Megan sent me this great article. It should provide a lot of conversation (in the comments section or in class). You should read the article yourself, but the gist is that a Chicago school is now making rules stating that parents can not send lunches to school with their children. In other words, the children "must" eat in the school cafeteria. No more brown bag lunches.
This brings up a few issues - does the school provide as nutritious of a lunch as the parents would have? Could the parents prepare a lunch for less money than the $2.25 they are required to pay for the cafeteria lunch? Might this force the schools to start to more closely examine their lunches and therefore provide more nutritious lunches?
There are also schools in other parts of the nation that are making similar rules. For instance, a school in AZ allows home-packed lunches, but nothing that contains white flour, refined sugar or other processed foods. Good-bye Lunchables! A school in Alabama forbid any drinks in lunches since there was tap water available in the school.
Thoughts?
Showing posts with label rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rights. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Consumer Protection or Endangerment?
We have talked in class about whether there should be laws regarding what products can be produced. If there is a market, should anything/everything be able to be produced and sold?
There is currently controversy over whether apps alerting consumers to police checkpoints should be allowed. "Locate Speed traps, speed cameras, DUI/DWI check points, red light cameras, active police vehicles and police enforcement areas." is how FuzzAlert advertises themselves. PhantomAlert is another company producing similar software. They claim that their product is to discourage drivers from drinking and driving. Four U.S. Senators have called for Apple to pull the apps from their devices, saying that alerting drunk drivers to the fact that police have a checkpoint set up is potentially dangerous for other people on the road who could be victims of the drunk drivers.
What do you think? Should we have software that alerts consumers to police checkpoints, speed cameras, etc.?
There is currently controversy over whether apps alerting consumers to police checkpoints should be allowed. "Locate Speed traps, speed cameras, DUI/DWI check points, red light cameras, active police vehicles and police enforcement areas." is how FuzzAlert advertises themselves. PhantomAlert is another company producing similar software. They claim that their product is to discourage drivers from drinking and driving. Four U.S. Senators have called for Apple to pull the apps from their devices, saying that alerting drunk drivers to the fact that police have a checkpoint set up is potentially dangerous for other people on the road who could be victims of the drunk drivers.
What do you think? Should we have software that alerts consumers to police checkpoints, speed cameras, etc.?
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Smoke Gets in My Eyes
Tara J. brought this to my attention this morning. Thank you!! This is an excellent example of a marketing and public policy issue.
New York City Council bans smoking in public parks and beaches. NYC isn't the first city to enact a ban like this although it is the largest city to do so.
It would certainly cut down on pollution (cigarette butts, air pollution, second hand smoke) but it would also cut into what some people consider a "right" in the great outdoors.
What are your thoughts on it?
New York City Council bans smoking in public parks and beaches. NYC isn't the first city to enact a ban like this although it is the largest city to do so.
It would certainly cut down on pollution (cigarette butts, air pollution, second hand smoke) but it would also cut into what some people consider a "right" in the great outdoors.
What are your thoughts on it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)