Kids can get toys in their Happy Meals, California judge rules Read more: http://www

[Apeman81]

Kids Can Get Toys In Their Happy Meals, California Judge Rules | Fox News

Children in California will still be able to get toys with their Happy Meals.
A San Francisco judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit that sought to stop McDonald's Corp. from using toys to market its meals to children in the Golden State.
The suit had been filed in late 2010 by Monet Parham, a California mother of two, and The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.


Read more: Kids Can Get Toys In Their Happy Meals, California Judge Rules | Fox News

We the people are simply too stupid to make important decisions concerning our children's dietary plan.

I'm ever so glad these tireless warriors for health are out there seeking to outlaw foods and food practices they feel a free society should not tolerate.

[crimethinker]

We the people are simply too stupid to make important decisions concerning our children's dietary plan.

Obesity and Overweight for Professionals: Data and Statistics: U.S. Obesity Trends | DNPAO | CDC

Apparently we are, especially those of us in southern and mid-western states... Hm. People are stupid. Fundamentally, they're just apes. The best way to make them relatively smarter is to give them a good education when they're young, supply them with the information and opportunities needed to better themselves as they get older, penalize or discourage "bad" behavior, and improve their environment. If you don't want to make the apes better and smarter, that's fine. The South and Midwest agree with you, and their results are clear enough.

Note, however, that I don't agree with this obsession people have with McDonald's and how they market their Happy Meals, for children, to children. I could eat nothing but McDonald's for a year and I wouldn't become obese, because I know how to control my caloric intake. Childhood obesity is a symptom of bad parenting and lack of impulse control, not McDonald's marketing.

[Apeman81]

Obesity and Overweight for Professionals: Data and Statistics: U.S. Obesity Trends | DNPAO | CDC

Apparently we are, especially those of us in southern and mid-western states... Hm. People are stupid. Fundamentally, they're just apes. The best way to make them relatively smarter is to give them a good education when they're young, supply them with the information and opportunities needed to better themselves as they get older, penalize or discourage "bad" behavior, and improve their environment. If you don't want to make the apes better and smarter, that's fine. The South and Midwest agree with you, and their results are clear enough.

Note, however, that I don't agree with this obsession people have with McDonald's and how they market their Happy Meals, for children, to children. I could eat nothing but McDonald's for a year and I wouldn't become obese, because I know how to control my caloric intake. Childhood obesity is a symptom of bad parenting and lack of impulse control, not McDonald's marketing.

If what you assert concerning the intelligence of "us" is true, what then would support this particular groups claim to a superior intelligence?

And should the government support the implementation of limitations on the freedom to parent based upon the conclusions drawn by "smarter" people?

How could we know that the government supporting such assertions are themselves smart enough to vet the advice of these "smarter" people and make an intelligent decision about their assertions?

Round and round we go

[Void Serpent]

Kids Can Get Toys In Their Happy Meals, California Judge Rules | Fox News



We the people are simply too stupid to make important decisions concerning our children's dietary plan.

I'm ever so glad these tireless warriors for health are out there seeking to outlaw foods and food practices they feel a free society should not tolerate.

I agree to an extent. Children have not been able to learn what their parents should have, so there should be some regulation or informational availability for the child. In the end is the parents' choice how to bring that child up, it is why they still have it after all and I also don't see a toy affecting the parent's choice to grab a quick easy burger throw it at their child and be done with the meal prep.
You'll get more mentally deficient people that cant take care of themselves as a result if people don't lean, that is their choice for themselves and let evolution(natural selection) have them. When it starts to affect you, like obese people getting handicap passes, or are unable to work because they never left their couch and want an unemployment check that is where the real crap starts.
As a student I eat out a lot, but I bike to class and moderate what I do eat. Fast food is not the problem with obesity, let them market and appeal to the weak minded that cannot eat a safe amount. It is their problem at that level, it becomes ours when we allow them to think it is OK and they start negatively affecting others.

[Dieval]

The best way to make them relatively smarter is to give them a good education when they're young, supply them with the information and opportunities needed to better themselves as they get older, penalize or discourage "bad" behavior, and improve their environment.

Who gets to decide what's "good" and "bad"?

[crimethinker]

If what you assert concerning the intelligence of "us" is true, what then would support this particular groups claim to a superior intelligence?

And should the government support the implementation of limitations on the freedom to parent based upon the conclusions drawn by "smarter" people?

Are you denying that there are smarter people and smarter ideas? Most people's minds are riddled with logical fallacies and biases and errors in perception (including mine). "Smarter" people recognize this, and use a more rational method like logic or science to determine the truth of whatever they're thinking about. Also, some fields require a lot of expertise to have a valid opinion on. I absolutely want public policy to be informed by expertise and rationality. Limitations on "freedom", however, may require a value judgment or balancing act. Can we agree that parents shouldn't be allowed to feed their kids gravel? That we should regulate food to make sure there's no disease or poison in it? Where do we go from there?

How could we know that the government supporting such assertions are themselves smart enough to vet the advice of these "smarter" people and make an intelligent decision about their assertions?

I don't know, should parents be allowed to feed their kids gravel, or is this an issue of Freedom vs. Tyranny? I'm more worried about the thousands of imbeciles who will promptly kill or permanently damage their kids without the government's guidance and regulation than the government cracking down on toys in Happy Meals. That's not a dilemma we have to face though.

[crimethinker]

Who gets to decide what's "good" and "bad"?

Elected representatives by the looks of it. In turn, we decide who represents us.

[Dieval]

Elected representatives by the looks of it. In turn, we decide who represents us.

I don't need my "elected representatives" legislating about what I can and can't buy at McDonalds.

[crimethinker]

I don't need my "elected representatives" legislating about what I can and can't buy at McDonalds.

I do and so do we all. Think of meth, pipe bombs, and disease-ridden meat products. It's not a question of regulation or no regulation; it's a question of what regulation and why or why not.

[Apeman81]

Are you denying that there are smarter people and smarter ideas? Most people's minds are riddled with logical fallacies and biases and errors in perception (including mine). "Smarter" people recognize this, and use a more rational method like logic or science to determine the truth of whatever they're thinking about. Also, some fields require a lot of expertise to have a valid opinion on. I absolutely want public policy to be informed by expertise and rationality. Limitations on "freedom", however, may require a value judgment or balancing act. Can we agree that parents shouldn't be allowed to feed their kids gravel? That we should regulate food to make sure there's no disease or poison in it? Where do we go from there?



I don't know, should parents be allowed to feed their kids gravel, or is this an issue of Freedom vs. Tyranny? I'm more worried about the thousands of imbeciles who will promptly kill or permanently damage their kids without the government's guidance and regulation than the government cracking down on toys in Happy Meals. That's not a dilemma we have to face though.

That' the crux of it , isn't it. The assertion of dilemma and the response to such they claim a need for government intervention.

Thus we have a self-appointed "watchdog" hounding (couldn't resist) the courts to leap into action to regulate parental freedom to feed their children. While gravel in any amount can be clearly demonstrated to have insufficient nutritional value to justify feeding it to your kids, the same cannot be said of McDonald's food or the accompanying toys sold with it.

We regulate food, but that clearly does not "make sure" there is no disease or poison in it. Many a recent instance demonstrates. it does help to foster the illusion of safety that investigation does not bear out. It may help to lower instances, but I believe the greater incentive to ensure quality is the desire of the provider to create a lasting trust with the consumer in order to sell more than once. Selling tainted food does not help the companies earning capacity.

The salient point is that assuming to intercede for all parents due to the belief in the ineffectiveness of some parents is not a measure by which we should grant government to act en loco parentis

[Jack]

I'm certainly glad we were able to achieve a resolution to the "Happy Meals Crises" before the election. Now we can focus on less important matters like the economy and employment.

[Muckraker]

Tobacco companies should start bundling $10 MP3 gift-cards in every carton of cigarettes. Maybe some free scratch-off lottery tickets with every bottle of Schnapps.

The Happy-Meal toy--especially the popular "collect them all" variety--is a blatantly underhanded marketing strategy that taps into a child's ability to annoy the hell out of their parents. Where else do we bundle food products like that? Why don't the expensive movie-tie-in toys I purchase come with coupons for free Happy Meals?

If the practice is not targeted at brainwashing children and "getting them while they're young" then why don't adults get anything with their meals? Where is my little bonus for eating at McDonalds? Screw the kids--if I'm the one paying I think I'm more deserving of the perks (besides the perk of being forced to buy new pants or the perk of being ridiculed by other "healthy" adults of course).