- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When/How do we start punishing parents for disasterous parenting?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
for many years i've proposed parents losing social welfare benefits if their child is a truant or disruptive in school
So only poor kids whose family is on welfare should be protected from this form of "child abuse?" If its truly abuse, how are you going to protect the other kids?
1
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
socially ostracizing and criticizing is a possible avenue.
this doesn't work for fat people fwiw. they just eat more.
i actually think what michelle obama is doing is a step in the right direction. at least raising awareness of what you should eat.
The solution to this problem would be to tax the shite out of sugar. I don't see that playing well with anyone.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
*ETA: my ultimate solution is the elimination of the nanny state, but this is a step towards that
Sure it may be disproportionate, but its not like childhood obesity is only a problem in poor families. You are operating under a false assumption.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:56 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So only poor kids whose family is on welfare should be protected from this form of "child abuse?"
well ultimately i'd love to eliminate the nanny state, but you have to see the secondary effects
those not on welfare would face similar issues if the kid was kicked out of his/her private school. they couldn't go to a public school OR the parent would be punished financially by paying a metric frick ton to another private school. that punishment, in theory, would lead to a change of course in the parenting
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:57 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
The solution to this problem would be to tax the shite out of sugar.
just remove the subidies on it and we're going to get great results
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:58 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
but its not like childhood obesity is only a problem in poor families.
it's not, but it's more prevalent in poor families
we can't save EVERY example of bad parenting. we can sure as shite take steps to stop subsidizing bad parenting, though
i mean vices are only truly vices if you can't afford them. life isn't fair in that regard
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
just remove the subidies on it and we're going to get great results
sugar will still be cheaper than healthy food. I am up for removing the subsidies, and removing trade barriers. But i bet the cost of a coke remains about the same.
Instead institute a fat tax. You pay an extra 25% on all good with excess sugar. at the end of the year, you get a physical under obamacare and you get it back if your weight is in line and your health checks out.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
those not on welfare would face similar issues if the kid was kicked out of his/her private school
So you shouldn't be able to pay for an education if your fat? Your being ridiculous SFP.
How about kids whose parents smoke. You could consider that "child abuse" how you are defining it as well.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
we can't save EVERY example of bad parenting. we can sure as shite take steps to stop subsidizing bad parenting, though i mean vices are only truly vices if you can't afford them. life isn't fair in that regard
You clearly defined this as "child abuse" in you OP. I think all kids should be protected from child abuse, not just poor ones.
Why do you hate rich fat kids, SFP?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:03 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So you shouldn't be able to pay for an education if your fat?
i think education should be privatized
and that comment was about disruptive students, not the fat ones.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:05 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
You clearly defined this as "child abuse" in you OP. I think all kids should be protected from child abuse, not just poor ones.
there are different levels of abuse, bro. just b/c it's child abuse doesn't make it illegal (which is a big part of this discussion)
like spanking. i go back and forth on spanking. it's technically child abuse, but i also believe in punishment. regardless, that doesn't make it an illegal act
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:06 pm to Jcorye1
It's more of an all around money saving plan of mine that would also have a significant impact on obesity (at least among the poor):
1) eliminate food stamps as they are
2) have new "food stamps" only apply to generic fruits, veggies, meat, poultry, juices, milk, and water
3) stop paying farmers to not grow food so as to lower those prices
Basically, make sure that if a child is obese, then it's not on the taxpayer's dime. And childhood obesity is definitely more prevalent in lower income folk:
LINK /
1) eliminate food stamps as they are
2) have new "food stamps" only apply to generic fruits, veggies, meat, poultry, juices, milk, and water
3) stop paying farmers to not grow food so as to lower those prices
Basically, make sure that if a child is obese, then it's not on the taxpayer's dime. And childhood obesity is definitely more prevalent in lower income folk:
LINK /
quote:
This national study of more than 40,000 children also found that in 2007, children from lower income households had more than two times higher odds of being obese than children from higher income households.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:07 pm to THRILLHO
quote:
2) have new "food stamps" only apply to generic fruits, veggies, meat, poultry, juices, milk, and water
as for obesity, within the current framework, expanding WIC to all food stamps is the way to go
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
just b/c it's child abuse doesn't make it illegal (which is a big part of this discussion)
Well what definition of child abuse have you been using? I assumed more of a legal definition.
quote:
it's technically child abuse
No, spanking in and of itself isn't technically child abuse.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:12 pm to SlowFlowPro
So when religious people suggest that bad morals hurt society it's all" keep your morals to yourselves, you can't legislate morality" etc.
But when it comes to things associated with health, parenting, and other things that hit the pocketbook, well, let's tell them what to do right?
But when it comes to things associated with health, parenting, and other things that hit the pocketbook, well, let's tell them what to do right?
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
Subsidize/eliminate sales tax on fresh fruits and veggies. Then tax the shite out of processed foods and foods with excess sugar.
Then throw in extra subsidies for health insurance for those who stay at a healthy weight.
Finally, as you suggested make food stamps work like WIC.
People can still choose to act as they already do, but you create an incentive structure that encourages good decision making.
Then throw in extra subsidies for health insurance for those who stay at a healthy weight.
Finally, as you suggested make food stamps work like WIC.
People can still choose to act as they already do, but you create an incentive structure that encourages good decision making.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:15 pm to Revelator
quote:
So when religious people suggest that bad morals hurt society it's all" keep your morals to yourselves, you can't legislate morality" etc.
But when it comes to things associated with health and other things that hit the pocketbook, well, let's tell them what to do right?
you do know my solution to this is LESS government, right?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:15 pm to Duke
quote:
Then throw in extra subsidies for health insurance for those who stay at a healthy weight.
am i the only one who is blown away that health insurance is not dependent on weight? is that part of a regulatory scheme?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
you do know my solution to this is LESS government, right?
Then how is the problem rectified without a nanny state over site?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 4:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
am i the only one who is blown away that health insurance is not dependent on weight?
Absolutely not. Fatties are almost certainly going to cost more. They should pay more.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News