Quantcast

Comments about ‘How sweet it is: Personal soft drink ban saves $1,000 a year’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Oct. 2 2012 8:43 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
lucidious
Pleasant Grove, UT

Michael, I'm sorry for all the effort you put into this article because all I can remember is the last hypnotic paragraph. I don't want my brain to shrink and I don't want to live life unrefreshed. But since I'm not very concerned about that Pepsi guy's bank account I'm on my way to get some Coke Zero.

Fitz
Murray, UT

The bottom line of all this is what and how much I drink or eat is not government business. Government has stuck its nose into way too many personal choices and are continually limiting or eliminating our personal choices. Government needs to get out of our personal lives.

To make this point, may I point out that in 1773 the citizens of Boston got irritated about taxing their tea and so they dumped it into Boston Harbor waters. And that was just for taxing it. Government today are telling us what we can and cannot drink and if we can, how much. What do you think the Boston Tea Party would do today if they were told they couldn't have their tea at all? Government, get out of our personal lives!

zabivka
Orem, UT

I really liked the advice of only getting to have a soda after pounding a glass of water. I think I'll incorporate that into my life and see how it goes. I'm a sucker for the Diet Dr. Pepper!

JP71
Ogden, UT

Yes soda is bad for you but it is our right to drink it. If the government can ban soda what can't they ban? This is only the beginning. We are losing more freedoms everyday.

snowman
Provo, UT

No one can tell any of us what we can eat or drink

timpClimber
Provo, UT

The high fructose (corn syrup)content of most sodas is known to have many negative effects on your health. Just do an internet search and the results should convince you to drink water. Sodas should be removed from schools and a warning label required on every container. No the government should not ban sodas but educate the public so they can make educated choices.

GK Willington
SLC, UT

per timpClimber

Agreed.

However, HFCS is in practically everything (not just soda). I avoid products where it is near the top of the ingredient list (exception is Dr Pepper).

U Student Y Fan
Woods Cross, UT

How is there not more outrage over this? This is one of the most egregious abuses of power we have seen towards taking away individual freedoms. Unlike the Patriot Act and similar measures--which are dangerous on an abstract level-- this is a way of government directly telling the people that they own us and will limit the decisions we can make. If this is considered a legitimate power of government, what isn't?

JayTee
Sandy, UT

"The government that governs best, governs least"--Thomas Jefferson

It's too bad we're moving rapidly away from the principles that made this country great and made it thrive. Now we have Nanny Boomberg or someone else monitoring our every move and dictating what we can and can't do according their perception of what we should or shouldn't do. I spent over a quarter-century working with every level of government in the U. S., and I can tell you emphatically that the government way is almost always the worst and most expensive way. Since government is a monopoly and has no competition, everything is basically based on pure politics. If we don't wake up, we're never going to see a country as prosperous or great as this country once was.

JayTee
Sandy, UT

And while we're talking about an endless array of hoaxes perpetrated on the American people by those controlling government, let's talk about the industrial byproduct sodium fluoride now mandated in most of our drinking water. There are now volumes of evidence that this is more destructive than productive, but because big money lobbyists are involved, it goes on and on--a toxic, corrosive substance put in your drinking water so you can water your lawns, wash your dishes and clothes, shower, and do everything else with lots of stuff that's supposed to increase dental health. The water treatment people I've talked to tell me that for what it costs, little pink calcium fluoride tablets could be provided to the entire population several times over. What's next? Even if it were beneficial, what if some lobby hooked up with cardiologists and convinced politicians that statin drugs are universally beneficial--do they go in the water supply next? Think about the absurdity of what we're putting up with on a daily basis.

BH
Tremonton, UT

Only the naive should be fooled by the suggestion of this article's headline, suggesting that this soda ban will save an individual $1000 each year. A New Yorker who is looking for a drink to quench a thirst, may not be able to buy a large soda, but they can still go to the corner Starbucks and get a XL double expresso. And yes, if they want it can be loaded with sugar.

Did the person save any money. No, they probably spend more. Are they any healthier? None at all.

A healthy diet should be a choice, not a mandate.

The Authority
Richfield, UT

Oh, shut up. If you quit paying taxes, you'll save a lot more than $1,000. As I write this from my federal prison cell, I think of all the thousands of dollars I've saved by not paying taxes.

Joe Moe
Logan, UT

It's great to tout the virtues of not drinking soda, and who wouldn't want to save $1k doing it? But I'm known as the biggest soda drinker in my family and work circles, and I only spend about $300 per year. This guy is either a very extreme case, an exaggerater, or bought his soda in the most expensive way he could find.

PS I'm starting to cut back, for those worried about my personal well-being...but please don't pass laws trying to force me.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments