Someone on Facebook alerted me to this video:
I agree with their points (no surprise … Reason is a libertarian magazine), but I’d like to add a few more.
What we’re seeing with Mayor Bloomin’ Idiot and the other nanny-staters attempting to control our food choices is a classic case of government rushing in to solve a problem largely created by government in the first place. I don’t think the people at Reason are aware of how the USDA dietary guidelines helped get us into this mess. I’ve seen people from Reason make a case for freedom of choice, but I haven’t seen them point out that we’ve gotten fatter and more diabetic since the McGovern committee ignited anti-fat hysteria across the country.
I chuckled when the pro-government lady said in effect, “Sure, people would rather pay down the deficit than spend money fighting obesity, but fighting obesity will actually save money in the long run.” If every expensive government program sold to the public with the line “But this will save money in the long run!” actually saved money in the long run, we’d be running huge surpluses by now. When Lyndon Johnson proposed massive increases in “Great Society” programs, he insisted those programs would save money in the long run. That was several trillion dollars ago. (Hey, LBJ, we’d like our surplus checks now, please.)
Naturally, the same lady blamed obesity on cheap, affordable food. Riiiiiight. That explains why the poor are fatter than middle-class people on average, homeless people in this country are often obese, and some of the most impoverished people around the globe have had high rates of obesity. My great-grandparents weren’t lean because they couldn’t afford to overeat. They were lean because they knew better than to fill up on refined carbohydrates.
Finally, setting the personal choice issue aside, what makes these people think they’re competent to design effective anti-obesity programs? Where is the evidence that similar programs have worked — anywhere?