Marathon Stupidity

Well, here's one person in New York City who's making a dumber decision than Mike Bloomberg when he decided the marathion must go on, even if Staten Island still resembles something from a lower circle of hell. 

Then again, those marathoners better not try to use any salt on their pre-race pasta meals, or Bloomberg may come get them.

Something Rotten in Denmark

Denmark is definitely off the tourist destination list.  And if you don't think they're try crap like this here, you're wrong -- the minute we decided to let government pay for things like health care, we started giving them the right to nag us to death about all our personal lifestyle choices.

The good news? I'm guessing that when politicians here try to tax deep-fried Twinkies, tar and feathers will become very popular. 

Reason #1467 I Don't Live In California

And I thought I hated my homeowner's association...

A southern California couple has been fined $300 dollars for holding Christian Bible study sessions in their home, and could face another $500 for each additional gathering.

City officials in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. say Chuck and Stephanie Fromm are in violation of municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits “religious, fraternal or non-profit” organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit. Stephanie hosts a Wednesday Bible study that draws about 20 attendees, and Chuck holds a Sunday service that gets about 50.

The Fromms appealed their citations but were denied and warned future sessions would carry heftier penalties. A statement from the Pacific Justice Institute, which is defending the couple in a lawsuit against the city, said Chuck Fromm was also told regular gatherings of three or more people require a conditional use permit, which can be costly and difficult to obtain.

I know, it's not their HOA, it's just another asinine local governmental body thathas too much time on its hands and too many lawyers telling them they can't bend the rules, lest they face a lawsuit from whatever busybody neighbor called the cops and complained in the first place.  I don't care if the Fromms want to have weekly orgies in their homes -- they shouldn't need to go through an expensive licensing process to do so.  If their guests are keeping the noise to a minimum, and in compliance with all local parking regulations, why should anyone care?  And if the problem is the latter, ticket and tow them.

My solution, since this is California: tell them everyone's getting together to smoke pot.  Or have the whole congregation marry one another, and assert that you can't keep a family apart.

I Guess This Was Why He Wanted A Third Term

Mayor Bloomberg, a.k.a. New York's insufferable nanny, now wants to cut back on salt in processed foods...

On Monday, the Bloomberg administration plans to unveil a broad new health initiative aimed at encouraging food manufacturers and restaurant chains across the country to curtail the amount of salt in their products.

The plan, for which the city claims support from health agencies in other cities and states, sets a goal of reducing the amount of salt in packaged and restaurant food by 25 percent over the next five years.

Public health experts say that would reduce the incidence of high blood pressure and should help prevent some of the strokes and heart attacks associated with that condition. The plan is voluntary for food companies and involves no legislation. It allows companies to cut salt gradually over five years so the change is not so noticeable to consumers.

“We all consume way too much salt, and most of the salt we consume is in the food when we buy it,” said Dr. Thomas Farley, the city health commissioner, whose department is leading the effort. Eighty percent of the salt in Americans’ diets comes from packaged or restaurant food. Dr. Farley said reducing salt from those sources would save lives.

Since taking office, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who just began his third term, has gained a reputation as an advocate for healthy living, initiating prominent campaigns against smoking and harmful trans fats. To combat obesity, he has campaigned for calorie labeling on restaurant menus and warned consumers about sugary soft drinks.

The city’s salt campaign is in some ways more ambitious and less certain of success than the ones it waged against smoking and obesity. For one thing, the changes it prescribes require cooperation on a national scale, city officials said, because major food companies cannot be expected to alter their products for just the New York market.

And removing salt from many products can be complicated. Salt plays many roles in food, enhancing flavor, preventing spoilage and improving shelf life. It helps bread to rise and brown.

The city’s campaign against salt resembles its push to cut trans fat from restaurant foods, which began with a call for voluntary compliance. When that did not work, the city passed a law to force restaurants to eliminate trans fat.

But city officials said it would be difficult to legislate sodium reduction.

“There’s not an easy regulatory fix,” said Geoffrey Cowley, an associate health commissioner. “You would have to micromanage so many targets for so many different products.”

He said officials hoped the campaign would work through public pressure. Companies that complied would benefit from good publicity.

I know I eat some unhealthy junk, and I also know that I add way too much salt to what I eat. But it's my job to get that under control, not Michael Bloomberg's. And if it is Bloomberg's job, then he's doing really lousy work, so I'd like him fired.

If Bloomberg stops this time with just public encouragement, I don't have a huge problem with it, although if I were a NYC resident, I'd probably prefer my mayor to be doing something other than reading nutrition labels for me. But the problem with these ideas is that they rarely stop with just public encouragement, and at some point, we end up limiting freedom of choice in ways that become far too intrusive (at least for me). Will restaurants later be encouraged to remove salt shakers and salt packets from the tables and other areas, providing them only on request? Perhaps after the consumer is read a lecture about using too much salt?

Yes, slippery slope arguments are inherently weakened by the fact that most of the problems in an individual parade of horribles are inherently absurd ("We're not going to stand here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America! Gentlemen!"). But the real question is how far we really want the state to go in regulating our lives for our better good. Even if people are making foolish decisions about their diet, those are their decisions to make. Besides, it's not like our city, state, and federal governments are covering themselves in glory making intelligent decisions right now -- I'd like there to be less on their plate rather than more, in part because I don't want to cede more control to them, and in part so they can actually do the jobs they're supposed to be doing.