San Francisco Passes a Happy-Meal Ban

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has “passed an ordinance that will require meals to meet certain nutritional guidelines if restaurants wish to include a toy with the food purchase.” Meals with toys must meet nutritional requirements with respect to fruit, vegetable and multigrain content. The ordinance passed by an 8-3 vote, enough of a margin to override a promised mayoral veto. Which comes first: a McDonald’s capitulation or a black market in happy meals? (HT: The Plan) [%comments]

TAGS: , ,

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 85

  1. AaronS says:

    As we learned from Spiderman, “With great power comes great responsibility.” McDonald’s could be a force for great good in this world. They could create an INCREDIBLE healthy meal for children…and give toys ONLY with those meals.

    Instead, they give a toy with all Happy Meals. Unbreaded/unfried chicken nuggets and, say, apple sticks with a fresh water…yeah, I’d love my kid to eat like that.

    Hey, McDonald’s, use your power for good, not just sales.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  2. Matt says:

    But can you still include a free toy with each marijuana purchase, assuming the weed meets certain quality benchmarks?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  3. The Quietist says:

    Thank goodness. How did people live before there were city councilmen and women deciding what we can and cannot eat?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  4. Svenn Diagram says:

    Wake me when they finally immanentize the eschaton

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. DaveyNC says:

    I think that the McDonaldseses that are closest to the SF city limits are about to have an uptick in business. And spilled drinks.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  6. I'll have the Unhappy Meal. says:

    Does the corn syrup in beverages count as a vegetable?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Lin says:

    TheQuietist, obviously not very well with a obesity/overweight rate rate of aout 75% in 07. First, many, many of those people will end up using government money to pay for their obesity-related health care, so the government needs to prevent as well as treat.

    Also, kids are kids and can’t be trusted to eat healthy things. Grown ups (life experts, of sorts) need to help them. If their parents are either idiots who don’t care, or lack the time and resources due to cook because they’re working 3 jobs, they obviously need the help of nutrition experts to make sure they have access to healthy food for their kids. If parents feed their kids junk and the children have health problems that follow them for years, or even forever, the “freedom” to feed your kids whatever trash you want seems pretty stupid.

    As a kid who grew up on McDonalds due to an overworked single parent and had all the weight and health problems that follows, I wish a councilman had been doing something to protect me.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  8. bob says:

    @ The Quietist

    Right, instead you have a huge multinational corporation deciding what millions of children eat.

    It doesn’t have to be an either or solution. McDonald’s uses cheap toys to profit on the degrading health of America’s children.

    Do their parents have a responsibility in this? Certainly, but that doesn’t eliminate McDonald’s responsibility as well.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1