The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Does this remind you of any other health campaign?

Discussion in 'Media and General News' started by rothenbj, Sep 9, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. rothenbj

    rothenbj Vaping Master Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Jul 23, 2009
    Green Lane, Pa
  2. AgentAnia

    AgentAnia Resting In Peace ECF Veteran

    May 22, 2013
    Orbiting Sirius B
    Incredible. Big Sugar. The Blame Game. Blame somebody else, anybody else. It worked on Big Tobacco, so what's the next industry we can blame for all our woes?

    Never mind inconvenient, pesky ideas like personal or parental responsibility. That takes too much effort. Let the state do it.


    If we need to go after Big [somebody], it's Big Health. Or where will it end?
  3. DrMA

    DrMA Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 26, 2013
    Seattle area
    With tobacco revenues under serious threat from vaping, they're setting the ground work for the next big govt racket: the SMSA (sugar master settlement agreement).
  4. Nate760

    Nate760 Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Mar 11, 2014
    San Marcos, CA, USA
    Does this mean it's only a matter of time before "sugar" makes the ECF banned-word list?
  5. sonicdsl

    sonicdsl Admin
    Reviewers Mgr
    Asst Classifieds Mgr
    Admin Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Aug 11, 2011
    Great. Now I have to issue infractions for sugar? :glare:
  6. rothenbj

    rothenbj Vaping Master Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Jul 23, 2009
    Green Lane, Pa
    Nah. sugar won't become a bad word, but we might start seeing that, "Sugar is more addicting than smoking".
  7. KODIAK (TM)

    KODIAK (TM) Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 31, 2014
    Dead Moose, AK
    Just more social engineering. Nothing to see here folks.

    I've lost 12 pounds since vaping. Probably because I can get out of the recliner all by myself now without needing CPR or oxygen. Haven't changed my diet at all.
  8. xpl0it

    xpl0it Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Mar 2, 2013
    Miami, FL
  9. Shipmonster

    Shipmonster Senior Member

    Aug 13, 2014
    I like how in the video the talking head states "they're not here to make America healthy, they're here to make money." And my reaction (read sarcasm) was something akin to

  10. pamdis

    pamdis Super Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 11, 2013
  11. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    And "fructose is poison" :facepalm:

    And Nixon is the culprit... lol

    Forbes: "top beneficiaries of big sugar’s influence for the current election cycle include Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa ($35,400)"

    SC019/SC019: The History of U.S. Sugar Protection

    The first Sugar Act, known as the Jones-Costigan Act, became law on May 9, 1934.[erm... that's FDR] Its main six features were as follows:
    1.the determination each year of the quantity of sugar needed to supply the nation's requirements at prices reasonable to consumers and fair to producers;

    2.the division of the U.S. sugar market among the domestic and foreign supplying areas by the use of quotas and subordinate limitations on offshore direct consumption sugar;

    3.the allotment of these quotas among the various processors in each domestic area;

    4.the adjustment of production in each domestic area to the established quota;

    5.the levying of a tax on the processing of sugarcane and sugar beets, the proceeds of which were to be used to make payments to producers to compensate them for adjusting their production to marketing quotas to increase their income;

    6.the equitable division of sugar returns among beet and cane processors, growers, and farm workers.

    The U.S. Congress repealed the processing tax (declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in early 1936) and payment provisions. The President [FDR] recommended new legislation that resulted in the enactment of the Sugar Act of 1937. The new Act contained an excise tax that was unrelated to government payments to growers, which would be made out of the U.S. Treasury from funds appropriated for that purpose. Quota allocations resulting from any market expansion were to be shared proportionally by both domestic and foreign areas. This Sugar Act was originally scheduled to expire in 1940 but was extended to 1941, then from 1941 to 1944, from 1944 to 1946, and again from 1946 through December 31, 1947.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice