Fat Camp for children

[ScreamingEagle]

Obese Brits face fat camp
Laura Donnelley in LONDON
September 7, 2009

HUNDREDS of thousands of Britain's overweight children - some as young as four - will be sent to ''fat camp'', under a Government scheme to tackle obesity.

Primary school pupils identified as being overweight will automatically be offered a place on a state-funded diet and exercise scheme. Although parents can refuse to send their children to the classes, ministers hope the majority will attend.

Parent groups said the Government had moved ''beyond a nanny state, to a dictatorship''.

Experts said the public branding of children as fat could damage their confidence, expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. But pediatricians welcomed the move.

Under existing regulations, children are weighed when they start primary school and again as they leave. Parents receive a letter saying whether their children are healthy, overweight, underweight or very overweight. The latest figures show that by the time they leave primary school, one in three children is overweight.

From this month, pupils whose weight is too high - or too low - will automatically be offered a referral to ''weight management services''. Those identified as obese may be sent to pediatricians for specialist treatment, drugs or even surgery.

Sydney Morning Herald - Business & World News Australia | smh.com.au

 

[Modbert]

This is more the UK becoming more "Big Brotherish" then anything.

Besides:

Primary school pupils identified as being overweight will automatically be offered a place on a state-funded diet and exercise scheme. Although parents can refuse to send their children to the classes, ministers hope the majority will attend.

Though many times the parents end up just giving the child whatever they want, and end up having plenty of health problems later on in life.

 

[RodISHI]

Coming to America soon.

 

[Modbert]

Coming to America soon.

They already have fat camps here, just the Government hasn't done anything official.

From the article:

Experts said the public branding of children as fat could damage their confidence, expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. But pediatricians welcomed the move.

No, being fat will damage their confidence, and expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. It's not like they're suddenly told they're fat and everything is changed.

 

[eagleseven]

This is more the UK becoming more "Big Brotherish" then anything.

Besides:

Primary school pupils identified as being overweight will automatically be offered a place on a state-funded diet and exercise scheme. Although parents can refuse to send their children to the classes, ministers hope the majority will attend.

Though many times the parents end up just giving the child whatever they want, and end up having plenty of health problems later on in life.

What part of "Stay the fuck out of our lives" don't you liberals understand???

 

[RodISHI]

Coming to America soon.

They already have fat camps here, just the Government hasn't done anything official.

From the article:

Experts said the public branding of children as fat could damage their confidence, expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. But pediatricians welcomed the move.

No, being fat will damage their confidence, and expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. It's not like they're suddenly told they're fat and everything is changed.

That forced government intervention is what I was referring to. Big government is not a conducive to the principals of liberty & freedom. We have way to much government mucking around in peoples lives as it is now as they all get together and decide what is good for everyone as they strip the public treasury and tax the people more and more each year.

 

[Dis]

The PC term is not "fat".

It's "salad intolerant".

 

[Modbert]

What part of "Stay the fuck out of our lives" don't you liberals understand???

Wouldn't be saying that when you need a cop or the fire department huh?

Seriously though, they are automatically offered a place. The Government is simply trying to help the people be not fat. Being fat just means a mess load of health problems later on, among many other things.

You do notice that the pediatricians welcomed this move right? You know, the people who actually know more about this?

I swear, this is you:

"Sir, you should really stop smoking. Since you're at risk very soon for lung cancer, we're going to offer you a spot in our free program that will help you quit smoking."

"What the fuck did I tell you Liberals? Stay out of my life. I could care less if I drop dead, it's my choice!"

"But Sir, what about your family? Don't you want to see your gran-"

"What part of fuck off Liberal did you not get?"

 

[Modbert]

That forced government intervention is what I was referring to. Big government is not a conducive to the principals of liberty & freedom. We have way to much government mucking around in peoples lives as it is now as they all get together and decide what is good for everyone as they strip the public treasury and tax the people more and more each year.

I don't think the Government offering programs to people for free since their kids are obese so they won't be obese is really intrusive to the point where it should be stopped. If this program was actually FORCED upon people, I'd be prone to agree with you.

People only give a fuck about the treasury and taxes right now since the economy's gone to shit. I didn't hear anything about this before the economy went down to a recession then depression. People should care all the time, that's the difference. Once the recession is completely over and everything has gone back to "normal" it will all die down again.

I can also tell you right now if the Republicans regain the Presidency, House, and or Senate in the near future, all they will do is blame Obama. One must remember, all this "stripping of the public treasury and taxing of the people" did occur under a Republican Administration many times and with a Republican Congress in place. And those are suppose to be the people who are for "Small Government".

 

[RodISHI]

People only give a fuck about the treasury and taxes right now since the economy's gone to shit. I didn't hear anything about this before the economy went down to a recession then depression. People should care all the time, that's the difference. Once the recession is completely over and everything has gone back to "normal" it will all die down again.

I can also tell you right now if the Republicans regain the Presidency, House, and or Senate in the near future, all they will do is blame Obama. One must remember, all this "stripping of the public treasury and taxing of the people" did occur under a Republican Administration many times and with a Republican Congress in place. And those are suppose to be the people who are for "Small Government".

It started a long time ago. It just grew and grew. That happens with greed. The big push for big banking hit the high in the late 90's. Too much money available for the greed mongers to ignore in all those retirement accounts invested into funds. The banks started throwing money out and everyone looked the other way. It is not that the warning signs and even people saying that this crash was coming. Greenspan tried warning Clinton. Clinton pressed on and ignored the warning. The bankers kept up the spread it around take our share while were at it agenda. Greenspan gave congress another stern warning in 2003 and they ignored the warning.

People ignored common sense and took the banks money and inflation grew and grew. Wages did not raise with the inflation of housing cost. The utility companies got in on the big inflation rewards and of course the oil guys had to get theirs too.

Now let's us play the blame game. We can note all the Democrats that sold themselves for nothing and the American public and you can name the Republicans that you think did the same.

Obama would not be where he is today if McCain had not been so idiotic as to assist in that bank bailout. BTW, the Democrats had the majority in congress as that all want down. Are you going to try to tell me they have no ownership is this financial fiasco?

 

[Modbert]

It started a long time ago. It just grew and grew. That happens with greed. The big push for big banking hit the high in the late 90's. Too much money available for the greed mongers to ignore in all those retirement accounts invested into funds. The banks started throwing money out and everyone looked the other way. It is not that the warning signs and even people saying that this crash was coming. Greenspan tried warning Clinton. Clinton pressed on and ignored the warning. The bankers kept up the spread it around take our share while were at it agenda. Greenspan gave congress another stern warning in 2003 and they ignored the warning.

People ignored common sense and took the banks money and inflation grew and grew. Wages did not raise with the inflation of housing cost. The utility companies got in on the big inflation rewards and of course the oil guys had to get theirs too.

Now let's us play the blame game. We can note all the Democrats that sold themselves for nothing and the American public and you can name the Republicans that you think did the same.

Obama would not be where he is today if McCain had not been so idiotic as to assist in that bank bailout. BTW, the Democrats had the majority in congress as that all want down. Are you going to try to tell me they have no ownership is this financial fiasco?

Not at all, Democrats are as much to blame for this as are the Republicans. However, what Democrat majority do you speak of? The one in 2006? The one that took over right AS the problem began harshly? Because before that throughout the 90's and early 00's it was the Republicans in charge of Congress and for 2001-2009 the Presidency.

Also, Obama wouldn't of been where he is today if McCain and Palin weren't completely useless when it came to knowledge about the financial situation.

For example, McCain once said he wishes Interest Rates were 0 during a televised debate.

 

[mskafka]

Coming to America soon.

They already have fat camps here, just the Government hasn't done anything official.

From the article:

Experts said the public branding of children as fat could damage their confidence, expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. But pediatricians welcomed the move.

No, being fat will damage their confidence, and expose them to bullying and trigger eating disorders. It's not like they're suddenly told they're fat and everything is changed.

If something isn't done, many of them will grow up to be obese adults. Noone should be forced to do it, but I think that the nudging is just enough. Pick a few of these people up on a stretcher at 350 lbs.+, and you won't be complaining about this. People have gotten so large (and because of paramedic injuries) that there are now hydraulic-lift cots. I don't know much about the UK, but people in the US are huge! They have been getting bigger and bigger the last 13 years.

Part of it is self-discipline. And I believe that there is some merit to the high fructose corn syrup debate. Sodas IMO were much better when they were made with sugar, and arguably better for you. If I drink one soda, I get hungry. To a minor degree, I think that it is an appetite stimulant.

 

[RodISHI]

The big bank push started in 96. Not sure if you were getting those pre-approved credit cards in the mail but I was. Mailbox had at least ten a week in it.

Significant Legislation Enacted

Several bills of significance to the FDIC and insured depository institutions were enacted during 1996. From the FDIC’s standpoint, the most significant legislation fully capitalized the Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF), one of the two insurance funds administered by the FDIC. This Act and other new laws that impact the FDIC and insured depository institutions are described in this chapter.

Omnibus Legislation

On September 30, 1996, an omnibus bill (P.L. 104-208) was enacted containing several laws of interest to the FDIC.

The Deposit Insurance Funds Act of 1996:

* Capitalizes the SAIF on October 1, 1996, through a one-time special assessment based on SAIF-assessable deposits held on March 31, 1995, in the amount necessary to achieve the fund’s designated reserve ratio of $1.25 for every $100 of insured deposits.

* Exempts weak institutions and various other defined institutions from the special assessment and reduces SAIF-assessable deposits at certain institutions for purposes of calculating the special assessment.

* Separates assessments for Financing Corporation (FICO) bonds (those issued by the government corporation created in 1987 to recapitalize the former Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation) from the regular SAIF assessments starting January 1, 1997.

* Requires banks insured by the Bank Insurance Fund (BIF) to begin sharing FICO bond payments. The rate on BIF- assessable deposits will be one-fifth the rate imposed on SAIF-assessable deposits for the first three years beginning on January 1, 1997, unless the last savings association ceases to exist before that date. Thereafter, all FDIC-insured institutions will share the FICO assessment on a pro rata basis, regardless of which fund insures their deposits.

* Directs the FDIC and the other federal banking and thrift agencies to take appropriate actions to prevent insured depository institutions from shifting deposits to evade SAIF assessments.

* Provides for the merger of the BIF and the SAIF on January 1, 1999, if no savings association exists on that date.

The Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 modified numerous regulatory requirements and procedures affecting federal regulatory agencies, financial institutions and consumers. This law:

* Streamlines application and notice requirements in a number of areas, such as nonbanking acquisitions by well-managed and well-capitalized bank holding companies.

* Allows a 60-day period (with a 30-day extension) for FDIC consideration of completed applications from a state bank or its subsidiary to engage in an activity that is not permissible for a national bank, but does not provide for automatic approval if the FDIC does not act on an application within the time period.

* Raises the threshold for small banks to be examined every 18 months from $175 million in total assets to as much as $250 million in total assets.

* Requires the FDIC and other federal bank regulatory agencies to review their regulations periodically and eliminate requirements for unnecessary internal policies.

* Directs each federal banking agency to coordinate examinations and consult with each other, to resolve inconsistencies in recommendations to be given to an institution, and to consider appointing an examiner-in-charge to ensure consultation takes place.

* Provides in cases of coordinated examinations of institutions with state-chartered subsidiaries that the lead agency could be the state chartering agency.

* Requires reports from all banking regulators on actions taken to eliminate duplicative or inconsistent accounting or reporting requirements in statements or reports from regulated institutions.

* Reduces regulatory burden under a number of consumer protection statutes, including the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and Fair Housing Act.

* Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, excluding lenders from liability under certain circumstances.

* Reforms consumer credit reporting laws to provide consumers with additional protections in areas such as protecting privacy and correcting mistakes.

The omnibus legislation includes other miscellaneous provisions also of interest to the FDIC or depository institutions, including authorizing the FSLIC Resolution Fund to reimburse the Department of Justice for various legal expenses.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-121) was enacted on March 29, 1996, as part of the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996. Provisions affect government regulation of small businesses, which may in some instances include financial institutions with less than $100 million in assets. The law also establishes a congressional review process for certain regulations.

The new law requires that agencies produce and make available additional materials to assist small businesses in complying with new regulations promulgated under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Also, each agency must establish a program for responding to concerns of small businesses.

Each agency that regulates the activities of small businesses must establish a policy or program not later than March 29, 1997, providing for the reduction or waiver of civil penalties for violations of statutory or regulatory requirements, subject to exceptions the agency may establish. The agency may, under appropriate circumstances, consider ability to pay in determining penalties against small businesses.

The law also provides that before certain rules can take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a report to Congress and the Comptroller General including any cost-benefit analysis and actions taken under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A rule may not take effect or continue in effect if Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval and the President signs the resolution.

Debt Collection Improvement Act

Another omnibus bill (P.L. 104-134), enacted on April 26, 1996, contains the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996. This law amends a number of statutes related to debt collection and electronic funds transfer of federal payments. In general, the law requires that all “federal payments” ultimately be made by electronic funds transfer unless a waiver is obtained. It also enhances the federal government’s ability to collect delinquent debts from people who are owed money by another government agency.

FDIC Contractor Regulations

The Office of Government Ethics Authorization Act of 1996 (P.L.104-179), enacted on August 8, 1996, extended the operations of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) for an additional three years. One provision eliminates the statutory requirement for OGE concurrence in FDIC regulations concerning the conduct of independent contractors retained by the FDIC and relating to conflicts of interest, ethical responsibilities, and the use of confidential information.
Bank and Thrift Taxation

The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-188), enacted on August 20, 1996, contains several changes to the tax code that could affect small businesses, the banking industry, and bank regulatory programs. One provision allows both spouses to contribute up to $2,000 to an Individual Retirement Account (IRA), even if one spouse does not work outside the home. Other provisions authorize financial institutions meeting certain criteria to qualify as Subchapter S corporations, create financial asset securitization investment trusts (FASITs), and repeal the reserve method of accounting for bad debts by thrift institutions.

Electronic FOIA

The Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996 (P.L.104-231), enacted on October 19, 1996, requires the disclosure of agency records in an electronic format, where feasible, when requested under procedures established by the Freedom of Information Act

.


Next step.

Repeal Glass Steagall. The Glass-Steagall repeal was the worse domestic policy decision that the Clinton Administration ever made.

Robert Rubin, a Clinton administration Treasury secretary who advocated Glass-Steagall's repeal, went on to work for Citigroup. Bet he has a nice salary.

To big to fail, sure after they insured they could get hold of thee surety companies, investment groups and bond companies. Who would want to lose their nifty little 401's and retirement accounts.

Now that the banking industry has crashed they seek a new deal to strip out more cash. Do you have any idea what that is? I can hear them now, "Go green, just go green and tell everyone we are doing good things for the future of the planet while we raid the kitty some more. Heck they have to pay taxes. A never ending supply we can just keep on tapping."

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Coming to America soon.

However the children of Congressmen and other elitist liberals will be not be attending "fat camps".... they'll be going to "weight loss spas"........

 

[RodISHI]

Coming to America soon.

However the children of Congressmen and other elitist liberals will be not be attending "fat camps".... they'll be going to "weight loss spas"........

No doubt and the best part is; we all get to pay our fair share them to go to those nice spas where "the trailer trash" usually does not hang around.