[concinds]

Ok.

1. I support ban/taxes on junk food.

2. Government doesn't do it, does something else.

3. I' still not satisfied, and still support ban/taxes on junk food.

I have opinions. So do you. What the government does is irrelevant to what I believe.

[baddox]

I don't get it. Would you rather the government have the authority to ban restaurants, or not? "The government only banning the restaurants that ought to be banned" isn't an option, unless you have good ideas on how to structure government.

The opinion we're discussing is whether governments ought to be able to ban restaurants, so what governments do is absolutely relevant.

[concinds]

Those distinctions are contrived and arbitrary.

I'm saying the government should ban it. You're arguing the government should, but shouldn't be able to. That only makes sense if you adhere to a set of arbitrary political "principles", which I view as nonsense. Government needs to solve problems, not obey imaginary rules.