I sure did, and when I was 11 years old we had soda machines at our public school. Sold soda at the lunch counter, and had free soda give away days where the distributor would hand out free new/trial products.

Kids can buy whatever they want if they have money. And surely, they'll buy the shiny thing thing they saw on TV or the internet when they encounter it in the shop and see it's cheap.

Again, kids won't do "whatever they want" if their parents do their job and instill proper discipline, education, and consequences for behavior that they don't want.

If you want the government to do your parenting for you, I don't know what to tell you. Not my idea of good parenting, and I think the results will be disappointing. We can agree to disagree on that.

> Again, kids won't do "whatever they want" if their parents do their job and instill proper discipline, education, and consequences for behavior that they don't want.

Clearly you aren't a parent, and I suspect you also have never been a child. It would be handy if what you wrote were true. But children aren't robots, and parents aren't the only people who influence them. The reason that food companies target children in their advertising is that it works to manipulate them.

I don't want the government doing my parenting for me but Lord knows I would love the government to help

The government is not doing "parenting". It is protecting from manipulation. Big difference.

I'm really surprised how many pro statists there are arguing against you. Feel sorry for their children.

When it comes to "Where do children get their food while at home?", I think it's fair to say they get 90+% of it from "Whoever does the grocery shopping".

This isn't a binary choice. Parents and advertisers can both take responsibility for what they are doing. Power and responsibility go together. And there's no denying food advertising is powerful; if it weren't, we wouldn't be enduring many billions of dollars worth every year.