Skip to comments.McDonald's Sidesteps The Happy Meal Prohibition
Posted on 12/02/2011 5:11:26 PM PST by Kaslin
Absurd Laws: The nannies of San Francisco tried to take the fun out of McDonald's Happy Meal. But enterprising managers found a way to bring joy to the kids anyway.
A city ordinance that prohibits fast-food restaurants from giving away toys with children's meals went into effect Thursday. San Francisco of course was the first big city in the country to pass such a law.
The intent, according to the supervisor who sponsored the prohibition, was to increase awareness of the nutritional makeup of children's meals.
That's Eric Mar's story and it seems he's sticking with it. But whatever the intent, McDonald's restaurants in San Francisco found a way around the government overreach. They're simply charging a minimal price 10 cents for adding a toy to the order.
So Happy Meals remain ... happy.
This should be a lesson for policymakers everywhere: People will always find a way to sidestep frivolous and vindictive laws and regulations.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
This story warms the very cockles of my heart.
I almost never eat at McD’s, but I’ll go there in celebration of this move. [I’ll get something off the dollar menu, but at least I’ll go.]
they shoulda made it a penny
Think about this: Liberals trust the politicians who get outsmarted far more than they trust the people who do the outsmarting!
“I almost never eat at McDs, but Ill go there in celebration of this move.” That’s a very good idea. Maybe the Asian salad is a viable option....
Happy meals or not, I was happy to raise my kids and never take them to a McDonald’s.
Let me see, Who is smarter? The city of San Francisco or McDonalds?
Sin Freak Sicko strikes out again. LOL
Of course you were. But you do have to admit it’s gratifying to see McDonalds outsmart the San Francisco nanny libs. Right?
Whats really in those chicken nuggets. But it is a free country so if you want em, have at it.
Hey, if stores can’t sell incandescent bulbs... maybe they give them away with the purchase of something else?
They allow naked men to wander around. who in their right mind would weant to have children in SF anyways?
I remember about 10m years ago coming out of a hotel, I think on Bay Street for my daily walk. Turned right and immediately spied a big pile of what could only be human feces.
I loved that city, but I’m glad my daughter moved south and we don’t go there. It’s way out of control.
Remember the locals get what they vote for.
This was the obvious solution right from the start. I am surprised it took them this long to come up with it. I would have gone with 5 cents rather than 10, though. What parent will say no to 5 cents?
can someone just walk in with a dime (plus tax of course) and buy a toy?
That might be why they are a dime. store can’t risk selling sometimes very popular toys for below cost.
“But you do have to admit its gratifying to see McDonalds outsmart the San Francisco nanny libs. Right?”
There are a lot of Nanny State Sycophants out there and they are not just libs in San Francisco.
And if people in San Francisco want to feed McDonald’s to their kids with or without a toy, it is cool with me.
Just seems that there are much better dining choices in SF than a Happy Meal.
Could be. Good thinking.
I’m surprised mcd’s showed backbone. More than Boehner would have.
SanFranStiffCo loses another one.
McDonald's pays Communist China about 10 cents for every thousand of these trinkets they sell for 10 cents each.
A sucker is born every minute.
No, you must buy a Happy Meal first. They will not be sold individually anymore. They used to be, before this ordinance, for a little over 2 bucks. But McDonald’s has now said they will not be, at least in San Fran.
They used to go into restaurants and plop their naked posteriors on the seats. SF recently banned naked people from entering eateries.
without towels probably
What idiot would bring a child there? or to Hollyweird? or to a publik skool these days?
I raised 5 and took them to McD’s a couple of times a year as a treat.
They do the same now with their kids.
No harm done.
Mark Knopler, Boom, like that on Ray Kroc who wrestled control of McDonalds from the McDonald Brothers
“Hey, if stores cant sell incandescent bulbs... maybe they give them away with the purchase of something else?”
When they go to the total ban on 100 watts they should just re-market them as 99 watts.
lol. great idea.
Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer ...
I saw this here the other day. This is really funny.
I have been seeing a bunch of 95 watt bulbs on the shelves. That is probably why.
I expect SF to make it illegal to sell toys with a meal which could not be bought without the meal.
But that's exactly the issue. The city of San Francisco doesn't want your kids to get a toy, and they want to take that choice away from you. As a non nanny state sycophant, you must see that as pretty uncool.
I mean it's not like you're some liberal troll who lacks normal conservative instincts yet has managed for years to avoid getting the ZOT or something, right?
Actually, in my posts I indicated that I opposed the SF policy of banning Happy Meal toys.
I also stated that I never took my kids to McDonald’s which is a decision my wife and I made long before we had kids and am happy that the state never forced our kids to eat at McDonald’s.
It’s amazing!! No one in America EVER eats at McDonald’s if you read blogs, forums etc where fast food is discussed and yet they sell BILLIONS of burgers and a gazillion tons of FF every year.
How can that be?
Makes me want to go out and treat my whole herd to some happy meals. YAY