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.
Is the U.S. Government about to try and tackle the Obesity Epidemic?
Replies
-
Theoldguy1 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ?
It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
No doubt that walking in a larger city is easier. Compared to Japan, America is far more spread out. I live in a rural area, and for me to walk to the store would be nearly 9 miles round trip. So, we have a car culture. In a more urban environment, Japanese walk to public transport, to the market... ect ect. Yes, there is a culture against walking in America... Just look at the people who stand on an escalator vs. taking the stairs. The stairs would be quicker sometimes, yet many choose to not take them. Watch people trying to get a parking spot at a store, many will drive around for a good while until they find a "close" spot. If they had just parked further away, they would have been in the store quicker. So yes, there is a culture against physical activity in America......
Never mind the store, how about the people that do that *kitten* at the gym?
Personally I look for where the furthest car is parked, then park 100 ft. further away. Hate door dings on my vehicles.
Yup... then the ultimate irony is many then get on a treadmill to walk.... fml...🤦♂️3 -
It might be useful to look at rich countries who don't have an obesity epidemic like us, say Japan or South Korea. It may be something in the culture, like how fat shaming is socially accepted, to the point where fat people are almost ostracized in society.
Also the US is much worse than any other western countries, obesity rates in northern European countries are much less, also certain countries in southern Europe.
Oooffff. No
Promoting fat shaming is not a good solution. Yikes. Wow. Yuck. No.7 -
Fidgetbrain wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
I’m not American but I’m sure you guys have similar problems with most places being super inaccessible for walkers and cyclists. We have no separate bike lanes in most places and a lot of drivers are very aggressive towards cyclists. A lot of more rural areas don’t even have footpaths or streetlights!
Where I live (midsized US city, Great Lakes state) there are many areas that are both reasonable safe to walk (crime-wise and traffic-wise), with reasonable facilities for walking (sidewalks, cut curbs, pedestrian signals at intersections, etc.) . . . and very nearly no one walking. That's true even in areas where residential areas are fairly close to business areas (i.e., within a few-block radius). Hardly anyone walks, as a form of transportation. In commercial (detached mall type) areas, it's common to see someone drive a car across the parking area from one store to another, maybe a hundred or two meters, rather than parking and walking across the lot, even when most people aren't buying un-carry-able things.
Why? I'm sure it's complicated. But I think it's not a walking culture, as a generality.
I get that it's part of the "culture" but it doesn't mean you have to conform to that culture. You can choose to walk and live for yourself.
It's the same here, but I choose not to conform to a silly car culture.
By "you", I assume you meant "people" or the generic "one"? I walk for transport more than average here. Currently, it's an 8+ mile round trip to the nearest grocery store. When I lived in a place where it was less than a mile, it seemed viable to do 40-50 pounds of groceries with an ash pack basket, and I did. At age 65, that's sadly more than I'm up for, at 8-ish miles. Smaller loads, on a bike, or to a closer convenience store walking, sure. I do try to organize so that groceries are on route home from more distant things, to save the resources.
Do more while you can, and it'll help you do more, longer, for sure.MargaretYakoda wrote: »Yikes there is a couple tons of ableism here in this conversation.
I, too, took the conversation in the recent posts to be about the generally able-bodied. Clearly, IMO, community transportation systems ought to account for varied abilities. Generalities tend to be about the general population, which is fortunate and able-bodied.2 -
Beautyofdreams wrote: »I live in a rural state that ranks 49th in mental health care. I also live where competent medical care may require going out of state. My small town is considered a food desert despite living in a rural area. My state also pays out the lowest medicare reimbursement rates and has a huge lack of doctors and medical facilities.
Speaking as a diabetic/ kidney disease disability recipient, I had very little access to health care until received disability. I hope that medicare will cover semaglutide. It is relatively safe and the most effective drug to date. It does not require medical staff to administer it and is currently being used in 2 diabetes medications.
Obesity is a chronic relapsing condition. I am not sure how much obesity programs can focus on the myriad mental health conditions that express themselves in weight gain or how we can encourage people to change habits established over a lifetime. A sin tax may prove helpful but why stop at fast food when grocery and convenience stores are full of unhealthy options.
Most people on medicare are older with multiple health problems that limit mobility and not likely to engage in vigorous physical activity. Programs that encourage social interaction with gentle physical activity and education along with medications would prove more effective in this demographic.
And before you tell me that you lost your weight the only correct way and that I should, too. I lost 96 pounds in 2010-2012, then had a change in circumstances, regained the weight and have lost 80 pounds since last March. There is no one correct approach to weight loss or maintenance that fits everyone. I had to have financial and mental health counseling before I could lose weight the second time. Will I be able to continue to lose or maintain I do not know. Will I relapse to some extent, that is an almost certainty. Will help be available for me again, more likely now that on disability but not a given.
As for other demographics, a decent minimum wage, early nutrition exposure and education for children and adults and the return of physical education programs available to all children during and after school may slowly change the coming generations along with a crackdown on misinformation on the internet and media regarding diet and obesity.
THANK YOU!
Mind if I send you a friend request?0 -
psychod787 wrote: »Came by this today. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/596/text?r=5&s=1
I wonder if this passes, what the reaction will be?
If the government (aka Congress) could not "tackle" the Covid-19 epidemic, masks wearing, quarantine and vaccination, I doubt it that they would pass any bill to tackle obesity. I hope that I am wrong.4 -
psychod787 wrote: »Came by this today. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/596/text?r=5&s=1
I wonder if this passes, what the reaction will be?
I don't think this is as big a change as you think it is. I haven't actually read the underlying legislation that would be modified, but this certainly reads as though various treatments to address obesity are already eligible for coverage by program(s) under the Social Security Act, and this bill would merely expand the kinds of medical professionals who can be paid for providing those services, IF the patient is referred to them by a physician or primary care provider, AND IF the service is provided on-site (doctor's office, hospital out-patient, or community facility) -- which frankly seems like a step back after a year in which we learned that various health services can be provided remotely (video chats, etc.). It also apparently makes some modification to when certain obesity drugs can be covered, but I'm too lazy to go look at the underlying statute to suss that out.4 -
cmriverside wrote: »I'm in for a 30% tax on fast food. Put it directly into the Medicare/Medicaid system.
There IS help. Remaining ever-the-victim is a personal decision.
Wouldn't it be better and more cost-effective to put the revenues from the fast food tax into providing healthy, ready-to-eat food and safe exercise spaces for low-income people? Instead of letting them suffer the bad health outcomes and then pay to treat chronic diseases and emergency recurring situations resulting from the chronic diseases?4 -
For the people suggesting fast food restaurants be taxed?
Or that food stamps should not be able to purchase soda and candy?
1) It is impossible to write a law that will clearly define junk food. Or candy.
2) Poor people also deserve to have an occasional treat.
https://medium.com/the-establishment/poor-people-deserve-to-taste-something-other-than-shame-90eb3aceabf9
Poor people are surrounded by nutritional advice. However, food deserts are a real thing.
I once visited Washington DC. The grocery store closest to where we stayed (an AYH hostel) was the very first time I realized how bad a grocery store in a food desert is. And yes, they exist. Even our capital.
There were very few fresh vegetables. The oranges looked like they were leftovers from last year. Apples didn’t seem to exist. There were plenty of chips in single serve packets, though.
And then the advice to just put something in a crockpot to eat after you come home from work. Sounds easy.
… but it assumes you can afford a crock pot. Yes. I know they’re not expensive. But when you have essentially no money? It is a factor.
Assuming you found a crock pot, are you going to leave it alone for twelve or more hours while you’re on the bus to your second job? Maybe. Maybe not.
Can you trust the electricity will remain on that whole time? I know there were times I couldn’t be so sure.
So. You swing by McD’s after you pick up the kids from daycare. Exhausted. But at least the kids are fed.
Food banks don’t usually give you things that would benefit from being cooked for a long time in a crockpot anyhow. Just FYI.
Food banks are mostly cheap carbs. And vegetables that need work. Which is fine. But if you’ve just done a ten hour shift, and you still have to feed the kids? It’s unlikely you’re going to have the energy to slice up a bunch of carrots for dinner.
Chances are high it will be brand X Mac and cheese. Made with no butter. Because butter is expensive. And probably no milk either, unless you receive WIC benefits. Because milk is expensive. And very rarely handed out at food banks.
If you wind up having to rely on community feeds? Good luck. You eat what you get served. And then if you’re lucky you leave with an armload of bread. But probably not much to put on it.
I could go on and on and on….
But I won’t. I just wanted to say my piece.9 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »I'm in for a 30% tax on fast food. Put it directly into the Medicare/Medicaid system.
There IS help. Remaining ever-the-victim is a personal decision.
Wouldn't it be better and more cost-effective to put the revenues from the fast food tax into providing healthy, ready-to-eat food and safe exercise spaces for low-income people? Instead of letting them suffer the bad health outcomes and then pay to treat chronic diseases and emergency recurring situations resulting from the chronic diseases?
When I lived in BC I noticed there were exercise areas in practically every park. Chin-up bars. Balance beams. Running tracks. It was really nice. Every neighborhood had such a park in easy walking distance.
I suspect it has something to do with universal healthcare. Not directly. But it definitely serves the BC government to keep healthcare costs down, and providing easy access to exercise helps that goal.2 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »For the people suggesting fast food restaurants be taxed?
Or that food stamps should not be able to purchase soda and candy?
1) It is impossible to write a law that will clearly define junk food. Or candy.
2) Poor people also deserve to have an occasional treat.
https://medium.com/the-establishment/poor-people-deserve-to-taste-something-other-than-shame-90eb3aceabf9
Poor people are surrounded by nutritional advice. However, food deserts are a real thing.
I once visited Washington DC. The grocery store closest to where we stayed (an AYH hostel) was the very first time I realized how bad a grocery store in a food desert is. And yes, they exist. Even our capital.
There were very few fresh vegetables. The oranges looked like they were leftovers from last year. Apples didn’t seem to exist. There were plenty of chips in single serve packets, though.
And then the advice to just put something in a crockpot to eat after you come home from work. Sounds easy.
… but it assumes you can afford a crock pot. Yes. I know they’re not expensive. But when you have essentially no money? It is a factor.
Assuming you found a crock pot, are you going to leave it alone for twelve or more hours while you’re on the bus to your second job? Maybe. Maybe not.
Can you trust the electricity will remain on that whole time? I know there were times I couldn’t be so sure.
So. You swing by McD’s after you pick up the kids from daycare. Exhausted. But at least the kids are fed.
Food banks don’t usually give you things that would benefit from being cooked for a long time in a crockpot anyhow. Just FYI.
Food banks are mostly cheap carbs. And vegetables that need work. Which is fine. But if you’ve just done a ten hour shift, and you still have to feed the kids? It’s unlikely you’re going to have the energy to slice up a bunch of carrots for dinner.
Chances are high it will be brand X Mac and cheese. Made with no butter. Because butter is expensive. And probably no milk either, unless you receive WIC benefits. Because milk is expensive. And very rarely handed out at food banks.
If you wind up having to rely on community feeds? Good luck. You eat what you get served. And then if you’re lucky you leave with an armload of bread. But probably not much to put on it.
I could go on and on and on….
But I won’t. I just wanted to say my piece.
Responding to point # 1: The rules for eligible foods for WIC (Women, Infants and Children) nutrition programs are very specific, not allowing what most reasonable people would consider "junk food" so yes a list is most assuredly possible
https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/wic-food-packages-regulatory-requirements-wic-eligible-foods
Point #2: I think I deserve a better house with a 4 car garage and a pool. Should the government pay for that or make provisions so safe place to live? Food stamps aren't the only funds people have. If they want a "treat" they can determine what else they want to sacrifice and use their money.
I've been in line too many times at the store where people buy a bunch of food, with a SNAP card then pull out a $100 bill to buy a 12 pack of craft beer for a "treat" Yes it happens on a regular basis.
9 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »I'm in for a 30% tax on fast food. Put it directly into the Medicare/Medicaid system.
There IS help. Remaining ever-the-victim is a personal decision.
Wouldn't it be better and more cost-effective to put the revenues from the fast food tax into providing healthy, ready-to-eat food and safe exercise spaces for low-income people? Instead of letting them suffer the bad health outcomes and then pay to treat chronic diseases and emergency recurring situations resulting from the chronic diseases?
When I lived in BC I noticed there were exercise areas in practically every park. Chin-up bars. Balance beams. Running tracks. It was really nice. Every neighborhood had such a park in easy walking distance.
I suspect it has something to do with universal healthcare. Not directly. But it definitely serves the BC government to keep healthcare costs down, and providing easy access to exercise helps that goal.
The parks/schools in my community have these things. Very seldom in use. It's a crime.4 -
This certainly is an interesting discussion. There are as many circumstances for obesity as there are obese people and one piece of legislation or a few ideas cannot tackle each one. I think there has to be a multi-faceted approach that tackles as many "groups" as possible as each one has unique factors they face toward getting healthy. Low income groups face financial and potential safety issues that need to be addressed. Some groups do maybe need a kick in the pants somehow. Others need professional support either with a dietician or therapist or both. Everyone here has an opinion on the factors they themselves have experienced or are causes they feel strongly about. None of them are wrong or more/less important than others. I actually think intervention by the government should be more focused on those who need the most help, not those who just need to find some discipline (and yes, there are many of us that just need to get off our butts and do the work)4
-
"Obesity is like any other mental health issue. IF and WHEN someone WANTS help, they can find it."
Not so fast. I have some of the best health insurance available and no where to use it because I live in a very rural area. There have been times where I wanted help and was unable to find it. And if you are physically or emotionally unwell you won't have the energy to do much.
I wish we could separate the health issues of obesity from the focus on appearance.4 -
Can I suggest that this thread really belongs in the Debate forum? It would be nice if heated arguments about what governments should do and how other people should behave were kept to that forum, IMHO.7
-
merchddefaid wrote: »Can I suggest that this thread really belongs in the Debate forum? It would be nice if heated arguments about what governments should do and how other people should behave were kept to that forum, IMHO.
You can go to the first post in this thread and Flag > Report > Other and request that it be moved.
I considered doing that myself but was curious to see if we'd get more participants in this discussion here in General.0 -
I've gone ahead and moved this to our Debate section per request.
Please continue to observe our Community guidelines while debating; Personal attacks or any other breach of our guidelines will not be tolerated. You can review the site's guidelines at the following link:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/welcome/guidelines
Love each other!8 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »It might be useful to look at rich countries who don't have an obesity epidemic like us, say Japan or South Korea. It may be something in the culture, like how fat shaming is socially accepted, to the point where fat people are almost ostracized in society.
Also the US is much worse than any other western countries, obesity rates in northern European countries are much less, also certain countries in southern Europe.
Oooffff. No
Promoting fat shaming is not a good solution. Yikes. Wow. Yuck. No.
Especially because the countries they are mentioning (Japan and S. Korea) have such a culture of conformity, that it has led to abnormally high (and it remains high) statistics concerning suicide. The majority of suicides are from an inability to perform, to be the perfect citizen according to parents and peers.
Also, Japan specifically has a "fat tax" that applies to companies who have employees who are overweight and a "burden" on the health care system.
I'd also mention that Japan has abysmal mental health facilities and treatment options. You have depression? Too bad, better suck it up and deal with it on your own since finding someone to talk to, let alone someone to prescribe you medication (should you be one of those who need it) is insanely hard.
And while none of that is on topic in regards to OP's post, I really wish people would stop holding up Japan as a country to emulate. They have so many, many issues of their own that negatively impact huge swaths of their population.
Oh, also, Japan had a growing obesity problem when I was living there from 2011 - 2014 and it's getting worse, particularly in middle aged men. Same with S. Korea. They are starting to see an increase in the same issues as we have here, a lot of it stemming from working long hours, riding public transit instead of walking and unlimited access to cheap, pre-prepared heavily caloric foods (cakes, cookies, fried foods, etc.). The government mandated health incentive (making companies pay a "tax" for each overweight employee that taxes the system) has not dramatically helped avoid it, either.5 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
No doubt that walking in a larger city is easier. Compared to Japan, America is far more spread out. I live in a rural area, and for me to walk to the store would be nearly 9 miles round trip. So, we have a car culture. In a more urban environment, Japanese walk to public transport, to the market... ect ect. Yes, there is a culture against walking in America... Just look at the people who stand on an escalator vs. taking the stairs. The stairs would be quicker sometimes, yet many choose to not take them. Watch people trying to get a parking spot at a store, many will drive around for a good while until they find a "close" spot. If they had just parked further away, they would have been in the store quicker. So yes, there is a culture against physical activity in America......
Never mind the store, how about the people that do that *kitten* at the gym?
Personally I look for where the furthest car is parked, then park 100 ft. further away. Hate door dings on my vehicles.
Disabled people use gyms too.
Just sayin’
Yes. But I see the same thing at my rowing club, where *I know* that specific people are not mobility disabled. (I know whose cars those are.) Folks park close to the boathouse, then do a vigorous full-body workout on the water. Even at times when we've encouraged them to park in the parking lot a few hundred yards away, that's been true. It's curious. We've given up - created more parking near the boathouse.
Off topic 🤪 .... I just want more info on the rowing club. I know nothing about the sport but Im quite curious about it. I think its definitely something I'd enjoy.1 -
Their suicide rate is not particularly astronomic compared to other countries, you can see for yourself : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
And suicide is a multifaceted problem, I know because in the province I live in we've had some of the worst suicide rates in the world.
The United States also has a big suicide problem, let's not forget that.
3 -
Fidgetbrain wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
I’m not American but I’m sure you guys have similar problems with most places being super inaccessible for walkers and cyclists. We have no separate bike lanes in most places and a lot of drivers are very aggressive towards cyclists. A lot of more rural areas don’t even have footpaths or streetlights!
They are very agressive towards walkers as well, particularly in the province of Quebec where we have probably the worst drivers in North America, no respect for anyone at all.
But I still walk 30 mins to work everyday, I don't even bother with public transport. I don't have a car and I don't even pay for public transport. I live 2 minutes away from the grocery store, the gym and anything you can think of. I guess i'm lucky.
A lot of cities, particularly in the Western US aren't really walkable unless you're literally downtown or in a student area. Many Western cities are urban sprawl that don't even have good public transit. I swap between two office buildings for work...one is 10 miles from my home and the other is 30 miles from my home but still considered to be in the "metro". I've bike commuted to my 10 mile office as an experiment, but it requires me to ride along side two busy highways to get there with cars going 60 MPH passed me...not remotely safe or pleasant and it's not even a bike lane, it's the shoulder of the highway. The nearest grocery store is four miles away and while I don't walk that, I have used my bike when I'm not having to pick up a full load of groceries. The nearest commercial anything from my residence is at least 4 miles in any direction except for a local pizza joint and brewery.
I would love to be able to walk or ride for commute, but there are places that just aren't set up for it. My BIL and SIL live in Connecticut and walk and take the train everywhere...that's just not something that exists in the SW USA. The only time I've ever been able to do it was when I lived in the University area of ABQ which has plenty of commercial mixed with residential and downtown ABQ is an easy 15 minute bus ride. Other than that, the ABQ metro area is a huge sprawl. You aren't going much of anywhere without a car.8 -
NoLimitFemme wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
No doubt that walking in a larger city is easier. Compared to Japan, America is far more spread out. I live in a rural area, and for me to walk to the store would be nearly 9 miles round trip. So, we have a car culture. In a more urban environment, Japanese walk to public transport, to the market... ect ect. Yes, there is a culture against walking in America... Just look at the people who stand on an escalator vs. taking the stairs. The stairs would be quicker sometimes, yet many choose to not take them. Watch people trying to get a parking spot at a store, many will drive around for a good while until they find a "close" spot. If they had just parked further away, they would have been in the store quicker. So yes, there is a culture against physical activity in America......
Never mind the store, how about the people that do that *kitten* at the gym?
Personally I look for where the furthest car is parked, then park 100 ft. further away. Hate door dings on my vehicles.
Disabled people use gyms too.
Just sayin’
Yes. But I see the same thing at my rowing club, where *I know* that specific people are not mobility disabled. (I know whose cars those are.) Folks park close to the boathouse, then do a vigorous full-body workout on the water. Even at times when we've encouraged them to park in the parking lot a few hundred yards away, that's been true. It's curious. We've given up - created more parking near the boathouse.
Off topic 🤪 .... I just want more info on the rowing club. I know nothing about the sport but Im quite curious about it. I think its definitely something I'd enjoy.
Happy to talk about it @NoLimitFemme, but it's off-topic on this thread. Send me a friend request and PM me about it, or start a thread in the Exercise part of the Community and tag me, or something like that. 🙂4 -
psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
8 -
psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
Maybe the same reason you pay extra for your alcohol, even though you're not an alcoholic?2 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
Maybe the same reason you pay extra for your alcohol, even though you're not an alcoholic?
Ha! I'm a non-drinker.
Extra taxes on booze here go to the government coffers. It's possible that some of the money trickles down indirectly to addiction services but there definitely isn't a direct funding pathway.3 -
psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
Don't get me started on the time our county tried to implement a "soda tax". They said to combat obesity, but it applied to zero-calorie diet sodas as well. It didn't last long before the outrage forced them to repeal it...people will tolerate a certain amount of government oversight, but you can pry my Coke Zero out of my cold, dead hands.6 -
psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
I don't have children but have no problem paying taxes to fund schools.12 -
kshama2001 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
I don't have children but have no problem paying taxes to fund schools.
Even the childless suffer with a poorly educated electorate.10 -
kshama2001 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Combine this with a tax on hyperprocessed , energy dense, hyperpalatable foods.
Hey. I'm not obese or overweight. Why do I have to pay extra for my treats?
I don't have children but have no problem paying taxes to fund schools.
I don't have children either but I'm happy to educate the doctors, nurses and personal support workers who will be looking after me in my dotage.
We already have a treat tax here anyway. I pay tax on a single muffin purchased to consume with my cup of coffee, yet a six-pack of muffins from the same vendor is deemed "grocery = essential" and is not taxed.4 -
Fidgetbrain wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
I’m not American but I’m sure you guys have similar problems with most places being super inaccessible for walkers and cyclists. We have no separate bike lanes in most places and a lot of drivers are very aggressive towards cyclists. A lot of more rural areas don’t even have footpaths or streetlights!
Where I live (midsized US city, Great Lakes state) there are many areas that are both reasonable safe to walk (crime-wise and traffic-wise), with reasonable facilities for walking (sidewalks, cut curbs, pedestrian signals at intersections, etc.) . . . and very nearly no one walking. That's true even in areas where residential areas are fairly close to business areas (i.e., within a few-block radius). Hardly anyone walks, as a form of transportation. In commercial (detached mall type) areas, it's common to see someone drive a car across the parking area from one store to another, maybe a hundred or two meters, rather than parking and walking across the lot, even when most people aren't buying un-carry-able things.
Why? I'm sure it's complicated. But I think it's not a walking culture, as a generality.
It really depends on where one lives, though. I think there's a walking culture where I live. I didn't have a car for years and know plenty of people who don't now.2 -
Fidgetbrain wrote: »Japan has an obesity rate of 4%, the US has a morbid obesity rate of 8%.
Also who prevents anyone from walking? You can choose to walk or you can choose not to walk. If you live in a big city, it's often better to walk instead spending so much money on a car.
Are we saying there's a culture that is against walking ? It's an individual choice, I think.
Edit : And yes individualism vs collectivism is the most important aspect.
I’m not American but I’m sure you guys have similar problems with most places being super inaccessible for walkers and cyclists. We have no separate bike lanes in most places and a lot of drivers are very aggressive towards cyclists. A lot of more rural areas don’t even have footpaths or streetlights!
Where I live (midsized US city, Great Lakes state) there are many areas that are both reasonable safe to walk (crime-wise and traffic-wise), with reasonable facilities for walking (sidewalks, cut curbs, pedestrian signals at intersections, etc.) . . . and very nearly no one walking. That's true even in areas where residential areas are fairly close to business areas (i.e., within a few-block radius). Hardly anyone walks, as a form of transportation. In commercial (detached mall type) areas, it's common to see someone drive a car across the parking area from one store to another, maybe a hundred or two meters, rather than parking and walking across the lot, even when most people aren't buying un-carry-able things.
Why? I'm sure it's complicated. But I think it's not a walking culture, as a generality.
It really depends on where one lives, though. I think there's a walking culture where I live. I didn't have a car for years and know plenty of people who don't now.
Of course. I could've phrased that better. I meant to be saying that where I live is not a walking culture, generally . . . not that nowhere in the US has a walking culture.
The main point was that even though here we have the facilities in some parts of my urban area so that it's reasonably walkable (unlike where the person I was responding to lives, seemingly), people here don't generally walk anyway. In a nearby neighborhood where I lived previously, one neighbor was a recreational runner . . . but would drive to the party store that was around a block away (ultra low traffic route), which I found kind of baffling.
As an aside: I'm in Michigan, which I think perhaps still has a stronger "car culture" due to its history. In this city (as in several others in the state) the auto companies were one of the major employers, every employee owned at least one of their employer's cars, some still see buying non-domestic cars as bad behavior, etc. Voluntarily not driving would be considered fairly eccentric by many; not being able to afford a car seen as quite economically unfortunate. For most of my married life, we owned only one car, and that was considered mildly eccentric by many people, since we could've afforded two.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions