It's unfair because while the ban might not be made with bad intentions, it's not the government's choice as to what the citizens will consume. Secondly, there are so many exceptions and loopholes in the ban, why even bother? For example, you can still get two drinks, you can still get diet soda, you can still go to a convenience store like the 7/11 store because it's not monitored by the city the same way a restaurant is, and drinks that have a volume of more than 50% milk are exempt from certain rules of the ban. Those are just a few, so why put so much effort into this ban when it causes more confusion?
NYC's ban on large drinks is unfair to small businesses, largely manned by people of color, in favor of major corporations that were given exemptions as the ban was largely designed to favor them. Why so many "liberals" began supporting it is beyond me. It's time to recognize it for what it was.
It is unfair and unnecessary because their are taking the wrong measures to reduce the obesity rate. New York is looking at this in an disproportionate way. I say this because what is the point of banning oversized drinks if you can buy two medium drinks with the same amount of fluid oz. as the oversized one? To me it just makes no sense and the whole city of New York can easily work around that by buying in bulk.
New York's ban of sugary drinks is very unfair. People should have the choice of what they can purchase and drink. I do not agree with the decision to ban these drinks and I think the cons outweigh the pros with this. People should be allowed to have choice and this is wrong.
The last time anyone check NYC was a part of the United States where people have the right to decide if they want soda or water. The mayor has forgotten that in this country it is the right of consumers to choose what type of drink they want--not the city’s mayor. Banning sugary drinks won’t solve the obesity problem. Besides, consumers can go elsewhere and buy the sugary drink of their choice.
Those people work, pay their taxes, and contribute to society as a whole. They have the right to choose to drink a soda if they want to drink it, and they have a right to choose which size they want.
You don't have the right to ban something just because you don't agree with and just because you think it's better for everybody. We live in a society where we have to let people be responsible for their own actions.
And, consider this: if the government can't trust its citizens with small things like acting responsibly and using discretion when it comes to soda, how long before the government decides that it can't trust the citizenry with big things like voting, jury duty, and raising their children?
It should be the right of the consumer to decide what they want to eat or drink. It's not like there's a government sponsored health care system that has to deal with the cost of people's health deteriorating over these reasons. Incentives to cut down on the drinks would be more effective than banning them.
Bloomberg is concerned about this city, and obesity rates could rise if large sized sodas are drunk all of the time. We are putting ourselves at risk by drinking so much soda, in such quantities. If everyone drank soda so often, the city would become a place with high obesity rates.