Megan McArdle quotes a reader from LA:
As someone who works in the entertainment industry in Los Angeles--land of the perfect body--I totally agree that government pressure will do nothing to make people lose weight. People will only give up one pleasure in exchange for a more intense pleasure. And if you're poor and miserable, and eating is the high point of your life, you'll always reach for the cheetos.
I suspect the only way people will change their behavior is a sudden desire to move up the social ladder. Being thin and attractive gives you a competitive edge, especially if you live in a city with lots of talented people. The moment someone I know suddenly gets ambitious, or makes partner, or needs investors, they start losing weight. In California, being fat will hurt any career, whether you're a doctor, lawyer or accountant.
I'm not poor or miserable, fortunately, but that doesn't mean I'm a counterfactual. After all, being financially comfortable (despite the UC salary cut ... excuse me, I meant "furlough") and having achieved my life's ambition (baing a law professor at a really good school), I have zero desire to move up the social ladder. Especially in the noxious LA social scene (the whole velvet rope business is just too absurd for words). The only difference is that instead of cheetos, I tend to reach for a nice rack of lamb with a 20 year old claret or a nice risotto with truffles with a 10 year old Super Tuscan. Of course, if they pass that junk food tax, preferring truffles to cheetos will even almost make economic sense.
Meanwhile, Volokh Conspirator Kenneth Anderson evaluates the comments to Megan's post and finds that they "illustrate a general tendency toward certain well-trod paths these days toward reductionism." Which is a little high-brow for yours truly.
PS: Just to remind you of my comment policy, comments are moderated (which means a delay in posting) and I reserve the right to delete comments for no better reason than that I'm feeling cranky. So play nice.
