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
11314161819104

Replies

  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    Options
    OP - NO, big fat NO. It's already taxed under state sales taxes. Personal responsibility should rule the day, anyway. Nanny state BS is what causes this kind of thinking.

    Not personally attacking you. I'm just attacking the whole notion of such thinking. It is wrong-headed from the word go.

    Not to mention the difficulty of defining "junk food." I can make an extremely good argument for a Double 1/4 Pounder from McDonald's being part of a well-balanced diet, especially for someone as active as I am with the calorie, protein, and carbohydrate requirements I have just to maintain my weight and current muscle mass.

    Toss the bun, drop the condiments, and the DQP with cheese is nigh identical to roasted chicken wings with no sauce or breading (slight carb bump and protein loss). You leave my chicken wings alone!
  • kristen6350
    kristen6350 Posts: 1,094 Member
    Options
    All I know is if Ohio decided to highly tax Diet Coke I'd create a major crap storm.
  • chocolate_owl
    chocolate_owl Posts: 1,695 Member
    Options
    All I know is if Ohio decided to highly tax Diet Coke I'd create a major crap storm.

    200.gif
  • Ruatine
    Ruatine Posts: 3,424 Member
    Options
    All I know is if Ohio decided to highly tax Diet Coke I'd create a major crap storm.

    I was thinking the same about Diet Dr. Pepper. :smiley:
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    Options
    queenliz99 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.

    Nailed it!!

    I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.

    A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.

    Did I say in any of this about low carb? I said "healthy". And those 2 do not go hand in hand.

    You said "binging on carbs" in a way that seemed to be used inter-changeably with "junk food." Could you explain what you meant by "binging on carbs" and how that was relevant to "healthy?"
  • the_quadfather
    the_quadfather Posts: 47 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    And taxation is going to solve that problem?

    Does anybody think seat belts are supposed to solve the problem of people dying in cars? Show of hands? No one?

    Ok, does anybody think having police is going to solve the problem of crime? Again, no one.

    I could go on and on with examples but the point is you're asking the wrong question.

    Apple, meet Orange.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    0xvm5.gif

    She is such a drama queen, girl after my own heart ;)

    Eta: typo
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    And taxation is going to solve that problem?

    Does anybody think seat belts are supposed to solve the problem of people dying in cars? Show of hands? No one?

    Ok, does anybody think having police is going to solve the problem of crime? Again, no one.

    I could go on and on with examples but the point is you're asking the wrong question.

    Apple, meet Orange.

    Only kinda. I don't support mandatory seatbelt laws either.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    And taxation is going to solve that problem?

    Does anybody think seat belts are supposed to solve the problem of people dying in cars? Show of hands? No one?

    Ok, does anybody think having police is going to solve the problem of crime? Again, no one.

    I could go on and on with examples but the point is you're asking the wrong question.

    I'm sorry my selection of one word offended you, but thank you for ignoring the context of the rest of my quote and the point being that people not understanding how many calories are in fried foods would likely not be affected in any *baby orangutan* way by a tax.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    Options
    queenliz99 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.

    Nailed it!!

    I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.

    A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.

    Did I say in any of this about low carb? I said "healthy". And those 2 do not go hand in hand.

    You said "binging on carbs" in a way that seemed to be used inter-changeably with "junk food." Could you explain what you meant by "binging on carbs" and how that was relevant to "healthy?"

    Maybe that wasn't the best "term" and I'm sorry if I started something. Most people relate "junk food" to "carbs", especially when trying to figure out how to eat "healthy". So they cut out cookies, baked goods, chips, candy, etc. Because those foods are "bad". Then some may even go as far as rice, pasta, tortillas, etc. But those last foods aren't "junk", they are just high in carbs and I'm sorry, but I'm so far off the "low carb" train it's not even funny. I lost 50lbs by eating less food and becoming more active, because I think a life without 1/2 the foods and drinks I love is SAD.

    So what I meant was that my meal plan was "healthy" (even though highly caloric, each item in a burrito is not classified as junk food), unless you want to tax beans, rice and tortillas too. But it was too much food for me and I got fat and now I'm pre-disposed to diabetes. Not because I sat and ate 2 packs of Oreos, 3 Reeses Fast Breaks and a bag of potato chips every day. And those foods I would assume would be part of the junk food tax (and not to go even farther, but how the heck would you draw the line on what's junk since everyone has different opinions?)

    Get my point? If not, I'm sorry, but we'll need to agree to disagree, but I didn't mean this to go in this way. I felt I was very logical.

    It was logical.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    Options
    Honestly? I think what goes in the discussions of policy makes is kind of similar to what goes here sometimes. I don't know if it's spending too much time around health conscious people or what, but some of the answers are really disconnected from reality. People in general, and many of us were the same, are not very concerned with nutrition. Does it look good? Does it taste good? Is it cheap? Is it convenient? If hits all or most of the notes it gets eaten even if all packaged foods had calories listed in a font size the covers more than half the package.

    Make it more expensive? Well that's one negative, but if it still looks and tastes good and is convenient people would still buy it, and those who wouldn't would buy something else that may not be that much better. I remember when a few years back the government decided to put a huge warning on cigarette packs that takes up all the back side of a pack. A picture of lungs with cancer. What was the first reaction of smoker (and I was one of them)? We actually sought those packages because we knew they were produced more recently so they were "fresher". Prices also went up. None of that did anything because it was not coupled with a cultural shift and to this day, despite the prices, the warnings and the pictures more than 60% of households still have at least one person who smokes, often more.

    I'm not sure what could be done, really. What outside factors would have motivated me to change, back when I was morbidly obese and didn't care? I'm trying to wrack my brain for an answer and I can't find any. Short of a complete cultural change I don't see a way, and even then the state of dieting would also need to change where dieting stops being a game of doing the latest fad for "fun". Calories are not as exciting as cleanses, "eating right" is not as morally superior as "eating clean" and patience is not as rewarding as the latest cabbage soup diet...
  • the_quadfather
    the_quadfather Posts: 47 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    And taxation is going to solve that problem?

    Does anybody think seat belts are supposed to solve the problem of people dying in cars? Show of hands? No one?

    Ok, does anybody think having police is going to solve the problem of crime? Again, no one.

    I could go on and on with examples but the point is you're asking the wrong question.

    Apple, meet Orange.

    Only kinda. I don't support mandatory seatbelt laws either.

    Seeing as driving is a privilege that is earned, not a basic necessity of life, and is thus governed by laws to keep everyone safe (not just me), I can live with mandatory seat belt laws. Therefore, that would still be apple/orange to me.

    And yeah, junk food isn't a necessity, but neither is grilled chicken or steamed broccoli.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    Options
    queenliz99 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.

    Nailed it!!

    I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.

    A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.

    Did I say in any of this about low carb? I said "healthy". And those 2 do not go hand in hand.

    You said "binging on carbs" in a way that seemed to be used inter-changeably with "junk food." Could you explain what you meant by "binging on carbs" and how that was relevant to "healthy?"

    Maybe that wasn't the best "term" and I'm sorry if I started something. Most people relate "junk food" to "carbs", especially when trying to figure out how to eat "healthy". So they cut out cookies, baked goods, chips, candy, etc. Because those foods are "bad". Then some may even go as far as rice, pasta, tortillas, etc. But those last foods aren't "junk", they are just high in carbs and I'm sorry, but I'm so far off the "low carb" train it's not even funny. I lost 50lbs by eating less food and becoming more active, because I think a life without 1/2 the foods and drinks I love is SAD.

    So what I meant was that my meal plan was "healthy" (even though highly caloric, each item in a burrito is not classified as junk food), unless you want to tax beans, rice and tortillas too. But it was too much food for me and I got fat and now I'm pre-disposed to diabetes. Not because I sat and ate 2 packs of Oreos, 3 Reeses Fast Breaks and a bag of potato chips every day. And those foods I would assume would be part of the junk food tax (and not to go even farther, but how the heck would you draw the line on what's junk since everyone has different opinions?)

    Get my point? If not, I'm sorry, but we'll need to agree to disagree, but I didn't mean this to go in this way. I felt I was very logical.

    It isn't about agreeing to disagree, as I've not taken a position on whether carbs are or are not healthy. I have taken a position on the difficulty to define what is included as "junk food" in the junk food tax and I agree with you there. I just saw that you said you ate a food that is high carb "EVERY DAY" and then concluded that you were not "binging on carbs." It makes more sense if you meant to say that you were not "binging on junk food," an entirely different statement, because you relate junk food to carbs. That does not make my response to what you said wrong, even if it isn't what you meant.
  • Domilg23
    Domilg23 Posts: 44 Member
    Options
    it won't help
  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    Options
    I guess the question people would need to ask is what problem such a tax would be expected to resolve. Is it a funding issue? Is it just a general desire to see population at a healthier size? I think the first step is to define the problem. Consequentially, I think you will find that taxation would be highly unlikely to improve upon that problem.
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    Options
    queenliz99 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.

    Nailed it!!

    I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.

    A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.

    Did I say in any of this about low carb? I said "healthy". And those 2 do not go hand in hand.

    You said "binging on carbs" in a way that seemed to be used inter-changeably with "junk food." Could you explain what you meant by "binging on carbs" and how that was relevant to "healthy?"

    Maybe that wasn't the best "term" and I'm sorry if I started something. Most people relate "junk food" to "carbs", especially when trying to figure out how to eat "healthy". So they cut out cookies, baked goods, chips, candy, etc. Because those foods are "bad". Then some may even go as far as rice, pasta, tortillas, etc. But those last foods aren't "junk", they are just high in carbs and I'm sorry, but I'm so far off the "low carb" train it's not even funny. I lost 50lbs by eating less food and becoming more active, because I think a life without 1/2 the foods and drinks I love is SAD.

    So what I meant was that my meal plan was "healthy" (even though highly caloric, each item in a burrito is not classified as junk food), unless you want to tax beans, rice and tortillas too. But it was too much food for me and I got fat and now I'm pre-disposed to diabetes. Not because I sat and ate 2 packs of Oreos, 3 Reeses Fast Breaks and a bag of potato chips every day. And those foods I would assume would be part of the junk food tax (and not to go even farther, but how the heck would you draw the line on what's junk since everyone has different opinions?)

    Get my point? If not, I'm sorry, but we'll need to agree to disagree, but I didn't mean this to go in this way. I felt I was very logical.

    Awe, you're good. Your intent was clear.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    Options
    queenliz99 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.

    Nailed it!!

    I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.

    A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.

    Did I say in any of this about low carb? I said "healthy". And those 2 do not go hand in hand.

    You said "binging on carbs" in a way that seemed to be used inter-changeably with "junk food." Could you explain what you meant by "binging on carbs" and how that was relevant to "healthy?"

    Maybe that wasn't the best "term" and I'm sorry if I started something. Most people relate "junk food" to "carbs", especially when trying to figure out how to eat "healthy". So they cut out cookies, baked goods, chips, candy, etc. Because those foods are "bad". Then some may even go as far as rice, pasta, tortillas, etc. But those last foods aren't "junk", they are just high in carbs and I'm sorry, but I'm so far off the "low carb" train it's not even funny. I lost 50lbs by eating less food and becoming more active, because I think a life without 1/2 the foods and drinks I love is SAD.

    So what I meant was that my meal plan was "healthy" (even though highly caloric, each item in a burrito is not classified as junk food), unless you want to tax beans, rice and tortillas too. But it was too much food for me and I got fat and now I'm pre-disposed to diabetes. Not because I sat and ate 2 packs of Oreos, 3 Reeses Fast Breaks and a bag of potato chips every day. And those foods I would assume would be part of the junk food tax (and not to go even farther, but how the heck would you draw the line on what's junk since everyone has different opinions?)

    Get my point? If not, I'm sorry, but we'll need to agree to disagree, but I didn't mean this to go in this way. I felt I was very logical.

    It isn't about agreeing to disagree, as I've not taken a position on whether carbs are or are not healthy. I have taken a position on the difficulty to define what is included as "junk food" in the junk food tax and I agree with you there. I just saw that you said you ate a food that is high carb "EVERY DAY" and then concluded that you were not "binging on carbs." It makes more sense if you meant to say that you were not "binging on junk food," an entirely different statement, because you relate junk food to carbs. That does not make my response to what you said wrong, even if it isn't what you meant.

    Yes it does - you continue to willfully ignore the clear meaning of the post and the follow-up...

    Willful Ignorance: It's not just for breakfast anymore.™

    The 1,200 calorie Chipotle burrito is low carb? To each their own...