    Edit:
    I disagree with the way the US is handling McDonald's, but I think you're also a little off. The US has not always believed in minimal government interference with business; this is mainly the Republicans and Libertarians now, and the real movement towards deregulation of business as we know it now didn't start until the Reagan era. Now, I agree that interference by the government shouldn't be as extreme as it is in this example, but businesses also shouldn't be allowed to do everything they want. The individual should still be protected against things like monopolies and trusts where the businesses can screw them over (and I'd argue that such regulation fosters more competition between businesses to make better, cheaper products so that at least the better one can grow more). The individual should also be allowed to be fully aware of what he or she is purchasing. I don't support communism by any stretch, and I don't support the specific regulation being discussed ITT, but I also don't support businesses running completely amok. There needs to be balance.
  25. orangekows

    orangekows

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,693
    Trying to regulate what people can and cannot eat is complete and utter bullshit. It's the parents responsibility to take care of their kids and make sure they eat healthy, not the governments. People are trying to give our government way too much power and it's ridiculous.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)