Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[WingsFan]

Added sugars.

This completely new category is important given recent updates to the dietary guidelines urging Americans to cut down on sugars that come from processed foods such as cakes and cookies. Added sugars are measured in both grams and as a percent daily value. The sugar industry has said that this emphasis on added sugars is not scientifically justifiable, but the FDA disagrees.

Fat.

Based on research that shows the type of fat is more important than the amount, the ?Calories from Fat? line will disappear. However, ?Total Fat,? and the subcategories

[Hannibal]

Added sugars.

This completely new category is important given recent updates to the dietary guidelines urging Americans to cut down on sugars that come from processed foods such as cakes and cookies. Added sugars are measured in both grams and as a percent daily value. The sugar industry has said that this emphasis on added sugars is not scientifically justifiable, but the FDA disagrees.

Fat.

Based on research that shows the type of fat is more important than the amount, the ?Calories from Fat? line will disappear. However, ?Total Fat,? and the subcategories

LMAO @ anyone who thinks that this will put even the slightest dent in obesity.

[Wild Hoss]

LMAO @ anyone who thinks that this will put even the slightest dent in obesity.

Its not really aimed at the obese. Rather those trying to be healthy, or more healthy.

[Hannibal]

It's totally aimed at obesity. Process sugars are the new obesity boogeyman and the war on High Fructose Corn Syrup has been brewing for a long time.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Hanni ....... and you have scientific evidence to prove otherwise? This isn't the soft science of global warming we're talking about here.

About a decade ago, there was a writer who did several pieces published in various professional journals and some of it ending up in the NYT that hypothesized that the food industry was going to get hammered for putting added sugars in its products to "addict" people to them just like the tobacco industry got hammered with the addicting and unhealthy nature of the tobacco products they were selling.

The author, as reported by himself in later pieces on this subject, stated that he made multiple presentations to the food producing giants like Kellogg, Coke and General Mills to name a few. He got laughed out of the room. Not because his basic science was wrong but because these executives knew nobody would ever raise questions about the safety and quality of their Cheerios. Back then, there was some truth to that. Not know.

I could go on about the kind of pressures that are being brought to bear on the world's giants to reduce unhealthy aspects of this food. There are some 10 companies world wide who control our food supply and put it on the shelves for consumers to eat. They are big and powerful. It still like pissing in the wind and you make that point, Hanni. But the pendulum is swinging and the pouring of 50 gallon drums of corn syrup (added sugars) into the 1000 gallon tank of batter that will end up as your "healthy" fat free crackers is coming to an end.

Whether or not it will be as dramatic an end (and as costly to the Tobacco industry) to added sugars in the products we consume as it was for nicotine in cigarettes remains to be seen.

[Hannibal]

I'm laughing at the idea that not getting fat is more complicated than "eat less, move more". Everything else is noise, despite the constant cycling of a big health boogeyman about once a decade or the rise and fall of health food fads. People don't get fat because they consume too large a percentage of their calories as <insert bad type of calories here> which then acts as some sort of metabolic Trojan Horse. People get fat because they eat cheeseburgers and pizza, drunk energy drinks, drink beer, and don't exercise it off. And pretty much everyone who is fat knows this.

[Wild Hoss]

It's totally aimed at obesity. Process sugars are the new obesity boogeyman and the war on High Fructose Corn Syrup has been brewing for a long time.

Nothing wrong with having better-organized, and more accurate, labelling.

This won't encourage kids to walk on your lawn. :-D

[Wild Hoss]

I could go on about the kind of pressures that are being brought to bear on the world's giants to reduce unhealthy aspects of this food. There are some 10 companies world wide who control our food supply and put it on the shelves for consumers to eat. They are big and powerful. It still like pissing in the wind and you make that point, Hanni. But the pendulum is swinging and the pouring of 50 gallon drums of corn syrup (added sugars) into the 1000 gallon tank of batter that will end up as your "healthy" fat free crackers is coming to an end.

This.

Its not about the difference between being obese, and...apparently not obese; its about making it easier for consumers to make better choices.

Some will, and of course some will not. I do not understand why this goal is worthy of ridicule, regardless of what choice is made on an individual level. Grumpy is as grumpy does I guess.

[Hannibal]

It's about taking the responsibilty for bad choices away from the people who make those choices and blaming the people who supply them with what they crave.

"You're not fat because of your bad lifestyle choices or because you lack impulse control. You're fat because Big French Fry and Big High Fructose Corn Syrup tricked you into eating food that's bad for you!"

[hack]

"Here's no information. Remember not to make bad choices."

[Wild Hoss]

It's about taking the responsibilty for bad choices away from the people who make those choices and blaming the people who supply them with what they crave.

"You're not fat because of your bad lifestyle choices or because you lack impulse control. You're fat because Big French Fry and Big High Fructose Corn Syrup tricked you into eating food that's bad for you!"

Really...its not. You're just making up a strawman.

[iam416]

My takeway is that the citizens of DFW have soundly chosen to invest in their city and I'm well-pleased for them and particularly well-pleased it angers Hoss so. Otherwise, windmills continue to be in serious jeopardy around here.

[Hannibal]

Really...its not. You're just making up a strawman.

Watch Super Size Me and then get back with me.

"Here's no information. Remember not to make bad choices."

If only all of those people eating Big Macs and Whoppers knew that eating salads would make them less fat.

Speaking of which...

http://bgr.com/2016/05/26/obesity-statistics-2016-americans-overweight-cdc/

CDC study finds America has never been more obese

3+ decades of food labeling and public service announcements and we're fatter than ever.

But don't worry guys -- this time it's totally going to work.

[Da Geezer]

I don't care a great deal about corp taxes....they aren't paying much anyway. This is why we should incentivize the return of holdings, with hopes they'll invest it here and we can glean some general benefit, but get it back on income tax and capital gains. The top suits may want to send their company's money overseas, but they want to live here.

The typical US corporation with overseas income pays 35% FIT on that income when repatriated to the US. That is far more than "not paying much. . . ". If we accept that Rust Belt industries have moved to FL, TX, WA, and TN partially because those states have no state income tax, it becomes obvious that relatively small decreases in tax cause substantial decisions to be made.

The most elegant way to address this problem is for stockholders to be taxed on the net income of the corporation. If you own .0001% of Apple, you should pay income tax on .0001% of Apple's net income, regardless of where that income is generated. Of course, this would never be passed by Congress because the US has long taxed dividends twice.

If the US went to a 15% corporate rate for Sub C corporations, there would be little or no reason to keep money overseas. Hoss is right in that, everything else being equal, most would rather live and invest in the US because our rule of law is well established relative to China or even Ireland. At 15%, not only would US Corporations want to remain here, but many foreign companies could be expected to relocate in the US over time.

The problem with this approach is that it would require the electorate and their politicians to be patient and let the lower tax rate work. I doubt patience is palatable to politicians, so the best we can hope for is a "one-time-only approach.

[Wild Hoss]

Watch Super Size Me and then get back with me.

Ah, there's the culprit. Well, there is whole universe of thought and science outside the realm of "Super Size Me" Hanni. Its worth looking into.

In the end, if the result is healthier, more accurately-labeled food, who gives a shit about the ?Why?? If it makes you happy to shake your fist at a non-existent Responsibility Boogeyman, more power to you I guess. This is an improvement, and the right direction to move in.