Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In NYC, most soda drinkers are stopping by their corner bodega/deli and buying a bottle, then walking/taking the subway somewhere. I feel like in this particular case, the goal was to force soda manufacturers to sell 16oz bottles rather than 20oz bottles, thus reducing the amount most people consume in a single purchase.

EDIT: I'm wrong, a reply below clarified the intent and also that bottles were exempt.

Back when I drank soda regularly, I often felt like 20oz was a little bit too much. A 12oz can felt about right, but in NYC it's a lot less convenient because you must finish it immediately upon opening.



That makes total sense for bottled soda, but for 7-11 sodas (which were what was mentioned in the comment I replied to), or fast food sodas (which were mentioned often at the time the law was proposed), there were always various sizes. They got cheaper by volume as they got larger, but 1) that's the same as every product, and 2) there's overhead in cup and the labor of filling it that stays fairly flat as the size increases.

Wasn't the Bloomberg law intentionally meant to corral people into drinking less soda by forcing people who wanted to drink more to carry two cups? The law, rather than the opposition to it seems like an explicit, intentional example of the OP.

edit: I don't drink soda, and I'm not a libertarian.


I don't have a refutation for your first point regarding fast food, although according to Wikipedia[0], 7-11, being a grocer and thus state-regulated, would be excluded from the sizing law.

> The law, rather than the opposition to it seems like an explicit, intentional example of the OP.

Indeed. However, we must note that using techniques described in the OP aren't necessarily bad: merely that when the values of these large (not-always-tech) companies do not align with their customers, consumers are manipulated toward actions that ultimately run counter to their (presumed) values, such as their physical, financial, and emotional well-being.

If a government, which ideally represents the values of its constituency, chose to regulate using these same principles, the result could be a net benefit for society.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_Drinks_Portion_Cap_Rule


The law exempted canned and bottled sodas. It was targeted at things like the Big Gulp, and movie theater sodas, where the small size starts at about 24oz.


I did not know this. Makes sense but also seems fairly weak/overly specific given it basically only targets movie theaters.


Well, also gas stations, convenience stores, and fast food places. Basically anywhere that has a self-serve fountain.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: