The American diet is NOT AT ALL in danger of being salt deficient. Salt is in fact the cheapest of additives to our food. Your concern is nonsense and there is plenty of evidence that the massively unnatural salt abundance in our modern diet isnt doing us any favors.
It is widely excepted that whole grains are better for you than bleached and heavily processed grains as they are far less likely to spike your blood sugar levels.
Veggies are intrinsic to every diet dietitians consider healthy.
In summary, your concerns are right up there with anti-vaccine types.
So we should feed our childhood obesity epidemic in our schools, thus encouraging a lifestyle that will kill our children early and cause a shit ton of needless suffering?
No, "in other words" schools are again contributing to eating habits that will shorten children's lives. There's nothing wrong with encouraging eating habits that will help combat the childhood obesity epidemic in this country.
I think a big part of the problem in the US is that school lunches are largely the junk food crap which kids love. I know I used to bug my mom all the time to get me school lunches rather than make my lunch because school lunches were full of the junk food I loved to eat.
It's a shame the kids have to suffer for their parents not paying their bills but there are programs in most of America for kids to get free school lunches if their parents are low income enough. While the article begins with a case of clerical error for the little girl who got her lunch thrown away the fact is that can not be the reason for most of the kids being refused food (or even as the article states, given cheese sandwiches or the like). To me it seems like the real bad guys here are the parents who cant be bothered to pay their kids school lunch bills or *gasp* prepare them a meal themselves which would probably be cheaper. Shoot, if you know how to shop you can send your kid to school with a buck or two worth of produce and they've got a filling, nutritious meal. That's certainly how I lived when I was going to college.
"School regulations are the purview of state, not federal. It's much *much* better when the local population has a say in how their kids get schooled"
No it's not, that's how we ended up with the garbage they were and / or are serving now. That's literally why these steps were taken because local government wasnt doing anything. Sure, I loved nacho day when I was a kid but when I think back on the food in my school cafeteria I cant believe that they were feeding us that shit and from everything I've ever read my school's menu was normal by American standards. We have a health epidemic of childhood obesity in this country and school menus are most certainly a contributor, particularly for low income kids who are more prone to obesity and depend on free school lunches for a "proper meal". The "locals decide the menu" method has shown itself to be a complete failure.
And for the nutrition nerds out there, I dont think the Obama era rules are perfect but they are most certainly better then what most schools were offering.
Aaaaand I just read your Breitbart article which you apparently did not, Right there in the article:
"Nineteen former SNA presidents wrote a letter against the waiver rider and asserted they were wary of the influence of the food industry on SNA’s position. Half of SNA’s operating budget comes from the food industry. With 55,000 members across the nation, SNA is fighting the new nutrition regulations, which include limits on sodium and orders students to have a serving of fruit or vegetables so their school is eligible for USDA reimbursement. "
Private roads are a great way to make over half the country uninhabitable and unreachable as the tolls necessary to make roads profitable in rural areas would be too high to be practical, thus the roads would never get built which then means these areas will never attain the populations to support roads profitably.
Your link is garbage too. Siting a book summary that doesnt lay out any of the author's evidence does not support your claim at all. But hey, maybe the author has it right and every affluent country in the world has it wrong!
No, the "worst corporate tools that there has ever been" would be the Republican party in general. Lower taxes on corporations and the wealthy meanwhile slashing social programs? The Democrats are certainly not perfect and Clinton most assuredly so but the Republican's economic policy clearly puts them in favor of the oligarchs over the common person. Their economic policy could not be more tailor maid to reduce the middle class in favor of enriching the affluent.
What laws make it "impossible" for teenagers to pick produce? I ask because I think you're full of shit and want "government regulations" to be a problem here just so you can can complain about government because "how on earth can government do anything right"?
Basically, I'm telling you your claims are completely fabricated. If you can substantiate them then maybe I'll take you seriously.
"I know, this time it will work, because you've worked out all the bugs. Yawn"
This is still the first run of the first world mixed model of socialism and capitalism. Also, no economic system or government has ever lasted forever. Maybe book up a bit before you start throwing blatently false claims about.
"People resist change just as a matter of being human. Any change needs to overcome this "static friction"."
I'll tell you why I resist change in the software I use. Software upgrades often come with changes to the UI which often require that the user relearn how to use their software. There are few things i hate more then having to relearn how to use software features I was already using.
For a lot of Nintendo fans it's not about the console at all, it's about Nintendo's games that you can only play on the console. Yes, the Wii was an exception to what I'm saying, attracting a lot of casual gamers with its special controlers but for the hardcore Nintendo fans it's the virtual garuntee of a good Zelda, Mario, Smash Brothers, etc title.
Hahaha, you're pathetically rediculous. You're playing dumb summantic games over two terms that share close equvilance and bring no real critical thought to the table. And I'm rascist and illiterate? You apparently dont even know what the words mean that you are using.
You nicely glossed over what I said and instead focused on what you wanted which in this case seems to be "political issue".
To elaborate on what I actually said before and tie it in with you are getting at (and some added emphases to help you notice the key component you missed before), did Syria get its start in online news? Did its president? Are either of them major players in what is currently a very influential online political movement?
Now dont get me wrong, a case could be made that slashdot should have an article about Syria. I might even agree with said case, I dont know. My point I've just reiterated here is that the online tie-in Bannon has makes him relevant news on slashdot. The Alt-right is big news in the context of internet culture right now. Syria, one way or another, is really irrelevant to whether Bannon should be reported on or not.
Well when you host your own website you can decide what can and cant be posted.
In the mean time, I'll keep reading slashdot and continue to be not surprised about news articles related to major players in major online political movements and how they are fairing in their current role in real world politics.
Refering to a city as a market in a context like this is completely accurate. Maybe go back to your high school economics class' text book for a review:)
Since you have no interest in what I'm saying and have every interest in turning this into a "my political sports team is duh best!" discussion I shall leave you with...
EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS RIGHT! Your shit not only doesnt smell but it also smells like roses at the same time. Anything the RIght does that's bad is really done by Left wing infiltrators because how could the Right do anything wrong? They're who you vote for! Your demonizing of those with contrary political views is 200 percent constructive and is not in any way, shape, or form reflective of our current dysfunctional political climate.
This just in, slashdot diminishes usefulness of site for a day in same tired April Fools joke they do every year!
One editor was reported saying, "Yes, we've been beating this horse for twenty years now but rumors of the horse's demise many years prior have been grossly exadurated."
Hense my reference to the hundreds of tea party rallies.
I guess i should have been clearer as I shouldnt expect critical thinking from the types who want to brand half the population for the actions of a few.
As much I disliked what happened in Berkeley with the protests the most annoying part of them for me is now we have idiots like you creating massive generalizations based off a single event.
If the entire Left is now against free speech because of this where does that put the right with all those photos of racist anti Obama banners from tea party rallies? There's photos from hundreds of rallies featuring these things. Is the Right a movement entirely composed of racists because of those?
Since you're a twit I'll answer for you, it puts the Right no where because holding an entire political ideology responsible for the actions of a few is something only stupid people do.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me address you point by point.
The American diet is NOT AT ALL in danger of being salt deficient. Salt is in fact the cheapest of additives to our food. Your concern is nonsense and there is plenty of evidence that the massively unnatural salt abundance in our modern diet isnt doing us any favors.
It is widely excepted that whole grains are better for you than bleached and heavily processed grains as they are far less likely to spike your blood sugar levels.
Veggies are intrinsic to every diet dietitians consider healthy.
In summary, your concerns are right up there with anti-vaccine types.
Okay, that's my point so I feel like you're making a different one?
So we should just go ahead and feed (literally) the childhood obesity epidemic in this country rather than try to teach kids how to eat properly?
So we should feed our childhood obesity epidemic in our schools, thus encouraging a lifestyle that will kill our children early and cause a shit ton of needless suffering?
No, "in other words" schools are again contributing to eating habits that will shorten children's lives. There's nothing wrong with encouraging eating habits that will help combat the childhood obesity epidemic in this country.
No, I worked my way through school and yes ramen was a key component to me diet, as were eggs and veggies.
Meat was a delicacy back then...
I think a big part of the problem in the US is that school lunches are largely the junk food crap which kids love. I know I used to bug my mom all the time to get me school lunches rather than make my lunch because school lunches were full of the junk food I loved to eat.
What about less salt, whole grains, and more veggies is junk?
I'm not saying the menus couldnt be better but they were a lot worse.
It's a shame the kids have to suffer for their parents not paying their bills but there are programs in most of America for kids to get free school lunches if their parents are low income enough. While the article begins with a case of clerical error for the little girl who got her lunch thrown away the fact is that can not be the reason for most of the kids being refused food (or even as the article states, given cheese sandwiches or the like). To me it seems like the real bad guys here are the parents who cant be bothered to pay their kids school lunch bills or *gasp* prepare them a meal themselves which would probably be cheaper. Shoot, if you know how to shop you can send your kid to school with a buck or two worth of produce and they've got a filling, nutritious meal. That's certainly how I lived when I was going to college.
"School regulations are the purview of state, not federal. It's much *much* better when the local population has a say in how their kids get schooled"
No it's not, that's how we ended up with the garbage they were and / or are serving now. That's literally why these steps were taken because local government wasnt doing anything. Sure, I loved nacho day when I was a kid but when I think back on the food in my school cafeteria I cant believe that they were feeding us that shit and from everything I've ever read my school's menu was normal by American standards. We have a health epidemic of childhood obesity in this country and school menus are most certainly a contributor, particularly for low income kids who are more prone to obesity and depend on free school lunches for a "proper meal". The "locals decide the menu" method has shown itself to be a complete failure.
And for the nutrition nerds out there, I dont think the Obama era rules are perfect but they are most certainly better then what most schools were offering.
Aaaaand I just read your Breitbart article which you apparently did not, Right there in the article:
"Nineteen former SNA presidents wrote a letter against the waiver rider and asserted they were wary of the influence of the food industry on SNA’s position. Half of SNA’s operating budget comes from the food industry. With 55,000 members across the nation, SNA is fighting the new nutrition regulations, which include limits on sodium and orders students to have a serving of fruit or vegetables so their school is eligible for USDA reimbursement. "
So yeah, SNA is not so creditable you hack.
Private roads are a great way to make over half the country uninhabitable and unreachable as the tolls necessary to make roads profitable in rural areas would be too high to be practical, thus the roads would never get built which then means these areas will never attain the populations to support roads profitably.
Your link is garbage too. Siting a book summary that doesnt lay out any of the author's evidence does not support your claim at all. But hey, maybe the author has it right and every affluent country in the world has it wrong!
No, the "worst corporate tools that there has ever been" would be the Republican party in general. Lower taxes on corporations and the wealthy meanwhile slashing social programs? The Democrats are certainly not perfect and Clinton most assuredly so but the Republican's economic policy clearly puts them in favor of the oligarchs over the common person. Their economic policy could not be more tailor maid to reduce the middle class in favor of enriching the affluent.
I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit here.
What laws make it "impossible" for teenagers to pick produce? I ask because I think you're full of shit and want "government regulations" to be a problem here just so you can can complain about government because "how on earth can government do anything right"?
Basically, I'm telling you your claims are completely fabricated. If you can substantiate them then maybe I'll take you seriously.
"I know, this time it will work, because you've worked out all the bugs. Yawn"
This is still the first run of the first world mixed model of socialism and capitalism. Also, no economic system or government has ever lasted forever. Maybe book up a bit before you start throwing blatently false claims about.
"People resist change just as a matter of being human. Any change needs to overcome this "static friction"."
I'll tell you why I resist change in the software I use. Software upgrades often come with changes to the UI which often require that the user relearn how to use their software. There are few things i hate more then having to relearn how to use software features I was already using.
For a lot of Nintendo fans it's not about the console at all, it's about Nintendo's games that you can only play on the console. Yes, the Wii was an exception to what I'm saying, attracting a lot of casual gamers with its special controlers but for the hardcore Nintendo fans it's the virtual garuntee of a good Zelda, Mario, Smash Brothers, etc title.
Hahaha, you're pathetically rediculous. You're playing dumb summantic games over two terms that share close equvilance and bring no real critical thought to the table. And I'm rascist and illiterate? You apparently dont even know what the words mean that you are using.
So you're the asshole debating the meaning of "is"?
I ask because "not renewing" sure seems to equal "dismantling"
You nicely glossed over what I said and instead focused on what you wanted which in this case seems to be "political issue".
To elaborate on what I actually said before and tie it in with you are getting at (and some added emphases to help you notice the key component you missed before), did Syria get its start in online news? Did its president? Are either of them major players in what is currently a very influential online political movement?
Now dont get me wrong, a case could be made that slashdot should have an article about Syria. I might even agree with said case, I dont know. My point I've just reiterated here is that the online tie-in Bannon has makes him relevant news on slashdot. The Alt-right is big news in the context of internet culture right now. Syria, one way or another, is really irrelevant to whether Bannon should be reported on or not.
Well when you host your own website you can decide what can and cant be posted.
In the mean time, I'll keep reading slashdot and continue to be not surprised about news articles related to major players in major online political movements and how they are fairing in their current role in real world politics.
Refering to a city as a market in a context like this is completely accurate. Maybe go back to your high school economics class' text book for a review :)
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
Relevant portion:
a (1) : a geographic area of demand for commodities or services - sell in the southern market
Since you have no interest in what I'm saying and have every interest in turning this into a "my political sports team is duh best!" discussion I shall leave you with...
EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS RIGHT! Your shit not only doesnt smell but it also smells like roses at the same time. Anything the RIght does that's bad is really done by Left wing infiltrators because how could the Right do anything wrong? They're who you vote for! Your demonizing of those with contrary political views is 200 percent constructive and is not in any way, shape, or form reflective of our current dysfunctional political climate.
This just in, slashdot diminishes usefulness of site for a day in same tired April Fools joke they do every year!
One editor was reported saying, "Yes, we've been beating this horse for twenty years now but rumors of the horse's demise many years prior have been grossly exadurated."
Hense my reference to the hundreds of tea party rallies.
I guess i should have been clearer as I shouldnt expect critical thinking from the types who want to brand half the population for the actions of a few.
As much I disliked what happened in Berkeley with the protests the most annoying part of them for me is now we have idiots like you creating massive generalizations based off a single event.
If the entire Left is now against free speech because of this where does that put the right with all those photos of racist anti Obama banners from tea party rallies? There's photos from hundreds of rallies featuring these things. Is the Right a movement entirely composed of racists because of those?
Since you're a twit I'll answer for you, it puts the Right no where because holding an entire political ideology responsible for the actions of a few is something only stupid people do.