MyFox
 

FishStick's Blog

by FishStick from Back Porch

Last Post 361 days, 13 hours Ago


Uncle Montgomery County to the Rescue!
Dec 30, 2007 | 3:26 PM
Category: News
Report This Post

You may have read come New Years Day, the County ban on use of trans fat in restaurants kicks in.  An article in the (Com)Post that includes an interview with the owner of the Tastee Diner in Bethesda and his comments on costs and who is going to be paying for them (you know who, of course).

I don't get it.  Where does government meddling in privately owned business end??  Clearly if the business is conducting something illegal (e.g. the 'spa' that just got busted) that makes sense.  But what's next on the list of health issues the County is going to weigh in on?  How about making folks eat egg-beaters instead of real eggs?  Only one strip of bacon?  No real sugar use allowed?  You can say I am over the top, but if you let government in the door, precedent is set.  Couldn't one make an argument that the County hasn't gone far enough to help the (stupid) consumer??

My point is let the government set rules where the government owns the property.  Otherwise, keep out!!  God knows there are plenty of things the County is already responsible for (security, traffic control, schools, etc) that need attention.

 

9 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 9
Page 1 of 1
Starrman1 read my blog view my photos
Dec 30, 2007 | 4:47 PM

B I G amen here FishStick!!
I wish they would start dealing with something that is REAL detrimental on the Montgomery County citizens and taxpayers, like the illegal problem? That seems to be glossed over, and looked at with a blind eye, on a regular basis.
Who the fudge are they to pass laws that say I can not eat what I like? It is bad enough already that almost all of the good old snack foods taste like cardboard, or worse. I do appreciate not having to endure a meal at a restaurant next to a table full of smokers, but come on. If I am able to afford to eat out, I want to eat what I want and enjoy it, not what some PC, nose up my butt, flaming AH decides what I SHOULD or should not eat. Bad enough I am going to have to pay 6 cents on the dollar now for their BS.
beagle_buddy read my blog view my photos
Dec 30, 2007 | 8:03 PM

...guess Leggett's at a loss for seeing issues that cry out for attention over trans fatty concerns...the health dept. must have some ambitions to create some growth in their agency and authority...
Y3Y3 read my blog view my photos
Dec 31, 2007 | 5:35 AM

Fact #1 - Politicians are shallow, selfish people.

Fact #2 - These people would not have jobs, had we not stupidly voted them into office.

Fact #3 - Trans Fat is a 'safe' issue, so they get to keep the phony job, whereas tackling Immigration or Pork Spending, or personal ethics might just get them removed from office.
caffeinated-cow read my blog
Dec 31, 2007 | 10:02 AM

This is what happens when you want to socialize healthcare. Nearly everyone who supports banning of foods does so because of the "high cost of medical care". Now if we had a self-pay system, no one would really care about the "high cost of medical care" because the individual is responsible for paying for their healthcare. This is the government's way of "saving" money for the government to use on other things like political junkets, tax-payer funded trips, etc.

However, we have a system where our taxes pay for medical care. Therefore the tax collection/allocation supervisor (AKA the government) has the responsibility of making sure they have enough money to continue to pay. So they now have the right to pass laws in order to keep their healthcare costs down. So if tobacco use increases government healthcare costs, they are obligated to ban smoking for the good of "public" health. If breathing increases government healthcare costs, they will pass legislation to limit breathing. Ditto for the trans fats, they are banning them in order to save anticipated government expenditure.

Honestly, I think if everyone had to pay out of pocket for their medical care, people would take better care of their general health. Afterall, if you have to shell out $20 for a doctor's visit because you decided to run around in 30 degree weather without a coat on and you caught a bad cough, you would think twice about running around half-dressed in the middle of winter the next time, wouldn't you?
caffeinated-cow read my blog
Dec 31, 2007 | 10:09 AM

But since people know if they get sick, they can go to the doctor "free" (ie---the government will pay for it), they are less mindful of their health. So they gain weight and develop diabetes and heart disease, because the government will pay for whatever medicine they need. They smoke because the government will pay for their cancer treatment. They get pregnant because the government will pay for the prenatal care, the delivery, the baby's doctor's visit, etc.

And once you let the government pay for your housing, your food, your clothing, your antibiotics and pain pills, then you allow the government to dictate all other aspects of your life. That's not "freedom" by any means, but people obviously want to be government-sponsored slaves because they endorse and support these government schemes and plans to enslave us.
mjb07
Jan 2, 2008 | 4:09 PM

It's amazing how agreeable some people can be as long as the laws don't affect them. As a smoker, I've taken the brunt of many changes--OK, now it's someone elses turn. And caffeinated-cow, for your information, the government will not pay for my cancer or any medication I need. I have health insurance to take care of that. I'm not sure where your rant was coming from. According to you "people" are all fat, diabetic, heart challenged, smoking, pregnant freeloaders who are receiving free housing food, clothing, and medication. NOT!! As I have done for the past 52 years, I got out of bed this morning and drove myself to work.
FishStick read my blog
Jan 2, 2008 | 4:48 PM

I didn't even bring up the smoking thing. I don't agree with the rules across the board, but I've ranted on that one before. I figure if it's privately owned, it ain't the governments business to legislate something like smoking in a bar or restaurant.
caffeinated-cow read my blog
Jan 3, 2008 | 12:02 PM

mjb, I think you mis-read what I wrote. In summary, the government is making up these laws because they don't want to spend money on their Medicare and Medicaid populations. It's not because they care about anyone's health---they only care about saving their Medicare and Medicaid dollars to spend it on other things.

So if our society wants socialized medicine, get ready for the government to pass more laws like this.
mjb07
Jan 3, 2008 | 2:09 PM

I would just like for big brother government to stay the heck out of my personal business. I've eaten transfat for many years (I guess--don't even know or care what it is) and I'm still alive! Ditto smoking. When my time is up, it will just be up.
Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




FishStick

Flag waver & guitar player.

Member Since: 10/17/2006


 

RSS: XMLWhat is RSS?