Tax on Junk Food!!! It's NEAR!

[bamf]

I think that's pretty unlikely. Since when did fat and salt start killing people before they were able to reproduce?

Well they lead to things like heart problems, which is why the hypothesis is that someday we will lose our taste for them. It's just something I remember hearing, not that I can say they're right or anything. They hypothesize that we have a taste for fats and salts because they are important in moderate quantities, and for hunter/gatherers they were somewhat difficult to come by. If the levels we consume them in carry on for a long period of time and cause things such as heart problems, which can be carried through the genes (possibly), they have some reason to believe it's possible.

 

[Barnabas]

How do you define junk food, is a hot dog junk food or is steak junk food?

 

[Detective Conan]

I guess a ban on junk food would suck for those with a taste for it...

For me, a junk food tax is non-issue, so I say raise that number and raise it high!

 

[the]

There is already a tax on tanning now.
I wouldn't mind seeing a tax on junk food.
Stop taking as many taxes out of my paycheck and supplement it with tannorexic junk food moneys.

Personally, I don't care.

I think there is a trend for things the rich do to be financially out of reach to the masses. I wonder if this tanning tax and other taxes are part of that trend.


In other news I think that people have to come to terms that as they age they will lose their teeth, have loose skin, probably be over or underweight at some point and then die. Taxing soda to stop all this? Madness.

 

[Stu]

any commerce which results in the consumer using government subsidized services should be taxed accordingly, with the revenue going to those services.

 

[testing]

any commerce which results in the consumer using government subsidized services should be taxed accordingly, with the revenue going to those services.

I am inclined to agree with this point of view. As long as they leave my corn dogs and fried pickles alone.

 

[acd]

I think there is a trend for things the rich do to be financially out of reach to the masses. I wonder if this tanning tax and other taxes are part of that trend.


In other news I think that people have to come to terms that as they age they will lose their teeth, have loose skin, probably be over or underweight at some point and then die. Taxing soda to stop all this? Madness.

I think taxing soda and junk food or tanning is a way to discourage consumers from the products.. basically because we are about to have government run health care and the hope is that in discouraging, they are also preventing illness and cutting future costs.. I can imagine they will use the health care bill that has passed to create all kinds of strange taxes and laws..like inserting microchips in the palm of your hand for self identification and such. In six years, you will go for a routine check up and be greeted and handled accordingly by your doctor: a reptilian shape shifting illuminati.

 

[aeon]

any commerce which results in the consumer using government subsidized services should be taxed accordingly, with the revenue going to those services.

As it concerns things like health, I think I agree.

As it concerns things like government subsidy of corn, which creates artificial markets, I don't think I do.


cheers,
Ian

 

[magister343]

I'd consider trying taxes on junk food, but not as the first option. The real problem is that junk foods are currently heavily subsidized by our agricultural subsidies. It is stupid to continue providing subsidies to encourage production while also taxing in hopes of reducing production. As these subsidies are also a huge waste of money, ruin the economy of other countries (which is a major cause of illegal immigration), and have a devastating effect on the environment (perhaps the biggest causes of deforestation in the Amazon these days is the high international demand for soy caused by our corn subsidies putting American soy farms out of business), it makes far more sense to cut them. Without agricultural subsidies, healthy foods would most likely tend to be cheaper than junk food.

Instead of taxing soda, why don't we consider getting rid of the government subsidy for corn growers? If we did that, and corn (and the HFCS made from it) actually cost in the marketplace what it costs to grow and produce, and it had to compete in the market fairly alongside other choices, that "cheap" bottle of soda wouldn't be so inexpensive anymore. Nor would any number of products made with HFCS.

Another issue: The United States obesity epidemic began at the same time of the introduction of the current Food Pyramid. Coincidence? I think not.

A low-fat, high-carb diet doesn't seem to work for the majority of people, based on the results witnessed across a large population.


cheers,
Ian

I think you mean the previous food pyramid. The current one does not place carbs at the wide base and fats higher up; in fact, it has no base, just a bunch of nearly vertical triangles. It really makes no sense for it to be a pyramid at all.

 

[894tt3h9]

All I can say is that you're lucky you don't have a 12% harmonized sales tax like many provinces in Canada do. We're taxed on all food items not considered "essentials," and since almost everything everyone eats is non-essential and pretty much total garbage, we end up paying a lot more for our food.

 

[Feelings]

All I can say is that you're lucky you don't have a 12% harmonized sales tax like many provinces in Canada do. We're taxed on all food items not considered "essentials," and since almost everything everyone eats is non-essential and pretty much total garbage, we end up paying a lot more for our food.

Aww... well I'm sure you don't eat much junk food, you look very healthy.