Sugar tax to be imposed in UK

Options
2456789

Replies

  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    socajam wrote: »
    If you are that poor, drink plain water or make homemade lemonade: sugar, lemons and water and a lot more healthy than a can of sprite and cheaper too.

    I don't know how much lemons cost where you live, but a can of sprite is cheaper than a lemon here.

    ...i think thats the problem... LOL
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,947 Member
    Options
    JoshuaMcAllister wrote: »
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    It's good news, it'll maybe cut back on people buying sugary drinks - water is free, no cals and good for us...
    And the good news is they have a plan for where the tax from it will go.

    Technically not true, all purified drinking water has a cost. As does most spring water, unless you're isolated enough to get the supply from source.

    And even then you probably spent money digging the well ;)
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage wrote: »
    Witchdoctor58 wrote: »
    You don't want to look like an American, do you? (I get to say this since I was born and bred in the states, and refuse to look that way). Sugar is a drug for many, and it's not a bad idea to make a bit of cash the same way they tax alcohol and tobacco. The NHS could use always some funds.

    The obesity epidemic is not due to over-consumption of sugar. Taxing alcohol and tobacco have done nothing to curb their use.
    Actually, there is decent evidence that every time states (United States side at least) raise tobacco taxes , demand goes down. Laws that attempt to ban things outright don't tend to stop the things from ever happening, but that doesn't mean taxes can't alter supply and demand curves.

    I was thinking the same thing. And many of the same arguments were made about cigarette taxes (they are regressive, they are in part to make money). I'm always kind of torn on this issue (without actually caring that much either way).

    I'm a bit torn too, I just don't like misinformation. I think sugar tax is a lot more regressive than a tobacco tax as there is no healthy level of tobacco consumption, where as sugar can be fine in moderation, and the tax tends to hit low income.
    I'd feel better if any such law explicitly earmarked funds raised towards food security for low income individuals.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,947 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    socajam wrote: »
    If you are that poor, drink plain water or make homemade lemonade: sugar, lemons and water and a lot more healthy than a can of sprite and cheaper too.

    I don't know how much lemons cost where you live, but a can of sprite is cheaper than a lemon here.

    ...i think thats the problem... LOL

    I think it's the cost of the lemon that's the problem lol! They're more expensive than avocados and are less yummy. And even avocados at like $2 each (except for one month a year when they at a joyful $0.89 each) are a sometimes treat.

    But using sugar, lemons, and water would be more expensive than a can of Sprite - which was my point to the original quote. Not cheaper lol.

    Also I'm bitter that the two avos I "spurged" on were both rotten. Stupid grocery store.
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    It's good news, it'll maybe cut back on people buying sugary drinks - water is free, no cals and good for us...
    And the good news is they have a plan for where the tax from it will go.

    Insert dig at Flint, Michigan's problems.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    hamlet1222 wrote: »
    It's be much better to force the manufactures to taper-down the quantity in food products.

    "Force" ? Bit of a challenge in the EU single market. The levy is designed to do this, as it has two levels for >8 and >5% sugar. The budget foresees a decline in revenue year on year after it is implemented.

    At 18 p/litre (25 US cents) the levy is about 4 times the cost of the sugar, I don't know how price sensitive consumers are as a 330 ml can varies in retail price over a 3:1 range. I guess half the population don't consume these drinks at all.

  • MonaLisaLianne
    MonaLisaLianne Posts: 377 Member
    Options
    It will mainly hurt retailers, restaurants and people in the beverage industry - and yes, the poor. Funny that no one ever asks, "Why should I be taxed on ANYTHING I consume?" instead of haggling over the amount & the target.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    MonaLisaLianne wrote: »
    It will mainly hurt retailers, restaurants and people in the beverage industry - and yes, the poor. Funny that no one ever asks, "Why should I be taxed on ANYTHING I consume?" instead of haggling over the amount & the target.

    hmm, i can't possibly wonder why taxes are necessary.... :expressionless:
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Options
    huh! They just announced the upping cigarettes by 12% for "the health of the nation" ppfftt. No mention of the 14 Billion extra $$$ they're making.
    So now a pack of 35's will cost $40. Definitely enough to make me quit!!
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    MonaLisaLianne wrote: »
    It will mainly hurt retailers, restaurants and people in the beverage industry - and yes, the poor. Funny that no one ever asks, "Why should I be taxed on ANYTHING I consume?" instead of haggling over the amount & the target.

    hmm, i can't possibly wonder why taxes are necessary.... :expressionless:

    The statement wasn't on being taxed, it was on being taxed on consumables. Almost all taxes on goods are regressive, there are plenty of other taxes that don't tax the poor more as a percentage than the wealthy.

    That said, if taxes are necessary to fund government is debatable, if one is talking about a government that controls its own monetary supply. Modern Monetary Theory holds that a self-issuing country only taxes as a form of policy, or to enforce the value of the currency.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Problem is, it's impossible to respond to the comment without definitely being in violation of the rules.

    (This thread probably belongs in Nutrition Debate, as I think that's for policy too.)
  • ElJefeChief
    ElJefeChief Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    Pointless. Just more money for the government to waste and committed obesenoids will just shift their calorie intake to other calorie-dense, nutrition-poor food choices.
  • Erik8484
    Erik8484 Posts: 458 Member
    Options
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    huh! They just announced the upping cigarettes by 12% for "the health of the nation" ppfftt. No mention of the 14 Billion extra $$$ they're making.
    So now a pack of 35's will cost $40. Definitely enough to make me quit!!

    A government policy success story!
  • socajam
    socajam Posts: 2,530 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    socajam wrote: »
    If you are that poor, drink plain water or make homemade lemonade: sugar, lemons and water and a lot more healthy than a can of sprite and cheaper too.

    I don't know how much lemons cost where you live, but a can of sprite is cheaper than a lemon here.

    ...i think thats the problem... LOL

    But which one is healthier - LOL
  • socajam
    socajam Posts: 2,530 Member
    Options
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    huh! They just announced the upping cigarettes by 12% for "the health of the nation" ppfftt. No mention of the 14 Billion extra $$$ they're making.
    So now a pack of 35's will cost $40. Definitely enough to make me quit!!

    It should far more than that - $75.00 and upwards
  • Pinkylee77
    Pinkylee77 Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    MonaLisaLianne wrote: »
    It will mainly hurt retailers, restaurants and people in the beverage industry - and yes, the poor. Funny that no one ever asks, "Why should I be taxed on ANYTHING I consume?" instead of haggling over the amount & the target.

    exactly!
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Options
    Erik8484 wrote: »
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    huh! They just announced the upping cigarettes by 12% for "the health of the nation" ppfftt. No mention of the 14 Billion extra $$$ they're making.
    So now a pack of 35's will cost $40. Definitely enough to make me quit!!

    A government policy success story!

    True :lol:
    socajam wrote: »
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    huh! They just announced the upping cigarettes by 12% for "the health of the nation" ppfftt. No mention of the 14 Billion extra $$$ they're making.
    So now a pack of 35's will cost $40. Definitely enough to make me quit!!

    It should far more than that - $75.00 and upwards

    And I bet people will still pay it... I'm not sure if they're doing it all at once, or in dribs and drabs. They're also banning the import of nicotine that people use in vapourisers to help them quit smoking.. The government will lose too much money if people turned to these. It's just a huge contradiction :rage:
  • EzRemake
    EzRemake Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    I ate sugar once.

    I died.

    RIP
  • sunnybeaches105
    sunnybeaches105 Posts: 2,831 Member
    Options
    It's just another excuse for government to take in and waste more money. It's easier if you can blame the people you're taxing, so "sin" taxes work exceptionally well. It's stunning to me how much money Western governments spend every year and yet we still have sub-par schools and people living on the streets and hungry.
  • KiwiAlexP
    KiwiAlexP Posts: 185 Member
    Options
    Personally I think taxing sugary drinks is simplifying the problem - after all not every one got fat drinking them, and not everyone who stays slim abstained.

    It's the cost of healthy food alternatives which can be a major problem. Takeaways and processed food can be a lot cheaper than fresh food that also needs preparation and cooking

    Driving into work they were discussing the new tax and how there have been calls for it here in New Zealand as well and it was suggested that maybe installing free water fountains in public places as another option. While I know bottled water in the USA (New York) is cheap to buy over here it can be between $3 and $5 for a 600ml bottle - the same size bottle of coke is half the price.

Categories