Sugar is the new "Devil"

PRMinx · August 2014

As a newbie to MFP but having paid a small fortune to Weight Watchers and Slimming World over the years I thought I knew all there was to know about healthy eating. I have to say I am finding it incredibly difficult to not go over my Sugar allowance - not because of chocolate or fizzy drinks but because of FRUIT!!! and I have always eaten lots of it - especially this time of the year when it is completely free and all around us... suddenly I find that if I eat all he blackberries, apples and plums that I want then I have overloaded big time on my sugar!!
Sorry off topic there - yes they have a right to tax sugary drinks etc. because they are a luxury. We don't need them because as this app has shown me we could obviously get enough for our bodies by picking bushes and trees....

I think that the sugar limits in the MFP system are unrealistic. I ignore them for the most part.

But, to answer your last point, if we tax sugary drinks because they are a "luxury," what else will we tax? Where will it end? Who determines what is a luxury and what is just food?

weightliftingdiva · August 2014

show previous quotes

Joining the "Weepy, left wing commie 'murica-hating sissy government sheep " in the pro "sin" taxes corner.

Where I'm from (not 'merica) the taxes are pretty darn high, on most thing actually, but the benefits are substantial. We have FREE health care and free education for everyone so there is nothing stopping anyone from getting the help they need or the education they desire. Just sayin

It ain't "Free", you are paying for it in many ways....and not just taxes.

and here in "merica", no one is turned down for health care.
Hospitals cannot turn a person away it is against the law, so they are forced to treat people.
Regardless if the person can or cannot pay

What you are referring to only applies to emergency situations or women in labor. Many people cannot afford the maintenance treatments they need for chronic diseases or other diseases like certain kinds of cancer. Those aren't considered emergencies - until the person is about to keel over for it. And even then, they are given the basic treatment that will prevent death - not necessarily the maintenance treatment they need. And they are still billed for it.

I was talking to my Mom's oncologist, who we trust and have a good relationship with. He says that the unregulated pharmaceutical companies and biotech manufacturers are driving up the costs of healthcare. By comparison the doctors are cheap. My Mom's ONE medication of the ten she takes costs $100,000+ a year. We are lucky that insurance covers it. Others are not so fortunate.

One of the most disturbing trends I've seen (not saying you feel this way, just what I've seen in the media) is the blatant disregard for the lives of people who can't afford basic healthcare. Can't afford it? Too bad, you're poor so you don't really deserve to live anyway. And if you get the treatment you need? Be prepared to be hurdled into even more debt if you don't have insurance.

What's happened to us?!

I'm not an economist, so I can't tell you if sin taxes or socialized medicine are the right answer. I know that SOMETHING needs to change - both on the healthcare end and on the personal responsibility end. People need to start taking personal responsibility for their health (read: obesity) but the healthcare system needs some sort of change too.

Before you offer an opinion on health care please be sure you really know how it works. I, work in health care, live in america, and let me tell you something, people are not stupid and they know how to get around things. So you say it has to be an emergency situation where someone is Keeling over? Have you ever considered going to the ER for the flu, a headache, a toothache? No? Well I have picked up hundreds of patients that dial 911 that want to be driven to the ER due to those issues. And I'm told plenty of times that they do that because they can't pay for a doctor. Guess who pays that bill? Us, who work and pay for insurance.

I didn't say that ALL people in the emergency room are ready to keel over. Many people wait to get treatment because they weren't able to go to a regular's doctor's office. They wait until things get bad.

You're absolutely right - people do go the ER for little things too because they can't go see a regular doctor. What does that tell you about how screwey the system is, if people can't afford to go to the doctor? The hospitals do end up covering the cost. That's not right - because the system is not right in the first place.

That doesn't mean people who can't afford it don't deserve healthcare, in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I do not agree with the whole 'people can't afford to go to the doctor' argument.

So you don't have insurance. Big deal. Guess what? Doctors take CASH and it's NOT as expensive as one would think for a simple visit. Don't have a doctor? Go to a clinic. My husband sprained his ankle really bad several months back. We don't have a GP so we waited until the after hours clinic opened up. We have insurance but we have a $10,000 deductible because our insurance is for a catastrophic emergency only so we always say we don't have insurance. His exam including the 6 x-rays they took was around $250.

Oh, and you know what else? Doctors and hospitals will put you on a payment plan if you can't afford to pay the bill up front. A friend of mine had to go to the hospital and she had no insurance and was put on a payment plan and they worked with her and asked her what could she afford every month and that's what she paid.

So not being able to afford a doctor/not having insurance is a weak excuse. And since Obamacare came into play more doctors are going to be only accepting cash.

What is affordable to you may not be affordable to someone else. $250 is a lot of money to some people.

I did not know about the payment plan, that's interesting. I'd imagine if you only have to see a doctor once, that would be hugely beneficial. But if you have a condition that requires lots of doctors and prescriptions, the payments will add up and be a burden for a long, long time.

MityMax96 · August 2014

show previous quotes

It's amazing how often people want the government to step in and control things. As if we are children. Yea we make dumb decisions but that's life.

Yes, I'm standing on the right. Free food, free money for staying home, free rent, free health care.........= motivation. While people like me have to work 2 jobs to live barely comfortable. It's f'ing pathetic all the lazy people we have roaming around crying and moaning about everything when they do nothing to make themselves better. But don't worry......government to the rescue.

Do you eat meat? If so, unless you're rich or ready to give it up, you aren't standing as far to the right as you think you are. Meat is only cheap because it's heavily subsidized.

What does eating meat have to do with political beliefs?

Because of government intervention meat is affordable for most Americans. Those standing to the right abhor government intervention in our lives. Therefore, either these people don't realize why they can afford meat or are not really standing to the right, at least not when it comes to results they want from that government intervention.

Get gov. subsidization out of all of it.
IMO

Do you like food riots and hundred dollar steaks?

People riot over the least little thing....
ANd then I will not eat steak.

I have faith in the free market.

People that own cows want to make money.....
So if demand for their product goes down, then they will adjust.

So yes...get rid of all subsidization...

We should not extract money from one group of ppl and give to another

So are you also willing to hire a private police force to protect you from the rioters? Because there is no sense having government all all if you want a truly free market.

Now you are mixing apples and oranges.

The gov. has its role, I accept that
I am not an anarchist.
Public safety and such is a role for government.

Them influencing the market place is not a role for them.....countries for years around the world have tried to do that.....and have failed...i.e. Russia...China...

So let's stay on topic here.....

martinel2099 · August 2014

the tax code should not be used to punish people.

Totally agreed.

MityMax96 · August 2014

Sorry off topic there - yes they have a right to tax sugary drinks etc. because they are a luxury. We don't need them because as this app has shown me we could obviously get enough for our bodies by picking bushes and trees....

Says you...
I disagree.

Why should I be taxed because someone can't control themselves??
Who says what foods are needed or not needed??

MityMax96 · August 2014

What is affordable to you may not be affordable to someone else. $250 is a lot of money to some people.

I did not know about the payment plan, that's interesting. I'd imagine if you only have to see a doctor once, that would be hugely beneficial. But if you have a condition that requires lots of doctors and prescriptions, the payments will add up and be a burden for a long, long time.

Then do this.

Pull out your checkbook, and start stroking checks for people.
Don't use mine.

Or, start a charity.....

Meerataila · August 2014

show previous quotes

It's amazing how often people want the government to step in and control things. As if we are children. Yea we make dumb decisions but that's life.

Yes, I'm standing on the right. Free food, free money for staying home, free rent, free health care.........= motivation. While people like me have to work 2 jobs to live barely comfortable. It's f'ing pathetic all the lazy people we have roaming around crying and moaning about everything when they do nothing to make themselves better. But don't worry......government to the rescue.

Do you eat meat? If so, unless you're rich or ready to give it up, you aren't standing as far to the right as you think you are. Meat is only cheap because it's heavily subsidized.

What does eating meat have to do with political beliefs?

Because of government intervention meat is affordable for most Americans. Those standing to the right abhor government intervention in our lives. Therefore, either these people don't realize why they can afford meat or are not really standing to the right, at least not when it comes to results they want from that government intervention.

Get gov. subsidization out of all of it.
IMO

Do you like food riots and hundred dollar steaks?

People riot over the least little thing....
ANd then I will not eat steak.

I have faith in the free market.

People that own cows want to make money.....
So if demand for their product goes down, then they will adjust.

So yes...get rid of all subsidization...

We should not extract money from one group of ppl and give to another

So are you also willing to hire a private police force to protect you from the rioters? Because there is no sense having government all all if you want a truly free market.

Now you are mixing apples and oranges.

The gov. has its role, I accept that
I am not an anarchist.
Public safety and such is a role for government.

Them influencing the market place is not a role for them.....countries for years around the world have tried to do that.....and have failed...i.e. Russia...China...

So let's stay on topic here.....

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

CarynMacD · August 2014

I think that the sugar limits in the MFP system are unrealistic. I ignore them for the most part.

But, to answer your last point, if we tax sugary drinks because they are a "luxury," what else will we tax? Where will it end? Who determines what is a luxury and what is just food?

Totally agree with both points.

MFP just lumps sugar into one category, but there are many types of sugars from different sources such as fructose, sucrose, glucose, etc.

I cannot see naturally occuring sugar being bad at all. But remember, everything in moderation.

MityMax96 · August 2014

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

martinel2099 · August 2014

show previous quotes

It's amazing how often people want the government to step in and control things. As if we are children. Yea we make dumb decisions but that's life.

Yes, I'm standing on the right. Free food, free money for staying home, free rent, free health care.........= motivation. While people like me have to work 2 jobs to live barely comfortable. It's f'ing pathetic all the lazy people we have roaming around crying and moaning about everything when they do nothing to make themselves better. But don't worry......government to the rescue.

Do you eat meat? If so, unless you're rich or ready to give it up, you aren't standing as far to the right as you think you are. Meat is only cheap because it's heavily subsidized.

What does eating meat have to do with political beliefs?

Because of government intervention meat is affordable for most Americans. Those standing to the right abhor government intervention in our lives. Therefore, either these people don't realize why they can afford meat or are not really standing to the right, at least not when it comes to results they want from that government intervention.

Get gov. subsidization out of all of it.
IMO

Do you like food riots and hundred dollar steaks?

People riot over the least little thing....
ANd then I will not eat steak.

I have faith in the free market.

People that own cows want to make money.....
So if demand for their product goes down, then they will adjust.

So yes...get rid of all subsidization...

We should not extract money from one group of ppl and give to another

So are you also willing to hire a private police force to protect you from the rioters? Because there is no sense having government all all if you want a truly free market.

Now you are mixing apples and oranges.

The gov. has its role, I accept that
I am not an anarchist.
Public safety and such is a role for government.

Them influencing the market place is not a role for them.....countries for years around the world have tried to do that.....and have failed...i.e. Russia...China...

So let's stay on topic here.....

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

I think you're mis reading max, he's not against taxation in general, of course we need to pay into the system to keep our roads and infrastructure running, police force, military and etc etc etc.

What is wrong is labeling items such as Sugared beverages as a Luxury because some people can't control themselves around it. I don't want to start paying double the price for my donuts because a small part of the population can't control themselves around it.

MityMax96 · August 2014

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

Just saw your bio page:

Anarchist atheist vegan commie. Don't like it? Don't friend me!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
but yet you want those things you detest, to subsidize things.....

So funny

Meerataila · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

weightliftingdiva · August 2014

show previous quotes

What is affordable to you may not be affordable to someone else. $250 is a lot of money to some people.

I did not know about the payment plan, that's interesting. I'd imagine if you only have to see a doctor once, that would be hugely beneficial. But if you have a condition that requires lots of doctors and prescriptions, the payments will add up and be a burden for a long, long time.

Then do this.

Pull out your checkbook, and start stroking checks for people.
Don't use mine.

Or, start a charity.....

Just a philosophical difference I guess.

Derpes · August 2014

Did someone say *kitten* tax?

O.o

Meerataila · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

Just saw your bio page:
show previous quotes

Anarchist atheist vegan commie. Don't like it? Don't friend me!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
but yet you want those things you detest, to subsidize things.....

So funny

Google different forms of anarchist. You're confused. Another term for my politics is Libertarian Socialist. It simply means anti-capitalist but also anti central planning. Another term is Participatory Economics.

CupcakeCrusoe · August 2014

show previous quotes

the tax code should not be used to punish people.

Totally agreed.

This.

Although, to be fair, a sugar tax will never go through. It is amazing how much hold companies have over our government. Politicians get a lot of very nice things with money they get from, oh, the dairy industry or con-agra for example. Those "got milk?" ads? Dairy's big business.

Not that I don't very much enjoy my ice cream. Get me a douple-dipped cone and bring on Big Brother.

MityMax96 · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states

Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner

A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun

weightliftingdiva · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

I like you.

bugaboo_sue · August 2014

Sorry off topic there - yes they have a right to tax sugary drinks etc. because they are a luxury. We don't need them because as this app has shown me we could obviously get enough for our bodies by picking bushes and trees....

Who decides what is a luxury and what isn't? Again, there are many things that I pay money for that someone would consider a luxury but because they make my life and my husbands life easier to us they're not luxuries.

So since sugar is considered a "luxury" by you and therefore should be taxed should we then have a separate "sin tax" that is applied every time we use our cell phone, computers, watch TV? Should there be a "sin tax" applied to all the food that we buy because some of the food in the store could be considered a "luxury" to those who can't afford it? When does it stop and who decides what is deemed a luxury and what isn't?

We don't need more government in our lives period.

Meerataila · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states

Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner

A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun

I'd rather mob rule than rich rule, which is, if you know your history (and I suspect you're intelligent enough to know it) is what we've always had.

MityMax96 · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

Just saw your bio page:

Anarchist atheist vegan commie. Don't like it? Don't friend me!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
but yet you want those things you detest, to subsidize things.....

So funny

Google different forms of anarchist. You're confused. Another term for my politics is Libertarian Socialist. It simply means anti-capitalist but also anti central planning. Another term is Participatory Economics.

Great
Free market...
relegated to the market place
Get rid of subsidization

government roles are just that, they are needed, and we do subsidize police, military, etc....
Or pay taxes for them, however you wish to view it...
Because we as people deem them necessary to preserve and protect our society

dewsmom78 · August 2014

No such thing as a healthy smoker.

Just because you can't see the damage doesn't mean it's not there.

I am an ex-smoker who is finally getting healthy.

CarynMacD · August 2014

Uh Oh - What have I started - it was just supposed to be a light hearted view of the world from some 45 year-old house wife that lives in South Africa...............

Unknown · August 2014

This content has been removed.

MityMax96 · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states

Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner

A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun

I'd rather mob rule than rich rule, which is, if you know your history (and I suspect you're intelligent enough to know it) is what we've always had.

And why do we have rich rule??
Oh, cause we have politicians that like to line their pocketbooks......

Name one country on this earth that exists or has existed where this has not been the case???

Even in communist countries, where it government control, you always had "rich ppl"

weightliftingdiva · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states

Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner

A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun

Unfortunately the founding fathers didn't write a "How-to-interpret" guide that accompanies the constitution. You believe that the *federal* constitution should be interpreted narrowly and that those are the only powers the feds should have. Other people disagree and have a wider interpretation of the constitution.

Edit: Sorry It's been a long time since I've taken American History.

Meerataila · August 2014

show previous quotes

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

Just saw your bio page:

Anarchist atheist vegan commie. Don't like it? Don't friend me!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
but yet you want those things you detest, to subsidize things.....

So funny

Google different forms of anarchist. You're confused. Another term for my politics is Libertarian Socialist. It simply means anti-capitalist but also anti central planning. Another term is Participatory Economics.

Great
Free market...
relegated to the market place
Get rid of subsidization

government roles are just that, they are needed, and we do subsidize police, military, etc....
Or pay taxes for them, however you wish to view it...
Because we as people deem them necessary to preserve and protect our society

We disagree on who should decide what government should be involved in. I say direct democracy for what affects us all. We all decide together. No more wealthy decision makers. Who, by the way, don't follow our Constitution anyway.

GrammyPeachy · August 2014

ahhhhhh.... I'm 53. Therefore, I recommend NOT killing the old people. I also recommend that the old and fat be given a chance to get to a better level of fitness. Oh, and old and fat people who are getting to a better level of fitness should get dark chocolate as a reward.

I think I mostly slept through economics, however, I do remember seeing something about increases in prices generally bringing down demand.

Yeah, I never see people at the gasoline pumps anymore.

CarynMacD · August 2014

No such thing as a healthy smoker.

No such thing as a healthy inactive obese person either.

MityMax96 · August 2014

Uh Oh - What have I started - it was just supposed to be a light hearted view of the world from some 45 year-old house wife that lives in South Africa...............

haha
Great topic, thank you

Sugar is the new "Devil"

Replies

Welcome!

Quick Links

Categories