Santa Clara County has decided to ban the inclusion of toys with certain fast food meals: if you order fries with your child's meal, then you don't get a toy; if you order apple slices, you do.
Personally, I'd love to see all small plastic toys banned from sale/trade/existence: they are unimaginative, obnoxious and wasteful–typical of the throw-away, materialistic mentality that is rotting our culture from the inside out.
But this law? Seriously?
You're going to specify, by nutritive value, how to package food? That my friends, is myopic government run amok.
By this standard:
- All sugary cereals should be packaged in unappealing bags and boxes.
- Pinatas should be of dull and muted color and shape, or, alternatively, contain fresh fruits and vegetables.
- Birthday cakes should be monochromatic, sport no characters resembling toys, animals, or anything else that could be construed as appealing to children.
- The contents of prepackaged Christmas stockings and Easter baskets sold to the public must meet minimum nutritional standards.
- Department stores shouldn't be able to market any sort of holiday-themed treat aimed at children–no Halloween candy, no candy-containing valentines, no peeps.
- Only 100 percent fruit and vegetable juices should be sold in colorful, child friendly sizes and/or ergonomically shaped beverage containers.
- Grocery stores shouldn't be able to place unhealthy snacks on the lower shelves of aisles at the checkout–clearly parents do not possess the ability to say no, and need regulations to protect their children's healthy eating habits.
On second thought, maybe parents should be stripped of all decision making powers, because, obviously, they are all more idiotic than the government members seated in the county of Santa Clara.
April 28th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
For real. Wasting time and money on this do-nothing, unenforceable legislation is absolutely ridiculous. It will be a disaster when one brother or sister gets a toy and another doesn't.
April 28th, 2010 at 8:25 pm
Shhhhhh……they will hear you and adopt all of your ideas 🙂 You are right….dumb law. Very dumb!
April 28th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Oh, good grief, I didn't even consider that scenario–try to explain to a toddler–say one that is allergic to the milk option–that because she can't have the milk, she can't have the toy, either, even though brother can. Yikes! Talk about another blow to business!
April 28th, 2010 at 9:10 pm
Oh, and that's actually what they are hoping, you realize–their goal, flat out stated–is to start a legislative trend that will sweep the nation, the way the did with posted nutrition facts.
April 29th, 2010 at 7:50 am
I totally agree about the plastic. As per usual, the government uses the half-baked, sideways approach. They should be going after the food companies for false advertising and greenwashing.
http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/09/smart-choices-food-label-claims-froot-loops-are-a-okay/
April 29th, 2010 at 8:00 am
HA! Look at that article! Can you believe? I had a visit from a USDA food inspector yesterday; among other things, she brought me the new guidelines going into effect soon for the national school lunch program (as a daycare provider, I have to abide by the same rules). They are prefaced by a statement concerning childhood obesity, etc., so I thought, hey, maybe they fixed the old rules–the ones that say eggs are not a breakfast food, but donuts, poptarts, and cinnamon rolls are. But no, protein is still blacklisted, and the sweets have just been reduced–now people can only serve donuts twice a week for breakfast, rather than every day. What? Oh, yeah, and pepperoni is no longer considered a meat product. Glad we got that straight.
May 1st, 2010 at 7:33 am
Things like this just make me tired. And disgusted.
May 1st, 2010 at 3:01 pm
What…my cynicism, or the new law? ;o)
May 1st, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I agree with your cynicism. =) All the phony concern over nutrition by the corporate world is really getting to me lately.