Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should junk food be taxed?
Replies
-
I can't even fathom the thought process that is going into demanding that the government become a food nanny for the entire populace... just wow, do you want the government to tell you when to go the bathroom and how many times you should wipe in the process as well????
ETA - besides, it's not 'junk' food that makes people obese - it is over-consumption of calories that makes people obese. I can get just as fat eating a healthy diet (and for the most did) as I can by eating 'Junk' food.7 -
The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.7
-
queenliz99 wrote: »tattoo barcodes are next!
Awesome idea! Add in some double-labelled water and mandatory urine testing to make sure you aren't overconsuming. Nanny state anyone?3 -
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????0 -
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
This is important. If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. Plus, you set a bad example for children.
The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
Something has to be done and taxing is better than nothing. Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
Do people really need the Cheeto?
What's more important than being healthy? My freedom to make my own personal choices that's what. That is more important than my health, or my life for that matter. And yes, I really sometimes need the Cheeto. Especially the jalapeno cheddar ones.13 -
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Yeah, see, that's the part I have a problem with. Who the hell is the government to be trying to tell me what a "healthy-for-you" diet is? That is telling people what they should eat. Just because you give someone the ability to choose from a subset doesn't mean you aren't still restricting their choices.
I have no problem with making our country healthier. You and I just have vastly different ideas as to how that should be accomplished.
3 -
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
1) This is important. 2) If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. 3) If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. 4) Plus, you set a bad example for children.
5) The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
6) Something has to be done and 7) taxing is better than nothing. 8) Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
9) Do people really need the Cheeto?
1) Not as important as personal responsibility.
2) That's not true because I include "junk foods" in my overall healthy diet and plus I'd have to live with an overreaching government which would now have a precedent of making personal, individual decisions on my behalf.
3) I'm also opposed to universal healthcare for the same reason.
4) So does Kim Kardashian. You gonna lock her up?
5) And there's the illogical appeal to emotion. #ItsForTheKids
6) No, actually, the government doesn't need to do a single thing.
7) No, taxing really isn't better than nothing.
8) Oh, so you'd rather eliminate an entire industry from the economy. Bad idea.
9) I can think of about 50,000 people who depend on Cheetos to be able to put a roof over their heads. And I can think of over 6 billion people (minus those with allergies or other medical conditions) who could easily fit Cheetos into a healthy diet if they had both the knowledge and desire to do so.12 -
Again, nobody is saying that you don't get to choose, just that you eat a healthy diet. Pick whatever you want!
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
This is important. If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. Plus, you set a bad example for children.
The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
Something has to be done and taxing is better than nothing. Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
Do people really need the Cheeto?
What's more important than being healthy? My freedom to make my own personal choices that's what. That is more important than my health, or my life for that matter. And yes, I really sometimes need the Cheeto. Especially the jalapeno cheddar ones.
Your freedom to eat your Cheetos doesn't outweigh our freedom to not spend all that money on your healthcare. If you choose to eat an unhealthy diet, you should pay for it.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
1) This is important. 2) If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. 3) If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. 4) Plus, you set a bad example for children.
5) The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
6) Something has to be done and 7) taxing is better than nothing. 8) Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
9) Do people really need the Cheeto?
4) So does Kim Kardashian. You gonna lock her up?
I can think of many people who would agree this is not a bad idea.
3 -
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?9 -
I'm pretty liberal, and even I think that's taking things too far.1
-
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
You know what else would make our country healthier? Executing the handicapped, pushing the infirm off of cliffs, and sending the fatties off to the camps. Does that make it a good idea? Hell no.
:getout:2 -
Again, nobody is saying that you don't get to choose, just that you eat a healthy diet. Pick whatever you want!
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
This is important. If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. Plus, you set a bad example for children.
The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
Something has to be done and taxing is better than nothing. Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
Do people really need the Cheeto?
What's more important than being healthy? My freedom to make my own personal choices that's what. That is more important than my health, or my life for that matter. And yes, I really sometimes need the Cheeto. Especially the jalapeno cheddar ones.
Your freedom to eat your Cheetos doesn't outweigh our freedom to not spend all that money on your healthcare. If you choose to eat an unhealthy diet, you should pay for it.
I'm sorry, but have you ever asked a question at the DMV? Have you ever flipped over to C-SPAN and tried to watch how Congress works? Have you ever tried to get a Stop Sign put on an unsafe intersection? I have to assume you have not, if you think anything about what you are describing would be "easy".
And to be blunt, your idea of what kind of government oversight is acceptable sends chills down my spine. There have been many novels about frightening dystopian futures that your plan would fit perfectly in.10 -
mskessler89 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?
Education hasn't worked.
We don't need to get too dramatic here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat, just how we might make ourselves a healthier country because we aren't.
If people are eating reasonable diets, nothing changes. Unless you are being crazy with junk and restaurant food, it doesn't affect you.
We need to do something to make people healthier.
Agree on taxing the diet industry as agree so much on bike lanes. We should have them everywhere. It would encourage people to bike!
0 -
No. Food should not be taxed. "Junk" or otherwise.2
-
mskessler89 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?
Education hasn't worked.
We don't need to get too dramatic here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat, just how we might make ourselves a healthier country because we aren't.
If people are eating reasonable diets, nothing changes. Unless you are being crazy with junk and restaurant food, to doesn't affect you.
We need to do something to make people healthier.
Agree on taxing the diet industry as agree so much on bike lanes. We should have them everywhere. It would encourage people to bike!
Education hasn't worked? When did it start?4 -
Relax. No chills necessary.
Again, nobody is saying that you don't get to choose, just that you eat a healthy diet. Pick whatever you want!
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
This is important. If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. Plus, you set a bad example for children.
The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
Something has to be done and taxing is better than nothing. Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
Do people really need the Cheeto?
What's more important than being healthy? My freedom to make my own personal choices that's what. That is more important than my health, or my life for that matter. And yes, I really sometimes need the Cheeto. Especially the jalapeno cheddar ones.
Your freedom to eat your Cheetos doesn't outweigh our freedom to not spend all that money on your healthcare. If you choose to eat an unhealthy diet, you should pay for it.
I'm sorry, but have you ever asked a question at the DMV? Have you ever flipped over to C-SPAN and tried to watch how Congress works? Have you ever tried to get a Stop Sign put on an unsafe intersection? I have to assume you have not, if you think anything about what you are describing would be "easy".
And to be blunt, your idea of what kind of government oversight is acceptable sends chills down my spine. There have been many novels about frightening dystopian futures that your plan would fit perfectly in.
The tax is coming. It's a step in the right direction.
Stay calm and fret not over the tax.
0 -
If you have a better idea that hasn't been tried, I'm all ears. How can we make this country more healthy?Gallowmere1984 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
You know what else would make our country healthier? Executing the handicapped, pushing the infirm off of cliffs, and sending the fatties off to the camps. Does that make it a good idea? Hell no.
:getout:
0 -
MiloBloom83 wrote: »No. Food should not be taxed. "Junk" or otherwise.
You mean that there are still people who suffer from food insecurity among all this abundance and we might want to actually care about them? I'm sure we can just layer in a simple tax deduction that they could use on their tax returns that they can calculate with their accountants and that will fix it up, right? Wait, you think they don't have accountants? Don't you think that's irresponsible of them?2 -
There is a difference between taxing it and making junk food illegal. I can support the former, but not the latter. As we have seen with alcohol during prohibition times, and with drugs today, outlawing a product that is desired only leads to a criminal underground enterprise that brings even more crime with it. Fortunately we are beyond the days of people getting killed over production of alcohol (maybe a rare case here and there, but not at the same level as during prohibition). Let's not start an organized crime syndicate of cookies.0
-
mskessler89 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?
Education hasn't worked.
We don't need to get too dramatic here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat, just how we might make ourselves a healthier country because we aren't.
If people are eating reasonable diets, nothing changes. Unless you are being crazy with junk and restaurant food, to doesn't affect you.
We need to do something to make people healthier.
Agree on taxing the diet industry as agree so much on bike lanes. We should have them everywhere. It would encourage people to bike!
What education?????? Seriously. There was a week in health class and not one damn time did the teacher say watch calories. She did suggest weight watchers as a good diet but that was it. There's really no education going on.
If you restrict what can be purchased then you are telling people what they can eat. Freedom before all else is important.1 -
If you have a better idea that hasn't been tried, I'm all ears. How can we make this country more healthy?Gallowmere1984 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
You know what else would make our country healthier? Executing the handicapped, pushing the infirm off of cliffs, and sending the fatties off to the camps. Does that make it a good idea? Hell no.
:getout:
Go back to letting people live and die by their own choices and it will iron itself out in a couple of generations. I've always found it amusing that so many of our cultural crises weren't a thing until the feds decided that they needed to be involved in everything, and save everyone from themselves.5 -
mskessler89 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?
Education hasn't worked.
We don't need to get too dramatic here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat, just how we might make ourselves a healthier country because we aren't.
If people are eating reasonable diets, nothing changes. Unless you are being crazy with junk and restaurant food, to doesn't affect you.
We need to do something to make people healthier.
Agree on taxing the diet industry as agree so much on bike lanes. We should have them everywhere. It would encourage people to bike!
With your card idea, you're telling me how much of something I can eat. That is telling me what to eat. That's violating my freedom.
Also, ignoring the implementation part, it's still impractical for changing anything - if I had a husband and 3 kids and I do all the shopping, that might get me a bag of Cheetos per week, perhaps? What if I'm the only one who likes Cheetos, and I binge eat them all? And we'd suddenly have a black market of junk food where healthy eaters would sell their Oreo quota to people who want it more. You realize this is ridiculous, right?
The only nutrition education I ever had in school was when I voluntarily took a nutrition elective in 10th grade. It wasn't required. Any education that's currently being implemented (which to my knowledge is minimal and woefully inadequate) will take another 10 years for effects to be seen. I believe I saw a study showing that my generation (35 and under) in urban areas was trending towards lower BMI and more activity - maybe the next generation will improve on that.6 -
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!13 -
Are people really going to fight for the freedom to be unhealthy!
If they are, they should pay for the healthcare, so a tax is necessary. If they don't like it, oh well. Too bad.
It would be better for everyone if people were just taught how to eat via a card system. Then people don't whine about the tax.0 -
Relax. No chills necessary.
Again, nobody is saying that you don't get to choose, just that you eat a healthy diet. Pick whatever you want!
What is more important than people being healthy? Nothing. People, kids especially, need to start getting healthier.Carlos_421 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Communism and fascism, though described as being on opposing ends of the spectrum of political theory, have two major similarities:
1) Government control of the populace
2) Self-justification by the flawed reasoning of "the people need us to make their decisions for them"
If you want a government that so encroaches on your personal liberties as to dictate what you should and shouldn't be eating, try the Castro brothers.
This is important. If you eat a healthy diet like you should then nothing changes for you. If you aren't eating a healthy diet then everyone else shouldn't have to pay for it which we would in healthcare. Plus, you set a bad example for children.
The health of the populace and the kids especially is the most important thing and we all see where allowing people to crazy with food had left us.
Something has to be done and taxing is better than nothing. Quit selling junk food would be better and probably easier.
Do people really need the Cheeto?
What's more important than being healthy? My freedom to make my own personal choices that's what. That is more important than my health, or my life for that matter. And yes, I really sometimes need the Cheeto. Especially the jalapeno cheddar ones.
Your freedom to eat your Cheetos doesn't outweigh our freedom to not spend all that money on your healthcare. If you choose to eat an unhealthy diet, you should pay for it.
I'm sorry, but have you ever asked a question at the DMV? Have you ever flipped over to C-SPAN and tried to watch how Congress works? Have you ever tried to get a Stop Sign put on an unsafe intersection? I have to assume you have not, if you think anything about what you are describing would be "easy".
And to be blunt, your idea of what kind of government oversight is acceptable sends chills down my spine. There have been many novels about frightening dystopian futures that your plan would fit perfectly in.
The tax is coming. It's a step in the right direction.
Stay calm and fret not over the tax.
Since your profile isn't viewable, would you mind sharing your age and where you live? Maybe context would help us?0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
If they're vegan, they get their vegan diet approved and that gets loaded into the card. This just wouldn't be that hard.mskessler89 wrote: »
Potatoes aren't bad for you in moderation. They could simply load all the info into debit cards so people couldn't buy things that weren't good for them. Or buy too much that isn't good for them. Like you get X amount of this and that and you can choose what kind you want. You get this much red meat, this much dairy, this much starch. If you want to eat rice, okay. If you'd rather eat bread, okay.Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »When I saw the OP, I assumed this would be a short and obvious thread. I can't believe how many people honestly think the government has a responsibility to determine what foods are "healthy" and to put effort into corralling people into choosing those foods. And honestly think people will stop eating the way they eat because of a tax.
It is the individual's responsibility to feed themselves and to do so in an educated manner. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children how to feed themselves properly. Eating is, possibly literally, the most basic and important skill any living thing needs to acquire. If that is too much to ask of the average American, and we can't do it without the government's forceful participation, that certainly calls for some weeping
I'd say why not.
To which I'd reply:
Because this is the United States of America which was founded on the principles of liberty and freedom. This nation was built by hard working innovators taking advantage of a free-enterprise, capitalist system and we owe the affluence we so readily take for granted to the very type of free trade that the creation of a socialistic nanny state would strangle.
We haven't become one of the most prosperous and blessed nations in the history of mankind because of government intervention in our daily lives. We've enjoyed the prosperity we have because, to a much greater degree than most countries, our government has left industry alone to succeed and our people alone to live and believe as they so desire.
We don't need someone to decide for us what we can eat and punish us monetarily for not adhering to their plan. If we don't take care of our own selves, it's on us. And even if we did need someone to make our decisions for us, it sure to goodness wouldn't be the government's job. You know, The Constitution and Bill of Rights and all that fun stuff no one remembers from their civics classes.
Besides, do we really want our nutrition choices to be dictated by the same entity responsible for bankrupting social security, the housing bubble (remember 2008?), Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, Benghazi, trillions of dollars of debt, etc. not to mention being heavily influenced by lobbyists and perpetually stalled in partisan gridlock?
That's why. For starters.
Seriously, the very idea flies in the face of everything that made America great.
And people ask me to expound on why I weep for this nation.
The fact that this is even being considered a serious conversation...
They're going to tax the junk food. They'll do it by taxing food with added sugars and high amounts of sodium.
I think people should be eating healthy. If they don't, they should pay for it.
Maybe they should just make cigarettes and junk food illegal instead of taxing it. That would probably be easier and have less people complaining about paying taxes. We would also have fewer people setting poor examples for children.
They could set limits on how much fast food and restaurant food people could eat. Nobody is saying you can't ever eat junk, but limit it to a reasonable, small amount.
People who are left to make their own decisions will make bad ones. It's bad for them, it's bad for children and it's bad for society. There is no good there.
Uh huh, and what happens when someone like me, who has a burning hatred for starches, ends up in an unelected bureaucratic position of power, and decided that your rice and potatoes are junk food, because they have a minimal micronutrient content relative to their caloric value?
I'm sure you see how this could get out of hand over time.
Nobody is saying people must eat food that they hate, just that if they refuse to make the choices that are good for them, we have to help them out and teach them how. Force them if we must. They might fuss at first, but they'll be grateful later,when they're healthier.
The could have people get approval from doctors for what kind of diet they should eat. Load it onto a card and voila, they buy what they should eat.
It wouldn't be that hard.
I can't even with your posts. I just can't. Do you realize how much individual diets vary, and how people thrive on different things? Are you going to tell an 80/10/10 vegan they're limited on how many starches they buy? Are you going to tell a person who needs to gain weight for health reasons that sorry, they're stuck eating avocados and peanut butter because they've maxed out beef jerky limit?
Oh, and as for sodium, now I have to pay a tax on soy sauce that I use in my protein-rich, veggie-dense stir-fries? Salted nuts are off the table? Cottage cheese can be high in sodium. Frozen veggie burgers can be high in sodium. Are these things all "junk"?
I don't want anyone trying to tell me what I can and cannot eat. I educated myself, I learned to make good choices. I know how to work in a treat. I like going out to eat, and I will do it as much as I like and work out for it if I need to, thanks very much.
I don't know why people would fight to eat unhealthy diets, but I am sure that when they're healthier, they'll be happy about it. Society would be better off.
This business of eating whatever you want thanks very much is not good for your health. Nothing is more important than health.
We are an unhealthy country, it's costing us money, we have to do something about it. Leaving the choice up to everyone hasn't worked.
At first, when I started to read this post I wanted to reply to reiterate that this would be a much more complex "solution" to implement than you think. I'm a business analyst working in an industry where just establishing which customers should have access to what information on the company website is a complicated affair. All the variables, processes, decisions, exceptions and so on which would affect this kind of endeavor are beyond staggering. Yet you sound like a little kid with no concept of reality saying "you can buy me the pony, Daddy. Just put it on your card. It's easy!"
Then I read the bolded...
FREEDOM!!!!
God bless America, our freedom is more important!!! If being healthy is more important than having freedom then why in the name of all that is good and kind did our founders risk their very lives (and many died!) so that we could have freedom??!!! How many thousands of brave soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom and you think it's more important that we not be fat???
This nation exists because brave men and women thought it better to die than to live under tyranny but you would accept tyranny with open arms in the name of "health" because you're afraid of big bad Cheetos!!
If my options are 1) be healthy but have the government dictating the way you live your own personal life or 2) sacrifice my health and fight for my God-given rights...I say pass the ammo and ice cream!!
I couldn't have said it better, and I don't even eat ice cream.3 -
Scientific issues that were easily fixed or scientific information that was properly conveyed either through public schools or otherwise:
(1) Evolution. No controversy here.
(2) Global warming. Everyone agrees we are handling this correctly, right?
(3) Sex education. My favorite topic at PTA meetings.
(4) Abortion. These laws were sooo easy. Hands off by body, right? We do all agree that government has a place in women's wombs as well as their grocery carts?
(5) GMOs. Scientific consensus says they're safe. How'd that go in Europe again?
(6) US organic label. This shows the food is healthier, right? And, it's totally organic . . .
(7) Gay marriage and sodomy laws. The government's place is in our bedrooms and our kitchens.
I'm convinced. This is easy. Something's got to be done!
ETA: I forgot about teaching calorie counting to adolescent girls in health class. We can weigh them all too. That is sooo easy, and parents dig it.3 -
Are people really going to fight for the freedom to be unhealthy!
If they are, they should pay for the healthcare, so a tax is necessary. If they don't like it, oh well. Too bad.
It would be better for everyone if people were just taught how to eat via a card system. Then people don't whine about the tax.
There doesn't need to be a tax. There does need to be a restructuring of the absurdly expensive and cumbersome health care system, and considerations about what obesity costs are covered and what are paid out of pocket.
But I would hands down take a tax over a card that tells me I can't buy eight pints of Talenti when it's on sale. Eff that.1 -
Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat just that they eat healthy.mskessler89 wrote: »mskessler89 wrote: »
I totally agree that telling people what they had to eat would be ridiculous.The direction this thread has taken makes me very sad. I find it appalling that anyone thinks the government should be telling people what they can and cannot eat. Granted I lean toward the Libertarian viewpoint of wanting the government to GTFO of people's lives, but I just can't fathom someone actually wanting to live in a country where the government has that kind of involvement in people's personal decisions.
Nobody is saying that anyone would be told what to eat, just have some reasonable moderation. You get the healthy range the usda recommends. If you have an exception for medical reasons, then your doctor could say that was healthy for you. You still get to pick what you eat.
You get to pick all the foods you like so long as they're part of a healthy-for-you diet.
Unhealthy people cost us too much money.
Why would anyone have a problem with making our country healthier??????????
Our personal freedoms come first. If you want the government involved, put more nutrition education in classrooms that starts in kindergarten and goes through 12th grade. Cut subsidies on corn so HCFS products are more expensive, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Build up public transportation and bike lanes so people have the option to walk/cycle on commutes instead of driving. If you want to regulate or tax something, tax the damn diet industry that pushes fads and useless products, preying on people's desperation and lack of education.
People should be given opportunities and encouragement to take responsibility for themselves. By limiting how much of a particular food they can buy, it makes society more infantile. Do we really want to keep dumbing ourselves down?
Education hasn't worked.
We don't need to get too dramatic here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be told what to eat, just how we might make ourselves a healthier country because we aren't.
If people are eating reasonable diets, nothing changes. Unless you are being crazy with junk and restaurant food, to doesn't affect you.
We need to do something to make people healthier.
Agree on taxing the diet industry as agree so much on bike lanes. We should have them everywhere. It would encourage people to bike!
With your card idea, you're telling me how much of something I can eat. That is telling me what to eat. That's violating my freedom.
Also, ignoring the implementation part, it's still impractical for changing anything - if I had a husband and 3 kids and I do all the shopping, that might get me a bag of Cheetos per week, perhaps? What if I'm the only one who likes Cheetos, and I binge eat them all? And we'd suddenly have a black market of junk food where healthy eaters would sell their Oreo quota to people who want it more. You realize this is ridiculous, right?
The only nutrition education I ever had in school was when I voluntarily took a nutrition elective in 10th grade. It wasn't required. Any education that's currently being implemented (which to my knowledge is minimal and woefully inadequate) will take another 10 years for effects to be seen. I believe I saw a study showing that my generation (35 and under) in urban areas was trending towards lower BMI and more activity - maybe the next generation will improve on that.
I agree that education is necessary. People really don't know much about how to eat healthy. A card would help with that. They'd learn to eat healthy via their diet and wouldn't have to learn anything.
We have to do something about this mess of unhealthy people.
Freedom is not more important than health because you cannot be free when you're dead.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions