Bloomberg and the Soda Law Essay Example for Free

Bloomberg and the Soda Law EssayThe soda righteousness introduced by Mayor Bloomberg to bar the sale of sodas larger than 16 fl. oz. at eating places across the city allow for have zero to negligible economic impact on people who are currently buying them. The soda ban w queasy have an extremely pocketable net positive economic impact on businesses. And the rationale ass this is the fact that whoever drinks more soda w reverse acquire more soda, regard slight of how big or small the drink is. A 20 fl. oz. soda, when banned will be replaced by a 16 fl. oz. loving cupful of soda. How much soda an individual drinks whitethorn even increase if instead of drinking just one and only(a) 20 fl.oz. soda, he decides to get a refill of his 16 fl. oz. soda, something that most restaurants allow. The benefits projected for the society from this law, that may releaseuce obesity are preposterous. The cost of soda for restaurants is roughly $0. 0132 per ounce (see auxiliary). On a 2 0 fl. oz. soda, the net cost to the restaurant is about $0. 22 (Appendix). A 20 fl. oz. cup of soda at an establishment such as McDonalds, perhaps the main target of this law, sells for roughly $2. 50. Once the 20 fl. oz. cup is gone, it will be replaced by the 16 fl. oz. cup, but at the same price.The restaurants will re-label the 16 fl. oz. cup as the new large, introduce a 12 fl. oz. cup as a medium and hang on the 8 ounce cup as a small. But will this minimal brain dysfunction significantly to the revenues of the restaurant? It is very unlikely, since the customers will just get refills for their 16 fl. oz. cups. The only economical benefit for the restaurant force be the people who do not refill their cups and this is minimal since the cost of soda is just a rounding error for most restaurants. This law is ineffective because it does not stop the consumer from consuming any less soda from what was being consumed before.The economic impact on the society will be in the red be cause of the hundreds and thousands of dollars spent on structuring the bill, the flawed methodologies of research that determined a small cup would result in less consumption of soda, and finally the money spent by various groups opposing or supporting this law. To effectively tackle the problem of obesity, the government needs to look at other avenues. Soda is a big cause of obesity, it is made of sugar and has calories, but the ban on a larger help is not the solution. An effective solution would be to raise the taxes on sodas.Another solution is to ban refills, so prompting the customer to purchase another soda, which will either discourage the purchase or add more to tax revenues collected by the government. In turn, this tax revenue can be utilise to build jogging tracks, exercise equipment and other recreational facilities for the community. Another option for the government is to advertise the ill effects of drinking soda and promote healthier alternatives such as fruit and vegetable juices at affordable prices at those restaurants. There are several other options for soda drinkers to consume the same sum up of soda when this law is enforced.Restaurants and movie theatres give free refills, convenience stores such as 7-11 are resign from this law, and grocery stores still sell the large bottles and cases. The answer to this problem lies in educating the people about the ill effects of soda and only then will this law be economically beneficial for the society. This law does not have any health benefits that can be converted in to economical benefits for the society. Appendix Costing Out Soda Free Refills How to Price Soda. Wholesale Food Restaurant Distribution by Pate Dawson Company. Pate Dawson Company, 2009. Web. 10 Oct. 2012. http//www. pdco. com/node/88289.