Two cases of liberal fail today. The first is in regards to Nanny Bloomberg’s ban on large sodas in New York City. It’s without dispute that Bloomberg is one of those elites…you know the kind who thinks he knows what’s better for you than you. Therefore, he took it upon himself to ban sodas over 16 ounces in food service establishments in an attempt to “solve” the problem of obesity. One problem: new research suggests that his proposed ban might actually produce the opposite effect, with people desiring to purchase more soda if the ban goes into effect (currently, the courts have struck down the ban, pending appeal). From RealClearScience:
Researchers invited participants to order food from various menus. (They weren’t actually given any real food.) Soda was available for purchase in three different ways:
“Unregulated”: 16-oz., 24-oz. and 32-oz. cups were available “Bundle”: 16-oz., 2 x 12-oz. bundle and 2 x 16-oz. bundle were available “No Bundle”: 16-oz. only was available
How much soda did they buy? (See below.)
Participants ordered more soda if it was bundled into smaller cup sizes.
The authors argue that NYC is probably assuming the “No Bundle” scenario, i.e., fast food restaurants will simply stop giving customers the option of buying more than 16 oz. of soda. However, soda is a big source of revenue, and this research suggests that if restaurants bundle 12- and 16-oz. sodas together into packages of two, customers will gladly buy those. In other words, people may actually purchase more soda if the large cup ban takes effect, completely undermining the reason for implementing the large cup ban in the first place.
The authors acknowledge that they did not examine consumption of soda, but merely the intent to purchase. Still, Mr. Bloomberg should consider the possible unintended consequences of his actions.
Perhaps, left to their own devices, people are actually smart enough to figure out what’s best for themselves.
The second case of fail comes from “Fauxcahontas” herself, Elizabeth Warren. Not to long ago, she made headlines for suggesting that the national minimum wage should be $22 per hour:
However, as reported by William Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection, it turns out that Warren is so concerned about income, that she pays her interns exactly $0 per hour:
The abuse of interns by powerful corporations like The NY Times is well documented, and the subject of controversy by student and worker advocates who argue that such internships in the private sector may violate wage laws. Even if done in compliance with legal guidelines, unpaid internships take advantage of unequal bargaining power in a weak job market.
We checked today with Warren’s Senate office, and were told that “all internships are unpaid.” When asked whether they had any paid internships, the office responded “we do not.”
Warren is not alone. Unpaid internships in Congress are the norm and appear to be legal because that’s the way Congress wrote the law.
We also researched internships Warren’s Senate campaign offered. Warren’s campaign made very effective use of “internships” as a lure to get students to work on campuses and elsewhere for the campaign. The internships were both part and full time and were unpaid.
I suppose all those evil business owners who “didn’t build that,” but earned their success on the backs of taxpayers must pay an exorbitantly unrealistic minimum wage, but a public servant, whose entire office is established and funded by taxpayers…not so much. “Fair” wages from thee, but not from me. If the hypocrisy was not so commonplace, it would be sad.