News-Record.com

I read about this yesterday and I am not sure it will be the best option to reduce the obesity "epidemic" that has apparently been discovered. A ban on building new restaurants is one thing but what about the fast food joints that are already in business and doing well? Are they unavailable/closed for a year; will they be mandated to turn away customers who appear overweight or obese; will they be required to only offer the more "healthy" menu options and discontinue offering their normal menu? How is this going to work? Plus, the idea to attract more healthy, sit-down type dining establishments is great but with that comes additional cost as well for the community members. Fast food isn't as big as it is just because it's convenient; it's also become a fad because it's affordable (a.k.a cheap). There are so many families that just can't afford to eat at better establishments that they seem to want to attract. So, what happens? The businesses who choose to open in those areas don't do well and end up closing. It's a vicious cycle that we seem to only perpetuate with this type of initiative. In my opinion, we need to make mroe healthy food options available in local groceries and do more to offer quick and easy meal prep advice to families. Aside from that, epidemic or not, you can't force people to eat healthy. It's a choice each individual makes on their own and the government should respect that. There are bigger problems facing our society today that need our attention and in areas such as this one, and smokers and drug addicts, we need to allow those individuals to make their choices and provide assistance when they make decisions to better their lives. Banning fast food, as far as I can see, will just be another reason to advance the unemployment rate in our country.

As a former college athlete and someone who has been accused of being OCD about working out and dieting, I think the idea is great on the surface. The problem is that obesity is largely a "poor man's" disease, not because of education or time, but expense. People know that fast food is bad, but a cheeseburger and fries for $2.14 is hard to beat.

My families food bills, we normally cook at home, are ridiculous. $2 a pound for boneless, skinless chicken, $2.75 /lb for lean hamburger, and fresh veggie prices continue to rise. With my wife recently being promoted to stay at home with the kids status, our once super healthy diet has had to take a back seat to a budget diet. 95% lean beef to 80% etc...

The introduction of a ban on fast food would do nothing to combat this and is a waste of time.

Axhandle:
I see the council's intentions, which appear honorable, but I agree. The moratorium won't do much good; eating healthier tends to be costlier, and if that ban isn't accompanied by cash (and it won't be), little is likely to change in LA.

You’re right, even unhealthy amenities are missing in East Greensboro, but fast food restaurants aren’t one of them. Fast food is a treat but it is not the issue here. Depression, medical problems and genetics all play a big part in obesity for children and adults. Aside from those, choices and culture reign supreme. It’s not where you eat, but what you eat. Eating in and of itself can be the culprit that packs pounds on the backside of someone’s body. Rice, beans and bread will add pounds to a person but it will also keep you full when there is nothing else in the house. Instead of buying from the $1 menu at McDonald’s most poor people head to the grocery store in order to use that $5 to feed a family of four for three days. East Greensboro needs grocery stores in the neighborhood and outreach efforts to teach residents how to buy healthy foods and still stay within their grocery budget. Even McDonalds, Burger King and Taco Bell have “healthy” menus. Perhaps research should be performed to see where the most obese children/adults actually live. It may surprise you that they are not in East Greensboro.

I've done the research on where the most obese Greensborians actually live, and the answer is at Wet and Wild.

This is a classically meaningless nanny state gesture, and its practical effects will be zero. As the rule states, in any less-than-utopian event involving a human being and an inanimate object, the liberal shall blame the inanimate object or, even better, its maker. Since human beings cannot be trusted with inanimate objects (guns, cheeseburgers, "confusing" loans, etc.), it is the job of government to regulate said objects. The next thing you know, we're living in a world without Happy Meals.

Brian:
I agree on the fast-food ban. But I do think predatory lending laws do good and make sense.

Because people aren't trustworthy or responsible enough to enter into contractual relationships on their own?

In a word, yes. These contracts can be confusing and misleading.
You've closed on a house. You know how much paperwork there is to sign.
You probably have credit cards as well. So you also know about the fine print and the hidden fees.

Brian444 obviously believes in a darwinian approach where the weak/unintelligent are driven out of existence by the stronger and more intelligent. If that is the root of his belief, then I am in concert with him.

I believe in the Darwinian principle of the survival of the folks who are willing to use the damned common sense God gave them.

It requires no special cognitive skills to determine how much one can afford for a house payment, nor to determine the basic terms of a loan. The phrase "adjustable rate" is not hermeneutically dense: it means that the "rate" is "adjustable." Truth in lending statements are pretty straightforward.

As for credit cards, my wife won't allow me to handle those, so I can't say for sure how complicated they are. But I do know not to use mine without permission.

Brian 444, you hit nail on the head, just more cradle to the grave control by liberals. I went to youth baseball tournament last week. They had a rule that all players must play 6 outs in the infield. So little over weight Johnny has no desire, to shape up and work hard. He knows he is going to play. So you can bust your ass, are sit on it, you have the same benefits. We do not want little Johnny to have his feeling hurt. Then he goes out in the real world and gets run over by a train. You wonder why we as Americans are falling behind, in the real world?

Your wife is a very wise woman.

Your wife is a very wise woman.

Your wife is a very wise woman.

Good comments by all! When I first saw this story, I thought to myself WOW that might actually help East Greensboro. The more I actually thought about it the more unlikely it seems as an aid to help East Greensboro. It seems that it will keep Economic Development at a stand-still as it has been for the past 15-20 years. City Council enacting a ban on fast food in East Greensboro would only give restaurants, grocery stores and the like a legit excuse for why they do not come to the East side of town. Until we have more developers and decision-makers that realize that there is an entire population of the city that they have not tapped into yet, East Greensboro will stay littered with Fast Food Joints...