Actually, it's about health care reform, and one component that is applicable is requiring that a tiny change be made on menus of restaurants, in that the caloric count is listed.

 

I agree with woodsrider that it's not enough information to be fully informed, but it's definitely a baby step in the right direction, IMO.

We'll have to agree to disagree, especially since the law does absolutely zero to address the very things that have made health care so expensive.

Actually, it's about health care reform, and one component that is applicable is requiring that a tiny change be made on menus of restaurants, in that the caloric count is listed.

 

I agree with woodsrider that it's not enough information to be fully informed, but it's definitely a baby step in the right direction, IMO.

 

Who says it's tiny? It requires every menu to be changed, lunch and breakfast, counter and drive thru. Just because it may not have been a big thing where you worked doesn't mean it's not a big change elsewhere.

Who says it's tiny? It requires every menu to be changed, lunch and breakfast, counter and drive thru. Just because it may not have been a big thing where you worked doesn't mean it's not a big change elsewhere.

 

 

You do realize that menus are changed frequently already...right? This is just something that will need to be edited when reprinting them.

You do realize that menus are changed frequently already...right? This is just something that will need to be edited when reprinting them.

 

Not that frequently.

Not that frequently.

 

Pieces from the linked article that seem to be missing:

 

It was added to the health bill with the support of the restaurant industry, which is facing different laws from cities and states. Sue Hensley of the National Restaurant Association says it will help restaurants better respond to their customers.

"That growing patchwork of regulations and legislation in different parts of the country has been a real challenge, and this will allow operators to better be able to provide their information," she said.

Some meals will be exempt from the calorie counts, including specials on the menu less than 60 days. The law will also apply to foods sold in vending machines, specifically those that do not have visible calorie listings on the front of the package.

New York City was the first in the country to put a calorie posting law in place. Since then, California, Seattle and other places have done so.

The FDA will have a year to write the new rules, which health advocates have been pushing for years. Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said it's one step in the fight against obesity.

 

So, the restaurant industry is FOR this. There are exceptions for menu items that may be seasonal or promotional, and establishments have over a year to prepare for this. I'm QUITE certain that the industry can survive this, especially as they seem happy to do so.

" An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure " Ben Franklin .

Pieces from the linked article that seem to be missing:

 

 

 

So, the restaurant industry is FOR this. There are exceptions for menu items that may be seasonal or promotional, and establishments have over a year to prepare for this. I'm QUITE certain that the industry can survive this, especially as they seem happy to do so.

 

The National Restaurant Association and restaurant owners are two different things. Sue Hensley speaks for her organization only, not restaurant owners.

 

It's a lot like the American Medical Association saying they support the Health Bill while the majority of doctors don't.

 

Menus and menu boards cost a bunch. This will cost millions in the restaurant industry. That cost will of course be passed on to the consumer.

 

Like I said before I don't like mandates like this, but I don't have a huge problem with it.

 

If it is going to happen, I am more concerned with how it is implemented. If they allow businesses to phase in new menus and menu boards as part of their normal updating and change process then I would be fine with it. They have these things built into their process and costs but they are budgeted for and planned out.

 

However, if they come in and just say change your menu. We don't care if you just spent $3,000 on new menus do it again. That I have a problem with. Many businesses are struggling badly right now and they don't need the government coming in and making them spend a bunch of money at a difficult time.

" An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure " Ben Franklin .

 

I always thought that was,

 

"An ounce of pretension is worth a pound of manure." Poet laureate of Dogwood Lane.:lol:

" An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure " Ben Franklin .

"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties." - Abraham Lincoln

Pieces from the linked article that seem to be missing:

 

 

 

So, the restaurant industry is FOR this. There are exceptions for menu items that may be seasonal or promotional, and establishments have over a year to prepare for this. I'm QUITE certain that the industry can survive this, especially as they seem happy to do so.

 

Ask the individual owners how they like it. The industry will be fine, you and I are the ones that will bear the cost. Even if it's a little bit it's just one more step towards the nanny state taking care of those too lazy to do it themselves.

"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties." - Abraham Lincoln

So I guess you're OK with the dead marine's family having to reimburse the Westboro Church over legal fees because of a lawsuit the family filed against the church and their protests at their son's funeral?

"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties." - Abraham Lincoln

 

Like suspending the writ of Habeas Corpus and MANDATING that the sourthern states give up their slaves. You can mandate that, but you cannot mandate that someone have health insurance. hmmmm

So I guess you're OK with the dead marine's family having to reimburse the Westboro Church over legal fees because of a lawsuit the family filed against the church and their protests at their son's funeral?

 

Like suspending the writ of Habeas Corpus and MANDATING that the sourthern states give up their slaves. You can mandate that, but you cannot mandate that someone have health insurance. hmmmm

Take it up with Abe, he said it. :lol:

Take it up with Abe, he said it. :lol:

 

and he suspended habeas corpus. Sometimes you do what is best for the country - or you don't.

and he suspended habeas corpus. Sometimes you do what is best for the country - or you don't.

And sometimes you do what's wrong for the country, like Obama's doing.