Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Referendum on Coca-cola ban to be held on 3rd and 4th March.

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    At last, what I may or may not buy is once again my own choice and not the choice of a bunch of ill-informed liberty-denying tree-huggers and anti-capitalists who think it's more important to get free money than it is to have free trade.


  • Options
    #63
    dyl10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,355 ✭✭✭dyl10


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    At last, what I may or may not buy is once again my own choice and not the choice of a bunch of ill-informed liberty-denying tree-huggers and anti-capitalists who think it's more important to get free money than it is to have free trade.

    There's nothing free about having to treat diabetes and heart disease within our health system, due to the effects of sugary drinks.


  • Options
    #64
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    dyl10 wrote: »
    There's nothing free about having to treat diabetes and heart disease within our health system, due to the effects of sugary drinks.

    Should SU shops stop selling crisps, chocolate, pre-packed sandwiches infested with salt etc as well? Fair enough I agree people should stop drinking fizzy drinks by the bucket-load but there is such a thing as free choice. A boycott on Tayto would probably have less street cred amongst liberal wannabes though....


  • Options
    #65
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    dyl10 wrote: »
    There's nothing free about having to treat diabetes and heart disease within our health system, due to the effects of sugary drinks.

    There's nothing free about having to treat repetitive strain injuries and eye strain within our health system, due to the effects of keyboard warriors making silly arguments.


  • Options
    #66
    mad lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 127 ✭✭mad lad


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    At last, what I may or may not buy is once again my own choice
    You always had the option to buy Coke on Campus, just not from an SU outlet. I wouldn't go to Burger King and complain that, under freedom of choice, I should have the right to buy a Big Mac there. Businesses have a right to decide what they stock.
    parker kent wrote: »
    Should SU shops stop selling crisps, chocolate, pre-packed sandwiches infested with salt etc as well?

    Coke was not boycotted because of any potential health effects, neither were the people involved in manufacturing crisps and chocolate calling for a boycott of the product they were manufacturing.
    parker kent wrote: »
    there is such a thing as free choice.
    Like any business, the people who run the SU shops (UCD students) have the right to collectively make decisions on the products they stock. I don't see why people seem to have a problem understanding this.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    33% God
    Closed Accounts Posts: 338 ✭✭33% God


    parker kent wrote: »
    A boycott on Tayto would probably have less street cred amongst liberal wannabes though....

    The conservative wannabes could get just as righteously indignant about it though.


  • Options
    #68
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    I am surpised there has been no talk of a 911 boycott due to their gross crimes again the culinary arts


  • Options
    #69
    Blut2
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭Blut2


    I dont drink coke but this is excellent news. Anything that annoys the self-righteous student activists who believe anything that happens in the UCD shops is ever going to have any sort of impact on Columbian workers rights is a good thing.


  • Options
    #70
    dyl10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,355 ✭✭✭dyl10


    parker kent wrote: »
    Should SU shops stop selling crisps, chocolate, pre-packed sandwiches infested with salt etc as well? Fair enough I agree people should stop drinking fizzy drinks by the bucket-load but there is such a thing as free choice. A boycott on Tayto would probably have less street cred amongst liberal wannabes though....

    They probably should if they could replace them with healthier foods, but that's not up to me.
    The point is that the quoted poster's "right to choose" isn't clear cut.
    Sure let them stock heroine if you want a "right to choose".
    I dont drink coke but this is excellent news. Anything that annoys the self-righteous student activists who believe anything that happens in the UCD shops is ever going to have any sort of impact on Columbian workers rights is a good thing.

    There would be few who believe that. Calling activists self-rightous is as stereotypical as me calling you an ignorant, rich kid.

    For the record, I don't patricularly care about Coke boycott either way, my only grievence is with the money squandering, party boys of the SU wasting time and money that could be spent elsewhere.


  • Options
    #71
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Glad that the ban was overturned. Particularly since I didn't get round to voting.

    The ban was a bit embarrassing to be honest :P.

    'What does the SU do for you? We partially ban coca-cola products. Screw you American fat cat multinational tycoon! (Particularly since they never responded to our strongly worded letter)'

    Agree about the idea of SU wasting money - but they do that all the time anyway (is there any sane reason why we have a women's officer and Irish-language officer? What about a trans-gender officer and polish-language officer? Crap! Now that I suggested it they will probably create those positions! :eek:)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    mad lad wrote: »
    Coke was not boycotted because of any potential health effects, neither were the people involved in manufacturing crisps and chocolate calling for a boycott of the product they were manufacturing.

    I know that, I have been in UCD since 2004 (with a 1 year working break) so I have heard all of the arguments countless times. I was responding to the idea that it should be banned because it costs tax payers money due to how unhealthy Coke is. I was basically saying the same thing as you.

    Also, it would not actually be a bad idea if they did actually set up healthy shops.
    dyl10 wrote: »
    For the record, I don't patricularly care about Coke boycott either way, my only grievence is with the money squandering, party boys of the SU wasting time and money that could be spent elsewhere.

    I wholeheartedly agree with that idea. I think we have all said plenty about the ridiculous waste by the SU.


  • Options
    #73
    dyl10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,355 ✭✭✭dyl10


    Sean_K wrote: »
    There's nothing free about having to treat repetitive strain injuries and eye strain within our health system, due to the effects of keyboard warriors making silly arguments.

    Good one


  • Options
    #74
    Breezer
    Registered Users Posts: 3,228 ✭✭✭Breezer


    dyl10 wrote: »
    Good one Touché
    FYP


  • Options
    #75
    mloc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭mloc


    Red Alert wrote: »
    It's mad that you can buy coke in the vending machine but not from the SU shop 2 metres away from it. Everyone in UCD is an adult and should be left to make choices in their purchasing habits themselves. This is not East Germany.

    Exactly. Let people vote with their wallets.


  • Options
    #76
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    This thread gives me the lolz. People on one side thinking a ban on Coke makes any sort of difference, other people with a misguided sense of "choice" dont seem to understand the free market. And this crap that the students run the SU shop.

    Thanks for the lolz


  • Options
    #77
    Blut2
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭Blut2


    dyl10 wrote: »

    There would be few who believe that. Calling activists self-rightous is as stereotypical as me calling you an ignorant, rich kid.

    For the record, I don't patricularly care about Coke boycott either way, my only grievence is with the money squandering, party boys of the SU wasting time and money that could be spent elsewhere.

    If few of the activists believed that banning coke from the UCD campus would improve Columbian workers rights then why did they bother wasting SU time campaigning for it and implementing a ban? The only reasons I can think of are either self-righteousness or self-aggrandizing.

    Though yeah, I do agree the worst problem with the ban wasnt its intentions but the fact that it was a horrible waste of both SU time and money. The SU should really just bother itself with things that actually directly affect the lives of UCD students, if it did that it might actually see more turnout in the elections.


  • Options
    #78
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    Grimes wrote: »
    This thread gives me the lolz. People on one side thinking a ban on Coke makes any sort of difference, other people with a misguided sense of "choice" dont seem to understand the free market. And this crap that the students run the SU shop.

    Thanks for the lolz

    It makes a difference in the sense that now I'll hopefully be able to buy coke for 20 cent less than it goes for in the machines! Plus there'll be a reduced risk of my money being eaten by the vendor.


  • Options
    #79
    Fad
    Registered Users Posts: 7,231 ✭✭✭Fad


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    It makes a difference in the sense that now I'll hopefully be able to buy coke for 20 cent less than it goes for in the machines! Plus there'll be a reduced risk of my money being eaten by the vendor.

    Buh-buh-buh-but! Coke believes in god (Straw clutching ftw)

    All this referendum will have done for me is more than likely remove the option of buying pepsi. Because I doubt it'll sell enough for it to be stocked alongside coke :(


Advertisement