San Francisco recently banned selling toys with meals at restaurants unless these meals met a minimum standard of nutrition. Essentially, they've banned Happy Meals. There are many valid reasons that this law may be a bad idea, along with reasons it may be a good idea. However, one argument that detractors make is flawed.
The argument is that individuals making choices such as diet, whether they are good for them or otherwise, are not hurting anyone else. In reality, however, many others will be involuntarily affected by an individual's choice.
If a person eats unhealthily, it will increase her risk of various obesity related diseases. If the person has private insurance, the costs of her medical treatments will be assessed on her insurance pool. Everyone in the pool will have to bear some of her burden through higher insurance premiums. If she has Medicare, her treatment will create a greater tax burden on taxpayers (contributing to the budget deficit). People's bad eating choices are theirs to make, but it's incorrect to say that they don't affect others.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment