San Francisco goes after trans fats too

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
How do *you* think it works? Do Lays owners say "Hey, let's take that money we save from using trans fats, and rather than use it in ways that will improve our product and help generate *more* money in the future like we choose to do with all our other equitable decisions, we just pretend those savings don't exist, and take them right out of the business model"?

[/ QUOTE ]

probably has to do with retooling factories or just changing assemby lines.

cost per bag less than .01$ I would guess.

with just in time delivery today, it probably is just do it the way we always did it that keeps them using transfats, since stocking over time is not such an issue anymore.

anyway, the issue is cost/benefit to consumers. if it's not a big deal, then how can you justify transfats? I mean, if t.f. free chips cost twice as much then ok I see your point, but they're the same price. it can't be such a big deal, although a penny * billion is money.

[PLOlover]

also btw, you guys are the ones claiming a benefit of transfats. how can I prove a neg? I mean showing trans and non trans chips cost the same is best I can do really.

[Kerth]

But I like fat transsexuals.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
also btw, you guys are the ones claiming a benefit of transfats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very false. I'm claiming nothing, and even said specifically that I don't know anything about the science of trans fats. If I had to offer a personal opinion, I'd agree that they're a bad choice. But *I* don't need to see a benefit to something in order to think other people have a right to use it.

You're the one claiming the position of forcing people not to sell or buy this type of fat. But I'm not even talking about that. I'm still talking very specifically about your claim that "there is no benefit." Again, how do you know what other people value?

You can argue all day long about why trans fat is a bad decision. But it's all moot. Personally, I can't fathom why anyone would conclude the mild effect of a cigarette is worth the substantial health risks associated with them. Just because I am in favor of their right to make this decision for themselves doesn't mean that I necessarily think there's a "benefit" to this decision.

[ QUOTE ]
how can I prove a neg? I mean showing trans and non trans chips cost the same is best I can do really.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you really think BagA and BagB could possibly "cost the same" when the only difference in the bags is that one of the ingredients in one of the bags is more expensive to produce, then you really have a very shortsighted view of economic activity.

The reason why you can't prove your claim that there is no benefit is because your claim was patently bogus. There is no way to determine what other people value.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
If you really think BagA and BagB could possibly "cost the same" when the only difference in the bags is that one of the ingredients in one of the bags is more expensive to produce, then you really have a very shortsighted view of economic activity.

The reason why you can't prove your claim that there is no benefit is because your claim was patently bogus. There is no way to determine what other people value.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you can't give one example of one person getting a benefit from transfat, yet you claim it's ludicrous to claim no benefit to consumers from transfat, other than perhaps a fraction of a penny saved per bag or whatever.

my point about bags costing same is that there is no price benefit to the consumer. so nobody can claim a single benefit to the consumer, yet I'm absurd for claiming no benefit.

ok. but I think most people would agree with me.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
so you can't give one example of one person getting a benefit from transfat

[/ QUOTE ]

All I'd have to do is tell you "I prefer to eat trans fats." It isn't up to you to determine how I am supposed to derive value.

[ QUOTE ]
my point about bags costing same is that there is no price benefit to the consumer. so nobody can claim a single benefit to the consumer, yet I'm absurd for claiming no benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's just plain shortsighted to think that a price benefit to the producer does not carry over in some way to the consumer, and (as I already explained) you are apparently ignoring that even if two bags are priced exactly the same (which I am just taking your word on) that this means the bag with the more expensive type of fat does not necessarily have a lighter weight or lower quality of other ingredients.

Even if it's a very small difference, the difference is still there and eventually funnels to the consumer in some way, and yes I do think it is absurd to claim that you know how other people are supposed to value this price difference.

It's really not a complicated situation. I'm done rehashing the same argument over and over for now though. You can think what you want if controlling other peoples' habits is that important to you. I don't even disagree that the cost benefits of trans fats are probably minimal. As time passes, I fully expect the preference to not produce products with trans fat to win out voluntarily. What we disagree on is that the use of government is the right solution.

Ultimately the trans fat thing matters very little to me, but your arguments bother me because they are really the exact mindset, just to a different degree, that contributes to every other sort of government regulation. "I know what's best for you."

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason why you can't prove your claim that there is no benefit is because your claim was patently bogus. There is no way to determine what other people value.

[/ QUOTE ]

btw, this is a variant of the old greek sophist counterargument: well , I can't counter your argument today or disprove it today, but that doesn't mean that at some time in the future I wont be able to rebut you, so therefore, you are wrong.

[PLOlover]

btw, I'm not asking you to "prove" anything, just name a single benefit to the consumer of transfat.

saying you can buy tater chips and store them for 5 years though doesn't count. I mean they stil would taste stale I think, even though they wouldn't go rancid I don't think.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
btw, I'm not asking you to "prove" anything, just name a single benefit to the consumer of transfat.

[/ QUOTE ]

For Christ's sake.

1.) Lower cost (which does indeed exist even if you can't wrap your mind around why)
2.) I like the name of it
3.) I get pleasure out of telling people I ate trans fat
4.) I'm emo and like the idea of rotting my arteries
5.) I can buy tater tots and store them for five years

I don't need anything that you consider to be a "good" reason. That's the [censored] point. How on earth does anyone declare this for anyone else?

[ QUOTE ]
saying you can buy tater chips and store them for 5 years though doesn't count.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh OK. I forgot you were the eternal decider of what I am and am not allowed to value.

[censored] off.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
4.) I'm emo and like the idea of rotting my arteries

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind if you eat poison. actually I encourage you to. but I oppose the widespread poisoning of the food supply.

I also oppose fluoridation of water on the same grounds.