San Francisco goes after trans fats too

[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."