Several years ago people began to bang the drum for heavy regulation of cigarettes as a public health issue. Cigarettes are horrible for you, and I don’t and have never smoked. I don’t support it and frankly, if you smoke, I think you are an idiot. And in public places, the public should be able to ban smoking, but not in private places, so bars and restaurants should be able to allow smoking. But this compromise wasn’t enough, and public policy makers went after these establishments as well.
“No, no,” they said to those who worried about what this could mean down the road, “this is where it ends. Cigarettes are a unique case involving a product that is hazardous as used. It is limited to this one case.”
Except now the use of trans fats is all but illegal (and actually illegal in New York). Also in New York, salt is all but illegal. And then you get Newsweek columnist Michael Tomasky supporting New York’s ban on soda’s containing more than 16 ounces (but not in convenience stores; or grocery stores).
Ok, you say, someone out at a movie or at a McDonald’s can buy two 16 oz sodas if they want more soda. Same price. No a big deal. Soda really doesn’t have much in the way of a redeeming quality, so its an easy target. Obesity is epidemic. Obesity is clearly unhealthy. Maybe you can see the logic here. I for one can understand the thinking. If you drink too much soda you really are an idiot, and if you wind up fat, you really only have yourself to blame. This all makes this is a pretty unique case, correct?
Certainly, except that this is where Tomasky goes next:
“Are bacon-cheeseburgers next? As a practical matter, no. Sodas are an easy target because there is nothing, nothing, nutritionally redeeming about them. But might there come a day when the New York City Department of Health mandates that burgers be limited to, say, four ounces? Indeed there might. And why not? Eight- and ten-ounce burgers are sick things.“As a practical matter, no.” It’s also not often practical to wage a 2-front war. But once the war on 1 front is won, it makes perfect sense to turn your eye to that other front. So once the battle over 16oz+ soda is over and people are still fat, perhaps then it will be more practical.
When you try to accomplish something good without regards to the means, this is where you can end up. Because now there is no limiting principle. Why stop at 4oz burgers. An eight ounce burger (Tomasky's "sick thing") is twice as large as a four ounce burger, but a four ounce burger is twice as large as a 2 ounce one.
In fact, fried patties of ground meat are certainly one of the, if not the, least healthy ways to eat beef. Why not ban burgers? Practical? Not right now. Once we are down to 2 ounces per burger, maybe. And plenty of people will tell you that eating beef isn't healthy anyway. Why not just ban meat consumption. Again, as a practical matter, it won't happen today, but I'm not worried about today, I'm worried about tomorrow.
Check out http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/03/newsweek-writer-we-have-this-liberty-bus for more likeminded commentary.
