Frat of the Land--Restaurant meal size fix
Frances Morey
austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
Sat Mar 13 12:06:21 2004
Who's Emiril?
.
--- On Sat 03/13, Igor Loving < lovingigor@hotmail.com > wrote:
From: Igor Loving [mailto: lovingigor@hotmail.com]
To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 09:09:06 -0600
Subject: RE: Frat of the Land--Restaurant meal size fix
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
<P>It is the menu that is the culprit. I eat huge bowls of Pho al the time which is 75% fish stock flavored with spices. If we all ate Vietnamese food we'd be short and skinny... maybe? Or you can eat at EL Rancho and have mole enchiladas with cheese and chicken , grease and beans and rice plus a whole bag of chips or shrimp ebchiladas with spinach and cream sauce with charro beans and rice... Anf the serving is good for three people which I gobble up. Maybe we should elect Emiril President so we can have food laws?.<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: Frances Morey <FRANCES_MOREY@YAHOO.COM>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>>To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Frat of the Land--Restaurant meal size fix
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:54:11 -0800 (PST)
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Dave,
<DIV></DIV>>It is a thorny problem, having the government or the lawyers any more involved in food industry rights and wrongs than they already are with permits, inspections, standards, etc. Kerry could certainly admonish the food industry to heal themselves without additional governmental intervention by simply offering more 400 and 500 calorie meals for average sized people who are intelligent enough to choose to control their weight and not just cater to the people impressed by wrteched excess whose eyes, imagined needs and budgets are bigger than their stomachs. I'm not so sure that laws and law suits are the answer due to the ubiquitous nature of the problem. Court cases and fines have little to do with feeding massive numbers of people who eat 50% of their meals away from home.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Instead of dithering about the tax cut, though, I think he should declare that time has come to double the minimum wage. That way the working people in the food industry can enjoy a poor man's stock-split and take pride in their employment. Double up stocks-splits aren't just for shareholders anymore but should be broadened to include those for whom labor is their stock in trade. Gee, they could make up the difference by just reducing the size of some of the meals they offer, charging one third less for half size meals.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Oh, but the price of fast food would skyrocket. So what, I hear there are places called grocery stores where people can actually buy very reasonably priced food and actually prepare meals at home. Grocery stores are also a part of the food industry. Are fast food workers to be treated as if they are today's version of slaves, earning half of what it is estimated that it costs to live? If all the minimum wage workers in America suddenly got paid twice as much as they are now earning the economy would recover at warp speed.
<DIV></DIV>>That is what I would do if I were Kerry. Fighting conservative political rhetoric with a few good ideas in the spirit of nobless oblige--that could bring out voters for the Democrats.
<DIV></DIV>>Your lil' ol' home economist,
<DIV></DIV>>Frances
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>dmcqklaatu@netscape.net wrote:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I watched the debate on this on CSPAN. Congresswoman Shiela Jackson Lee of Houston tried heroically to derail it, but couldn't. One of the Republican arguments for the bill...swear to God...was that Santa Claus was fat, and happy.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Frances Morey wrote:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> >The problem is that restaurants only offer too-much-food per order. You cannot order and consume a small meal in any known restaurant. It is as if they engage in amount and price fixing across the board. Small meals aren't offered on the menu, period! That's the problem! These establishments do indeed make you fat if you cannot order half size meals for half the money to suit your body's needs rather than the restaurant's bottom line. The coertion involved that ought to be made illegal is ignoring the requirements of smaller people and only serving meals that might be about right for professional football players or ironworkers and which are generally a quantity large enough to feed a family of four.
<DIV></DIV>> >People typically finish their plate, now platter, no matter how much is on it and that is where the obesity comes from. Restaurant culpability is in failing to offer the smaller size meal choices on their menus--and present the customer a plate that it's okay to finish.
<DIV></DIV>> >FM
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >David Rubinson wrote:
<DIV></DIV>> >Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:03:04 -0500
<DIV></DIV>> >To: (Recipient list suppressed)
<DIV></DIV>> >From: David Rubinson
<DIV></DIV>> >Subject: Fat of the Land
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Children grow up in the "developed" countries bombarded with messages to CONSUME.
<DIV></DIV>> >An endless repetitive assault of advertising, PR, and subliminal brainwashing.
<DIV></DIV>> >Americans grossly over consume- and food is just one small item.
<DIV></DIV>> >We have exported our desperate consumption everywhere on the planet.
<DIV></DIV>> >So now children of the lucky countries we have decided to "develop" are also getting obese.
<DIV></DIV>> >Diabetes is epidemic.
<DIV></DIV>> >The corporations who maliciously push this over consumption call the rewards they glean - "PROFIT."
<DIV></DIV>> >Profit - from their children's gullilbility and defenselessness.
<DIV></DIV>> >Profit from selling poison and planet-destroying "product."
<DIV></DIV>> >Their CEOs grab millions from the process, their shareholders crow about the earnings ratios.
<DIV></DIV>> >And lives are being ruined on a global basis.
<DIV></DIV>> >These corporations make very sure to send a lot of the "profits" along to the rule makers, senators, congresspeople, government regulators.
<DIV></DIV>> >And so, those sworn to protect us abandon us, abandon their own children- in the pursuit of monetary gain.
<DIV></DIV>> >They take money and let us die.
<DIV></DIV>> >It's that simple.
<DIV></DIV>> >There has been a Radical Regime Change -- and if that's OK with you, then do nothing.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >---------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/11/politics/11BURG.html?th
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >March 11, 2004
<DIV></DIV>> >Vote in House Offers a Shield for Restaurants in Obesity SuitsBy CARL HULSE
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >WASHINGTON, March 10 Saying overeating is a problem for individuals, not the courts, the House easily approved legislation on Wednesday to bar people from suing restaurants on the ground that their food makes customers fat.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Advocates of the Republican-written measure, which has become known on Capitol Hill as the cheeseburger bill, said it was needed to curb the threat of obesity claims against fast-food franchises that provide millions of jobs along with their burgers and fries.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"The food industry is under attack and in the cross hairs of the same trial lawyers who went after big tobacco," said Representative Ric Keller, a Florida Republican who is the chief sponsor of the measure, which was adopted 276 to 139.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >The White House endorsed the bill on Wednesday, saying in a statement that "food manufacturers and sellers should not be held liable for injury because of a person's consumption of legal, unadulterated food and a person's weight gain or obesity."
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >The outlook is unclear in the Senate, where Democrats have blocked consideration of such limitations on lawsuits. The main sponsor, however, is the No. 2 Republican, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"This bill says, `Don't run off and file a lawsuit if you are fat,' " said Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Republican of Wisconsin, chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "It says, `Look in the mirror because you're the one to blame.' "
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Opponents said the legislation was unnecessary and irresponsible in light of this week's government report identifying obesity as a condition fast catching up to tobacco as the No. 1 preventable cause of death in the United States. Democrats said the fact that the House was devoting almost a full day to the proposal illustrated the misplaced priorities of the Republican majority.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"With all the challenges facing this country and with the limited schedule set by the Republicans this year, is this the best bill to consider?" asked Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts. "Under the Republican leadership, this House has become a place where trivial issues are debated passionately and serious ones not at all."
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >The measure was the latest Republican-led effort to provide legal immunity for a specific industry after efforts to impose broader limits have been blocked. Last week, a measure to provide immunity to gun manufacturers and dealers was defeated. Last year, a broad energy measure stalled over resistance to granting immunity to producers of a gasoline additive blamed for water pollution. In the past, Republicans pressed for immunity for the tobacco industry and producers of vaccines.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >While Republicans on the House floor said there had been a spate of such suits against restaurants, Democrats said there had been few.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University who has been a main critic of the measure, said that he knew of only one suit that would be covered by the measure and that it had been dismissed in court. Professor Banzhaf said a handful of other such suits had proceeded based on labeling and ingredients. He also acknowledged that there were lawyers exploring suing restaurants over obesity.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"There seems to be a hysteria that a couple of law professors are going to pick on poor little defenseless companies like McDonald's, Kraft and KFC," Professor Banzhaf said. "It just doesn't make sense."
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Supporters said the mere prospect of lawsuits justified the measure, which the House majority leader, Tom DeLay of Texas, said was intended to discourage the "Ronald McDonald made me do it defense."
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"It is ridiculous that we even need to do a bill like this, but we do," Mr. DeLay said.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >The legislation is formally known as the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act. It would bar new cases and dismiss pending federal and state suits in which damages are sought as compensation for conditions connected to weight gain or obesity attributed to restaurant food. The authors said it would not prevent suits brought because of a restaurant's negligence, false advertising, mislabeling or tainted food.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Though the bill was championed by Republicans, 55 Democrats joined 221 Republicans in supporting it. Opposing it were 137 Democrats, one Republican and one independent.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Democratic critics failed in multiple efforts to win changes in the measure, which was backed by the National Restaurant Association and the National Federation of Independent Businesses and opposed by some legal and health interests.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"For small-business owners, the threat of a frivolous lawsuit remains one of their greatest worries," Jack Faris, president of the business group, said.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >But Dr. Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, called the measure unwise because obesity was gaining new recognition as a significant health problem.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"Given that we are just now beginning to discover the industry's involvement, granting them sweeping immunity is, at best, dangerously short-sighted," Dr. Barnard said.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > David Rubinson
<DIV></DIV>> > ,,,, ,,,,
<DIV></DIV>> > \\\ ///
<DIV></DIV>> >~~~~~~~~~~{ô¿ô}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<DIV></DIV>> >~~~~~~~~~~( . ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<DIV></DIV>> > :::::::::::::::::: ooo:::ooo :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
<DIV></DIV>> > :::::::::::::::::: ( ) :::( )::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
<DIV></DIV>> > ( ) ( )
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > in J A M A I C A
<DIV></DIV>> > YAH !! MON !!
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Quote of The Day:
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >"... Haiti is the world's most explicit example of what globalisation really means. It was the unwitting test bed for the current lunacies..."
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >John Maxwell, Jamaica Observer March 4, 2004
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >---------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>> >Do you Yahoo!?
<DIV></DIV>> >Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>__________________________________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>>Introducing the New Netscape Internet Service.
<DIV></DIV>>Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
<DIV></DIV>>Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
<DIV></DIV>>Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Do you Yahoo!?
<DIV></DIV>>Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2731??PS=">Frustrated with dial-up? Lightning-fast Internet access for as low as $29.95/month.</a> </html>
<p>