Illegal Happy Meals

[rie'smom]

Again, happy meals are not being banned. The sale of toys are not being banned. All that is happening is that the fast food restaurants will not be able to use toys as a way to entice children to eat happy meals.

I don't think that the govt is the only one who can do something, but they can certainly help in combating obesity. Better education is also a key in the fight against obesity, but at least the govt is trying something.

It isn't the government's job to combat obesity unless I missed it somewhere in civics class. It's up to the individual. What the heck has happened to people being responsible for themselves?

 

[FireDancer]

Again - I understand everything you're saying..

So - parents are allowed to abuse their children by endangering their health - not only now, but for years to come - yet other forms of abuse are okay to place limits on?

I certainly agree that adults can make whatever choices they want for themselves - whether it be smoking, eating themselves up to 500 lbs. or more, drinking in excess (as long as they don't get behind the wheel of a car) - but we're talking about the choices they are forcing on their children.. Until such time as the children are able to do the grocery shopping themselves, they don't have a choice.. That's where the whole "choice" theory flies out the window..

So - what is the solution?

Well, the only solution really is making it child abuse to allow your child to get obese. Is that something that you (general you) would be comfortable with?

Sometimes kids are harmed by the choices of their parents and it isn't always abuse. The first example I can think of is second hand smoke. As far as I know it isn't illegal anywhere to smoke around your children but that is harming them, possibly as bad and long term as the eating habits.

I don't think that there is a government solution. Parents have to want to be the solution and when they aren't their kids suffer. In the end the only children I am in "control" of are mine or those I am the guardian of. I will do what I feel is right for them and others can do the same, even if I consider the choices bad. I don't feel responsible for the health of other people's kids, but that is the libertarian in me talking.

 

[Planogirl]

The nanny state just keeps on getting stronger and stronger. I don't know what this says about society but I don't like it!

 

[luvmy3]

Well, you could call any law a ban if you put a spin on it.

A speed limit is a ban on going above a certain speed.

Laws preventing child labor are a govt ban on kids joining the work force.

When you constantly use the word ban, it conjures up images of being oppressed and fearful of your govt. This new law does not bring up those feelings in me. Of course, I don't wear a tin foil hat, so I don't see the terrible things that this new ban will bring upon us.

Hhmm, this post is heading down a road that got threads like this banned awile ago.

No tin hat needed, its right in front of your face, what you choose to see (or not) is your issue and has nothing to do with what kind of hat you wear

 

[Wall-E1]

Then honestly whats the point of the ban? If the same kids can get the same food and the same toy, but it just cant be "together" why even bother? If given the choice between McD's without the toy and a noce healthy meal at home without a toy, which do you think the chidren of CA are going to pick? My money is on McDs, the ban is pointless and will not achieve what the govt is claiming its for.

If kids are not tempted by toys, they are less likely to demand a certain food choice. They may not even be in the mood for a happy meal, but they know it comes with a toy that they want, so they beg to go to McDonalds. Without the toy as a temptation, they may not want happy meals so often, or so badly.

 

[Planogirl]

If kids are not tempted by toys, they are less likely to demand a certain food choice. They may not even be in the mood for a happy meal, but they know it comes with a toy that they want, so they beg to go to McDonalds. Without the toy as a temptation, they may not want happy meals so often, or so badly.

Is that truly up to government to decide though? Where in any Constitution is it mentioned that government shall see that people eat the right foods?

This is what is troubling to me. As they interfere in one thing, they tend to go on to interfere in more and more and... I don't like it!

 

[C.Ann]

Parents have to want to be the solution and when they aren't their kids suffer.

That last sentence nailed it - and pretty much answered my question..

Still, I find it ironic that a parent can be charged with child abuse for neglecting and starving a child, but not for endangering a child and filling them with junk food to the point that you have 5 and 6 yr. olds weighing 150 lbs..

 

[Wall-E1]

It isn't the government's job to combat obesity unless I missed it somewhere in civics class. It's up to the individual. What the heck has happened to people being responsible for themselves?

Why can't the govt assist in something that benefits this nation as a whole? Obesity results in hundreds of billions of dollars each year in medical expenses. For example, older people are becoming more obese which increases medical costs for Medicare. This in turn increases our federal deficit. It is a nationwide problem and the govt does have the duty to "promote the general welfare" (as per the U.S. Constitution). This is what the govt is doing. They see this epidemic as harming the general population. Should the govt stay out of AIDS and Cancer research and prevention also?

 

[luvmy3]

If kids are not tempted by toys, they are less likely to demand a certain food choice. They may not even be in the mood for a happy meal, but they know it comes with a toy that they want, so they beg to go to McDonalds. Without the toy as a temptation, they may not want happy meals so often, or so badly.

You've got kids, do you really believe that?
Even if you do, what you are saying here is not a problem with the temptation, its a problem with parents giving into their child's demands.

 

[Anjelica]

I'm so glad the government is here to think for me. Next they can fully replace my moral compass.

Stupid - stupid - stupid law. Once again, "other" people know whats good for my family/children.

And for those that think CA is crazy - I live in the state of loons - IL. We like to produce very corrupt officials who are allowed to run our state into the ground for many years.

 

[Wall-E1]

Hhmm, this post is heading down a road that got threads like this banned awile ago.

No tin hat needed, its right in front of your face, what you choose to see (or not) is your issue and has nothing to do with what kind of hat you wear

I don't see this thread going down that road. What is right in front of my face? You seem to jump to odd places on things. I simply don't see this leading to govt crackdowns on Doritos or Oreos. Call me crazy. I just can't get myself there.

 

[Wall-E1]

You've got kids, do you really believe that?
Even if you do, what you are saying here is not a problem with the temptation, its a problem with parents giving into their child's demands.

Of course I believe that. That's how advertising works. It targets certain audiences. Why do you think McDonalds advertises and gives out free toys with their meals? Is it out of the kindness of their hearts? No. It's because they know that it will increase sales. They know that without the toys, they will sell less happy meals. It's common sense. It is a selling tactic to increase sales. Why do you think they include toys and advertise this to kids?

 

[Anjelica]

Forgot to add (Some food for thought )

"McDonalds is the #1 purchaser of apples in the food and restaurant industry" - I found that interesting when I heard that a few years ago.

 

[luvmy3]

I don't see this thread going down that road. What is right in front of my face? You seem to jump to odd places on things. I simply don't see this leading to govt crackdowns on Doritos or Oreos. Call me crazy. I just can't get myself there.

Its heading down a road that is could lead to individual politics, thats what I meant.

You are accusing me of wearing a tin foil hat, so I guess I'll just accuse you of being blind to what is right in front of your face . You have heard about the ban on trans fats, the propsed ban on salt in restaurants etc? These things are not conspiracies, this is whats happening right in front of your face, and its the first step toward government control of what you put in your mouth, maybe someday including Doritos and Oreos. You can choose to not see it but it is happening in small doses. One day we will wake up and wonder what the heck happened. Will it happen in a year or two, maybe not but I don't doubt that it will happen.

Of course I believe that. That's how advertising works. It targets certain audiences. Why do you think McDonalds advertises and gives out free toys with their meals? Is it out of the kindness of their hearts? No. It's because they know that it will increase sales. They know that without the toys, they will sell less happy meals. It's common sense. It is a selling tactic to increase sales. Why do you think they include toys and advertise this to kids?

Has it been established that they do in fact advertise these toys, because I don't ever see McD commercials showcasing the toy. I see Ronald McDonald exercising and the little kid eating their white meat nuggets and apple slices , but never the toys.
I can't speak for your kids but mine actually like the food and if given the choice between eating at home and eating at McD's they would 9 times out of 10 pick McD's, no toy required. While I dont know for sure I am willing to bet that most kids in America would make that same choice if given. Its the parents jobs to say no, and thats really what it comes down to. I guess you could argue with me that its the gov'ts job to step in when parents dont say no, and I would disagree. (Again maybe leading to political discussion).

Anyway, its been nice but time to call it a night

 

[FireDancer]

Of course I believe that. That's how advertising works. It targets certain audiences. Why do you think McDonalds advertises and gives out free toys with their meals? Is it out of the kindness of their hearts? No. It's because they know that it will increase sales. They know that without the toys, they will sell less happy meals. It's common sense. It is a selling tactic to increase sales. Why do you think they include toys and advertise this to kids?

Yes, they are advertising to the kids. The kids, however are not the decision makers in this situation or the gate keepers to the finances. If little Suzie sees an add that is targeted at her on the television and goes to mom or dad and says "Dad, I want to go to McDonald's and get a happy meal and that toy" a parent can say no. Little Suzie isn't breaking out of the house, jumping on her big wheel, going to McDonald's, and buying the meal for the toy with sea shells she got down by the seashore.

Whether the toy was the reason little Suzie wants McDonald's or the food is the reason little Suzie wants McDonald's the parents are the gatekeeper can say no, the parent can say yes, or the parent can decide they can only get the toy if they choose apple wedges and water instead of coke and fries with their meal.

Parent ≠ Government and in the above situation the parents are in full control of the food decisions of their child, toy ad or no toy ad. Any parent so lazy that they need the government to do what is right instead of doing so themselves really should take a look in the mirror and grow up.

 

[Wall-E1]

Its heading down a road that is could lead to individual politics, thats what I meant.

You are accusing me of wearing a tin foil hat, so I guess I'll just accuse you of being blind to what is right in front of your face . You have heard about the ban on trans fats, the propsed ban on salt in restaurants etc? These things are not conspiracies, this is whats happening right in front of your face, and its the first step toward government control of what you put in your mouth, maybe someday including Doritos and Oreos. You can choose to not see it but it is happening in small doses. One day we will wake up and wonder what the heck happened. Will it happen in a year or two, maybe not but I don't doubt that it will happen.

Right there - where you said "are not conspiracies". You immediately followed it up with a conspiracy theory - "its the first step toward government control of what you put in your mouth, maybe someday including Doritos and Oreos."

And the only way the govt will get my double stuff oreos from me is if they pry them from my cold dead hands.

Has it been established that they do in fact advertise these toys, because I don't ever see McD commercials showcasing the toy.

Yes. Go to you tube and look. They have commercials for Chipmunks sqeakquel toys, Ice age 3 toys, Star Wars toys; etc. I don't want to post links because you know how some people use profanity in the comments on there.

I can't speak for your kids but mine actually like the food and if given the choice between eating at home and eating at McD's they would 9 times out of 10 pick McD's, no toy required. While I dont know for sure I am willing to bet that most kids in America would make that same choice if given.

I never really took my kid to McDonalds when he was younger, so he never developed a taste for it. Now, Subway he asks for almost nightly.

Its the parents jobs to say no, and thats really what it comes down to. I guess you could argue with me that its the gov'ts job to step in when parents dont say no, and I would disagree. (Again maybe leading to political discussion).

I simply said I agreed with the decision to stop the targeted practice of advertising towards kids in the way they do. This is different then your statement about the government stepping in when parents don't say no. Parents are still free to buy as many happy meals and toys as they would like. The govt is not stepping in to make you stop this. The govt is stepping in to try and help combat obesity in children.

 

[jekajekalynn]

On a lighter note, jeeze, I could really go for some chicken mcnuggets right now..

 

[TheDisneyGirl02]

On a lighter note, jeeze, I could really go for some chicken mcnuggets right now..

 

[Wall-E1]

Yes, they are advertising to the kids. The kids, however are not the decision makers in this situation or the gate keepers to the finances. If little Suzie sees an add that is targeted at her on the television and goes to mom or dad and says "Dad, I want to go to McDonald's and get a happy meal and that toy" a parent can say no. Little Suzie isn't breaking out of the house, jumping on her big wheel, going to McDonald's, and buying the meal for the toy with sea shells she got down by the seashore.

Whether the toy was the reason little Suzie wants McDonald's or the food is the reason little Suzie wants McDonald's the parents are the gatekeeper can say no, the parent can say yes, or the parent can decide they can only get the toy if they choose apple wedges and water instead of coke and fries with their meal.

Parent ≠ Government and in the above situation the parents are in full control of the food decisions of their child, toy ad or no toy ad. Any parent so lazy that they need the government to do what is right instead of doing so themselves really should take a look in the mirror and grow up.

Don't I wish I was in full control. I can barely control the family cat. In my house this is how it works. After I tell my kid "no" 17 times, he knows that the 18th time, it will change to "yes". I try to be consistent this way.

I just think that the govt can assist us in combating this epidemic and educating the public on this. Why can't we all work together to combat this issue? I don't understand the fear in this? I do believe the intent of this new law came from a good place. They were trying to do something to help combat obesity. I don't believe they passed this law as a first step in taking away our rights.

 

[PebblesMK]

I will say that my child goes for the happy meal for the toy only. Most of the time I decline her request because it's one more thing to add clutter and I will throw it away so it can sit in the landfill for years to come. However, not all kids have parents around them to say "no" to their every whim. At the McDonalds I stop at, there are ALWAYS kids in there, sometimes as young as 4ish who are ordering their own food. Do their parents know where they are or what they are doing? Who know, but there are ways around it for some kids. And McDonalds most definitely does use it to draw in kids, if it's not promoted, perhaps it would be easier or parents to disappoint their child with no burger and fries.

Now, if the government really wants to do something about the obesity epedemic (which I agree is horribly sad), then they need to regulate what people are allowed to get from foodstamps. In Wisconsin, chips, candy, soda and everything unhealthy is covered under the card. When I worked at a grocery store, the things people would buy was absurd. Carts would be full of Mountain Dew, chips, kool-aid, cookies, candy and steak and ribs. Would it really be that difficult to say, "This card will cover fresh fruit and vegtables and actual food". There a thing called WIC that offers struggling families with basic food needs, milk, protein, cereal, cheese, beans, fresh fruit and I don't remember what else (formula for babies) and people don't put up a fuss...why not do the same for state food stamps?