I was reading an article tonight about the Navajo imposing America's first "junk food tax" upon themselves. According to the article, this tax will add 2% to the cost of food "with minimal-to-no-nutritional value", which it makes clear is intended to try to reduce consumption. Similar efforts have so far failed elsewhere, though at times, some areas have banned soda and sweetened juice machines from schools and other locales, and in a few cities, container taxes have been used to covertly achieve similar ends (as well as impose a stealth tax on alcohol).
Of course this is always treated by the press as a good thing, a high minded measure, along with actions such as smoking bans and cigarette taxes, intended to make us all healthier and happier and so on. And many readers no doubt will ask "why object? If they want to stop selling such foods, why do you care?" And we have been so brainwashed by the press perspective, I bet many probably cannot even see the insanity in such a position.
Think of it this way: If you want to stop eating chips and fried foods, what do you do? Simple, you stop eating them. You don't go to the trouble of drafting legislation and forcing it through local government. There is no need. It is the same for smoking. If you want to quit smoking, you quit. Or maybe you get nicotine gum, or some other aid. You don't pass legislation.
Legislation has nothing to do with voluntary measures or efforts to help themselves. A law is all about forcing people, all about those who DON'T WANT to do what you think is best. In other words, the ban is not about people who want to stop eating such things making themselves do so, it is about people who want to stop eating such things forcing everyone else to do the same, whether they want to or not. It is all about one of two things. Either it is about those who resent having to give up something making sure no one else can enjoy it either, or it is about people who think they know best forcing what they think is good on those too foolish, ignorant or unenlightened to see how smart and correct they are.
I find both horrible reasons for passing laws. Laws, as I have made clear, should be about protecting rights, not forcing people to do what you think is right, or protecting them from "making bad decisions", which are always "bad" only when defined by your perspective, not theirs.
Our nation was established on the rights of man, to protect everyone's rights to life, liberty and property. It was not established as a giant day care or asylum where the enlightened few get to tell the rest of us how we should live. And that is why I find laws such as this so disturbing.