This past May, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed a “ban on the sale of large sodas and other sugary drinks at restaurants, movie theaters” and other public venues. The ban he is proposing was almost universally criticized, as The New Yorker pointed out, “by both John Stewart and John Boehner.”
Now, overall I’m a fan of Mayor Bloomberg. I admire him because his loyalties are not to the left or right, but to common sense. I can’t say that I am as vehemently opposed to this drink ban as many others, though I do understand where their criticism is coming from, even if I do believe it’s a little overblown.
But if nothing else, Bloomberg has brought attention to the ridiculous portion sizes of the drinks being served in restaurants, cafes, movie theaters, and sporting & event arenas. The standard size of soft drink portions that these public venues serve has grown considerably over the past decades. Even my kids are surprised by the size when they order a medium drink at a fast food restaurant.
Honestly, it is truly ridiculous how large the serving sizes have become, with one of the most extreme being the 7-Eleven Team Gulp at 128 oz. That’s just crazy. Would you buy a 2 liter bottle of soda and stick a straw in it? How about two, because that’s just about what you would be doing with this team gulp.
Indeed, the gas station/convenient stores seem to be the worst offenders, but McDonald’s, Wendy’s & Burger King all offer a 42 oz drink size. That’s over 5 cups of liquid – go ahead, take a look at that measuring cup you have in the cabinet. KFC is apparently the worst offender with a 64 oz drink, a full half gallon.
Even coffee shops are not immune to this, with Starbucks increasing their sizes from the original 12 oz large – now called the Tall, and their default “small” size – to a 31 oz Trenta. That’s the equivalent to going into a diner and ordering four cups of coffee.
Bloomberg does have a point about portion sizes, and he see’s where his city’s money is going – health care for the obese. And he does have an epidemic on his hands as unhealthy, overweight individuals tax health services and use more sick time.
Of course the companies serving up these extra large drinks, with names such as HuMUGous, The Beast, and Mega, claim that their customers are perfectly capable of making intelligent decisions when it comes to these choices. You would think so. But how often have you heard, after making your choice, a friendly cashier ask if you’d like to get the next larger portion for only 50 cents more? Apparently, even if we do make a choice that’s best for us, it’s not good enough for these retailers.
So while Bloomberg’s concern about the drink sizes in his city, and the nation, are valid I think that perhaps he is going about it the problem the wrong way. The large sizes should not be banned. If you want to be a glutton, go for it. What Bloomberg should instate is a mandatory sizing for reasonable drinks, whereby all venues serve a Small at 8 oz, Medium at 12 oz, and Large at 16 oz. After that the vendor can create any size they want and call it what they want. I even have a few suggestions:
-
20 oz – Xtra Large
-
24 oz – Super Size
-
32 oz – Double Portion
-
64 oz – Slosh-buckler
-
128 oz – Elephantine
-
256 oz – Water-Boarder
✧ ✧ MidWestMyers ✧ ✧ 
I’d Like To Add You To My Professional Network
Linked In is a professional network, or rather a networking tool used by professionals and businesses. It is not Facebook. My Linked In network consists of people whom I have personally worked with over the years and feel fairly well acquainted with their skills and personalities. I would vouch for any person in my network if asked, because I can speak knowledgeably about them and their abilities. I do not include people in my network who I may know well but do not respect their work ethic, or who may be quite good at what they do, but are difficult to work with.
So it baffles me when I receive these invitations from people I don’t know, and who don’t know me. I’m not saying that these are unqualified people, but I don’t know that. I have a co-worker who gets many of the same invitations as I do, and he often accepts them. I asked him why, and he says it’s because it helps expand his network. My response is “Yes, but what if they’re a dick?”
Currently I have a full time job that keeps me plenty busy, so I am not looking to pick up freelance work, or for new employment. I understand where having an expanding network could be helpful in this situation. But then, if I’m getting recommended by someone in the network, I want to know that I can trust them, and that they can trust who they’re making the recommendation to. It’s great to have a professional network, but if you let every person into your network, how do control the quality of that network? If you dilute your network with people who are mediocre in their field, does that not reflect poorly on you?
Here is my short response for anyone who is looking to add me to their “professional network.”
Posted by larvamoose on August 23, 2012 in Comments, Computer, Work
Tags: Networking