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?
Options
Replies
-
Better to tax people for every pound they are overweight. Yes, seriously, I do think that's a better idea. Do I support either idea? Hell to the no.7
-
queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »Maybe, but perhaps healthy food should be more affordable instead of junk food. It's cheaper to buy chips, soft drinks and sweet foods than it is to buy fresh fruit and vegetables.
What? That's ludicrous! Bananas in California are 89 cents a pound and a large bag of potato chips are $2.79.
Ok. But you're in cali. Here, a honeybun is 50 cents, and a banana is about the same price. Chips here (offbrand) are $1.00 vs a bag of carrots that will cost over $3. It's that way almost everywhere.
You are in Arizona, if you were in Canada I would get your point. But I have been to Arizona many many times, so I have seen the prices of fruits and vegetables and they are no different than in California. We get foods from Mexico and so does Arizona.
I meant to comment on that too! People say it's expensive to eat healthy. But in most parts of at least the US, there is almost always fresh produce at reasonable prices, even in regular grocery stores. Sure, strawberries are expensive in NY in January, but apples, potatoes, cabbage, and carrots are cheap. And things like bulk rice, beans, and lentils, frozen fruits and veggies, cut raw chicken parts, stew meat, non-fancy frozen fish fillets, generic plain yogurt, eggs, all this stuff is cheap compared to most packaged food.
We grow a lot of food in our state including avocados but visiting family in another state the avocados were cheaper. lol
A 10 pound bag of potatoes is the same price as large bag of potato chips. A 1 pound bag of carrots is one dollar, not sure were previous poster shops. Her carrots are really expensive, organic maybe??3 -
No, why would I want to give the *kitten* heads in DC another reason to mess with my life and my choices?!?6
-
It's also more than just about the price of individual food alone. A lot of food considered to be "junk food" is also convenient. Quick and easy to make and often portable. And it tastes good (usually).
0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »caroldavison332 wrote: »no. we pay too much in taxes already and it won't dissuade people from eating it. Look what they pay for cigarettes.
Every time they raise the tax on cigarettes, teen smoking goes down. You make a good argument.
Does it? Seems to me I see more teenagers smoking and less adults, mainly because teens aren't paying bills with their money.
Yes it does. Even with your anecdote.
3 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »It's also more than just about the price of individual food alone. A lot of food considered to be "junk food" is also convenient. Quick and easy to make and often portable. And it tastes good (usually).
I get that, and that's fine. The problem with a lot of those isn't so much what's in them, but how much a person gets. As an example, taken individually, all of the ingredients in a burrito are fine. The fact that the person buying it feels compelled to eat something the size of their head in one sitting might be the problem.4 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »It's also more than just about the price of individual food alone. A lot of food considered to be "junk food" is also convenient. Quick and easy to make and often portable. And it tastes good (usually).
I get that, and that's fine. The problem with a lot of those isn't so much what's in them, but how much a person gets. As an example, taken individually, all of the ingredients in a burrito are fine. The fact that the person buying it feels compelled to eat something the size of their head in one sitting might be the problem.
How would tax fix that?
0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »It's also more than just about the price of individual food alone. A lot of food considered to be "junk food" is also convenient. Quick and easy to make and often portable. And it tastes good (usually).
I get that, and that's fine. The problem with a lot of those isn't so much what's in them, but how much a person gets. As an example, taken individually, all of the ingredients in a burrito are fine. The fact that the person buying it feels compelled to eat something the size of their head in one sitting might be the problem.
How would tax fix that?
It wouldn't, which is why I am firmly against the tax.2 -
I am 100% in favor of taxing soda but I doubt the government could come up with criteria for junk food that would make sense. They'd likely tie it to saturated fat, sugar and salt content which would just lead to food companies cutting these things and replacing with something worse to avoid the tax.6
-
Annamarie3404 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »Maybe, but perhaps healthy food should be more affordable instead of junk food. It's cheaper to buy chips, soft drinks and sweet foods than it is to buy fresh fruit and vegetables.
What? That's ludicrous! Bananas in California are 89 cents a pound and a large bag of potato chips are $2.79.
Come to Newfoundland. Prices are much higher here because it all has to come over via ferry. When the ferry is out of service (usually due to winter storm weather), the stores look like they were hit by looters. Fresh foods are pretty much cheaper where the food is. Don't even ask about Nunavut.
Ok. What about Nunavut?
Would you pay $13 for a head of cauliflower?0 -
Sugar should be taxed if you are on a universal health care system. Since the US isn't, then you're just taxing yourself later when you become diabetic or overweight and have complications.
If not then there should be penalties or restrictions for companies who are adding too much sugar into our food. Do we really need high fructose corn syrup in almost every loaf of bread?
You know sugar doesn't cause diabetes, right?
You know that sugar of some form is needed for the yeast to do its job on bread, right?2 -
Annamarie3404 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »Maybe, but perhaps healthy food should be more affordable instead of junk food. It's cheaper to buy chips, soft drinks and sweet foods than it is to buy fresh fruit and vegetables.
What? That's ludicrous! Bananas in California are 89 cents a pound and a large bag of potato chips are $2.79.
Come to Newfoundland. Prices are much higher here because it all has to come over via ferry. When the ferry is out of service (usually due to winter storm weather), the stores look like they were hit by looters. Fresh foods are pretty much cheaper where the food is. Don't even ask about Nunavut.
Ok. What about Nunavut?
Would you pay $13 for a head of cauliflower?
Is cauliflower seriously that expensive? It's barely $1 for a big head here0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »caroldavison332 wrote: »no. we pay too much in taxes already and it won't dissuade people from eating it. Look what they pay for cigarettes.
Every time they raise the tax on cigarettes, teen smoking goes down. You make a good argument.
Does it? Seems to me I see more teenagers smoking and less adults, mainly because teens aren't paying bills with their money.
Yes it does. Even with your anecdote.
I'm not sure that tax is why youth smoking (and smoking in general) has been reduced. Education about the dangers of smoking was EVERYWHERE when I was a kid. When I got to middle school, there were a few people who thought it looked cool, but most everyone else thought it smelled bad and was a bad idea. Buildings started banning smoking inside, so kids weren't seeing adults smoking everywhere all the time and getting the impression it was normal. The tax increase happened in conjunction with education and limiting smoking areas, so can we really say it's the tax that's the driving factor? I don't really think so. I think education and access are MUCH bigger factors, and would be with food as well.8 -
queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »Annamarie3404 wrote: »Maybe, but perhaps healthy food should be more affordable instead of junk food. It's cheaper to buy chips, soft drinks and sweet foods than it is to buy fresh fruit and vegetables.
What? That's ludicrous! Bananas in California are 89 cents a pound and a large bag of potato chips are $2.79.
Ok. But you're in cali. Here, a honeybun is 50 cents, and a banana is about the same price. Chips here (offbrand) are $1.00 vs a bag of carrots that will cost over $3. It's that way almost everywhere.
You are in Arizona, if you were in Canada I would get your point. But I have been to Arizona many many times, so I have seen the prices of fruits and vegetables and they are no different than in California. We get foods from Mexico and so does Arizona.
I meant to comment on that too! People say it's expensive to eat healthy. But in most parts of at least the US, there is almost always fresh produce at reasonable prices, even in regular grocery stores. Sure, strawberries are expensive in NY in January, but apples, potatoes, cabbage, and carrots are cheap. And things like bulk rice, beans, and lentils, frozen fruits and veggies, cut raw chicken parts, stew meat, non-fancy frozen fish fillets, generic plain yogurt, eggs, all this stuff is cheap compared to most packaged food.
Where I live, increases in food cost (and housing) have outpaced increases in wages by a very large margin. Potatoes and apples were never cheap here, but even locally grown foods are now expensive way out of proportion to paychecks. So if a "basket" of foods cost 10% of your month's wages in the 1980s that basket would cost 30% of the wages of the person doing that job now, maybe more actually.
I 100% agree though, that in relative terms, there are some healthy cheap choices.
Here it's dry beans, white rice, canned tomatoes, good olive oil is suprisingly less expensive than it was, frozen vegetables (not all of them though, only a few are still available in the family size bags, most have been converted to small and pricey steam in the bag single serving size). Okra in season, and watermelon in season, and collard/mustard greens in season, also sweet onions. Eggs are still a good deal, and milk. And, oddly, limes.2 -
One problem that comes to mind is the definition of "junk food". Where is that line drawn, and will that be something voters agree with? Here in Canada all our food is taxed already, frankly we are taxed too much as it is...push folks further and the government may not like the response.2
-
Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.6 -
kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
pretty much this ..
and i have zero desire to give government bureaucrats another dime of my money so they can blow it on enriching themselves and their lobbyist friends, or spending on idiotic studies like "shrimp on treadmills"
6 -
Sugar should be taxed if you are on a universal health care system. Since the US isn't, then you're just taxing yourself later when you become diabetic or overweight and have complications.
If not then there should be penalties or restrictions for companies who are adding too much sugar into our food. Do we really need high fructose corn syrup in almost every loaf of bread?
You know sugar doesn't cause diabetes, right?
You know that sugar of some form is needed for the yeast to do its job on bread, right?
If not sugar then what foods do cause diabetes?0 -
@mskessler89 - If you look at the chart, teen smoking dropped sharply beginning in 1999. Indoor smoking (including in middle schools) was banned long before then, so can't be responsible.
You don't think cost has any effect on people with a limited and fixed income? Economists disagree, and history doesn't bear your theory out.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Sugar should be taxed if you are on a universal health care system. Since the US isn't, then you're just taxing yourself later when you become diabetic or overweight and have complications.
If not then there should be penalties or restrictions for companies who are adding too much sugar into our food. Do we really need high fructose corn syrup in almost every loaf of bread?
You know sugar doesn't cause diabetes, right?
You know that sugar of some form is needed for the yeast to do its job on bread, right?
If not sugar then what foods do cause diabetes?
Do you understand what diabetes is? It isn't caused by a specific food, although obesity can be a significant risk factor.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 967 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions