Like many New Yorkers, I was relieved when Bloomberg’s soda ban failed to pass. And I don’t even drink soda. It’s the principle of the matter that bothers me. The ban on smoking in restaurants I was more receptive of; after all, secondhand smoke can be very harmful to people who aren’t smokers themselves. However, a ban on large sodas is intrusive in the extreme. If someone wants to purchase drinks that are less than healthy, I don’t see how the government has a right to stop them.
Additionally, I wonder how effective these types of “health-promoting” policies are. After all, it seems as though doing things like banning the consumption of soda in large quantities is dealing with a small part of the obesity crisis, without addressing the main issue. Even if people can no longer purchase a huge cup of Coke, I seriously doubt that this will be a serious impediment for people who wish to live an unhealthy lifestyle. The real problems–lack of education as to healthy food choices, and the high cost of fresh produce and other healthy foods, to name a few–remain unaddressed. I think that if Bloomberg is, as he claims, so concerned with New Yorkers’ health, he should focus on policies that actually can make a difference and aren’t so intrusive, instead of battling out his soda ban and angering the people he claims to be helping.
Honestly, I am not a child. I don’t need to be told how much sugar I’m allowed to drink. What’s next, Bloomberg making it illegal for me to eat cookies in the afternoon, because I might spoil my appetite for dinner?
