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
-
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!!
'Murrica!0 -
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.
Can't be serious. Please, please tell me you are trolling.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.
You seriously don't understand how ridiculously contradictory this statement is? It's like saying "you can have whatever color you want as long as it's black."
If I'm only able to eat what I want "so long as I eat healthy," as defined by a government entity, then I do not, in fact, have the freedom to eat however I want. "Healthy choices" are being forced upon me.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.
Freedom is not more important than health because you cannot be free when you're dead.
Allow me to quote one of our founders, Patrick Henry:
"Give me liberty or give me death!"9 -
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.
Um. Ah.
Orwell would be proud.6 -
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.
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.
Your statements are contradictory. There's a huge variety that can make up a balanced diet. Forcing people to eat a certain % of any food group is telling people what to eat.5 -
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.
Sure, let's infantilize a bunch of adults even further by taking away their need for education and critical thought. Sounds like a great foundation for a progressive society.5 -
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
0 -
Define healthy then and make it include all of the things that I currently eat, including the Cheetos that I crave every once in awile. By simply saying that people have to eat a healthy diet you are IN FACT defining what they can and cannot eat - how in the hell can we get that thru your simplistic definition of a solution?!?!?
ETA - plus, my freedom is absolutely paramount to any argument that you care to put forth, including my decision to end my life (not that I am actually contemplating that at the moment) thru whatever means that I choose! I DO NOT NEED a government entity to get that involved in my personal choices!2 -
I don't even like Cheetos, but anyone who thinks you can't have a healthful diet that includes Cheetos is the one who needs to be educated about nutrition.10
-
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
I'm not trusting you my Cheetos. If you want to regulate what people eat I suggest law school, running for congress, and raising a ton of money. Then you can tell the food companies who gave you that money to pound sand. Let me know how it goes.
Meanwhile, I'll munch Cheetos 'till my face turns orange and magically lose weight. *scatters magic Cheetos dust*7 -
0 -
It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.0 -
It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?8 -
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?6 -
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
0 -
we got enough taxes....I'd rather pay a tx to keep unneeded chemicals out of my food!0
-
again, since you chose to ignore my previous post - define healthy eating?!? and yes, you have to include all diet variations and the various restrictions that come with them.1
-
Also, presumably if I am regularly running 50 miles a week I should get to eat more (on my card) than if I am sedentary. What do you do to make sure I'm really doing the exercise I claim?
Who administers these cards? What if I don't want some third party knowing what I eat? Isn't there a privacy issue?
And like WinoGelato, I'm interested in what's actually on the cards, absurd as the concept is.2 -
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
How is advocating for the freedom to be able to choose what foods we eat, even if those foods happen to be things like Cheetohs and ice cream,
synonymous with people fighting to be unhealthy?
Are you saying that consuming "junk food" in any dosage, automatically makes a person unhealthy?5 -
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
0 -
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
Almost every person here arguing against your idea is in the normal BMI range, active, and educated about nutrition, so I'm not sure how we're incapable of eating and being healthy on our own.6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Also, presumably if I am regularly running 50 miles a week I should get to eat more (on my card) than if I am sedentary. What do you do to make sure I'm really doing the exercise I claim?
Who administers these cards? What if I don't want some third party knowing what I eat? Isn't there a privacy issue?
And like WinoGelato, I'm interested in what's actually on the cards, absurd as the concept is.
We forgot to mention the exercise tax. Wear and tear on those sidewalks! Not to mention running is going to hurt those knees, which may or may not be offset by increased heart health. I think we need a complex formula to make sure this is all fair.6 -
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Also, I'm not sure why we are picking on the Cheetohs, but can you explain to me what about Cheetohs makes them unhealthy, and is that in any dosage? What if I eat a single serving once a week when I take a picnic lunch with my kids after hiking? Also in the lunch is a turkey wrap with spinach and red peppers, hummus and veggies, and blueberries for dessert. I'm still unhealthy?6 -
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
Oh, good, USDA ranges.
So we are outlawing low carb diets? What if I sell Moe some of my fat and he sells me some of his carbs?Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
I am an adult and not an idiot or incompetent. Therefore, I do not need the gov't to spoon feed me how to eat.
I don't think the gov't is competent to do this in a workable way, anyway. But even if they could, it's a terrible idea. Just think of how well Prohibition worked, when the gov't decided to teach us that drinking is unnecessary and unhealthy.
I could probably open a speakeasy for pie, though--that might be fun.
Anyway, troll on!4 -
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
I'm bmi 20 and have an overall healthy intake. Having a bag of Cheetos has no effect, positive or negative, on my health.3 -
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
You should compare health stats, diaries, and pics with those with whom you're arguing. That pic is me the weekend before last standing next to my two athletic daughters who the doctors complement every time they go in for a visit. High muscle mass for their ages and low body fat.
I'm actually arguing for the right to remain healthy and not have my ability to do so hijacked by some uneducated functionary with too much time on his hands and no knowledge of nutrition and sports science.* Or law for that matter.
* No. Not you. The two bit clown who will have himself appointed to head the new agency that would administer the ridiculous program you're suggesting. There's no doubt in my mind that they'd not only screw up current scientific understanding but manage to stay at least two decades behind the curve once the program was put into place.6 -
You're making it more complicated than it has to be and getting into things that aren't necessary.WinoGelato wrote: »
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
The USDA sets ranges of food consumption for individuals? This is new information. What parameters do they use? Gender? Age? Activity level? Underlying medical conditions? I'm allergic to strawberries. I presume in your big brother governed dystopian society that whomever issued my card knows that, and that if I decide to tempt fate to see if I still will break out into hives after all these years, that the card knows that would be unhealthy for me and won't allow me to proceed...
Nobody is telling anyone that they cannot eat whatever they want.
Everyone can calm down and know that they'd still get to choose all their own foods. They'd just be limited as to health. You get this much red meat and pick your own. You get to choose your range of carbs, fats, proteins from the recommended ranges. Anyone with special health issues gets their diet.
If the doctor thinks it's good you get a reasonable, moderate amount of junk food.
It would help people learn what is and isn't healthy and would reduce healthcare costs.
Everyone is still choosing their own foods so the only problem is people who don't want to be healthy fighting for their FREEDUM to be unhealthy and I think we can mostly agree that listening to that demand to be unhealthy is unproductive.0 -
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
1 -
This thread with people fighting for the right to be unhealthy just proves how much help they need and how they're incapable of eating and being healthy on their own.Carlos_421 wrote: »It would certainly be easier and cheaper for everyone to have a card but people seem really upset, so I guess a tax is better for now. Let them pay their healthcare costs via a tax. A diet system as part of healthcare would be good in the future. It is time to start discussing it now so people get used it and will calm down about it.
I still think a card would be easier and do a better job lowering healthcare costs, but fine. Tax for now, card later.
How about none of the above?
The tax is a done deal. We are going to tax junk food. Reading this thread makes me even more certain that we need a card system as part of our health are system. People have to learn to eat for health because nothing is more important than our health and our children's health.
You've gotta be kidding me...
Lady, if one of us needs help from the other I can assure you I'm not the needy one. And I sure don't need help from a government bureaucracy.
I eat deliberately and toward my goals. I get a solid balance of macronutrients and also ensure proper intake of micronutrients as well.
All my health markers are fantastic. My blood work is great. My blood pressure is excellent. I'm the picture of health.
I've run a 5k in under 23 minutes. I've deadlifted 2.5 times my bodyweight. I'm also currently cutting weight shooting for single digit body fat.
Educate me. Please tell me where I need help from the government.
Resistance to government encroachment on my life is not proof for its necessity!
And why do you keep saying the tax is a done deal? I'm pretty sure it would have made the news by now and I sure haven't seen anything about it (I even looked).3 -
If it were up to me, we would outlaw McDonald's. We have an obesity epidemic (please note that I did not say crisis) and McDonald's on every corner do not help but I don't see that happening. Big Food lobbying. No.
Whatever the usda ranges are for you that your doctor has agreed are healthy.WinoGelato wrote: »
This exactly this. People fighting for the freedom to be unhealthy demanding that they really NEED Cheetos. Maybe if they have to pay for it, that will change their minds.WinoGelato wrote: »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!!
'Murrica!
I think this whole thread just proves how deeply Americans need help learning how to stay healthy.
We do not need the Cheeto.
Wait. Is there a place where Cheetohs are free? Because every bag of Cheetohs I have ever purchased I did pay for...
The rest of this discussion is so ludicrous I cannot believe this is a sincere suggestion, that we are all given debit cards on which will be pre approved foods that we can purchase based on what the government and our doctors deem "healthy"? This is seriously your recommendation? Ok, let's give it a try. I'm a 41 year old mother of two at a healthy BMI (now after losing 30 lbs) with no underlying medical conditions. What is on my pre approved list?
You still get to pick ALL your own foods in the ranges that are healthy.
Nobody is going to tell anyone what to eat, just help them eat healthy via a card. It's not that big a deal.
Cheetos are unnecessary and unhealthy and if people want to eat them, they will contribute to higher healthcare costs, so if course they have to be taxed. The taxes on food should've come when the cigarette taxes did. These taxes are necessary, undebatable and overdue.
Try to stop fighting for your right to be unhealthy and fight for your right to be healthy and to pay less for healthcare.
Do you even understand that eating something like Cheetos does not automatically make you unhealthy? According to my Dr. I am in great health. I eat all kinds of foods, including fruits vegetables, potato chips and ice cream. I had fast food just the other day. What about restaurants anyway, woukd some be banned by the government for being unhealthy?
The card could easily allow for a reasonable amount of restaurant food.
This wouldn't be that difficult and if everyone here is eating a healthy diet then they'd have NOTHING to worry about!
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