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?

1454648505170

Replies

  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    bpotts44 wrote: »
    I am normally a libertarian, but sugar is not any sort of essential nutrient and it is definitely addictive and abused which causes societal costs that we all bear. Alcohol and cigarettes are similar in that vane. I wouldn't be opposed to taxing sugar or HFCS.

    So...why exactly does society bear this cost to begin with? This is anti-libertarian.

    Society bears the cost of sugar and HFCS via government subsidies. Your taxes are paying for sugar and corn to be grown, increasing availability and artificially depressing the prices. This makes it cheap to use in food...and food companies like cheap ingredients. Society also bears the costs of the healthcare associated with sugar and HFC overconsumption...like type 2 diabetes..via higher health insurance premiums and higher Medicare/Medicaid costs.

    Avoiding the question posed.

    I asked why?

    That's a really complex thing to answer. Most farm subsidies were set up in the Depression era because people were starving, the economy had tanked and the post WWI era was one of isolationism. They currently cost around $20B/yr in taxpayer funds. Higher healthcare premiums are because everyone that a healthcare company covers is in a risk pool...the higher the prevalence of ill health, the higher the costs to pay for the medical care..these costs are then apportioned out so that the healthy are subsidizing the care of the sick. Medicare/Medicaid costs are going up and they are considered entitlements...or a sacred cow...in the budget..so the government pays whatever the cost is no matter how much it goes up. Extra funds are drawn from other taxes to cover any deficit. If it gets too much, the Gov can raise the %taken from each pay check in Medicare/Medicaid taxes. The government has the authority to do this for the general welfare of the US per article 1 of the Constitution. What gets funded or not funded is determined by the political process in Congress via the annual budget bills...which is influenced by lobbyists and constituents.

    The answer is quite simple - to acquire and increase power. The complexities are merely justifications for the acquisition of power.
  • This content has been removed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I thought of this thread when I read an article on Reason the other day, so I'm glad ol' pot-stirrer Lemur Cat brought it back. :)

    Philly heavily taxes sodas ($57 tax on a $60 bag of syrup) and hilarity (sad, ironic, predictable hilarity) ensues, at least in the first couple of months:

    http://reason.com/blog/2017/02/22/with-sales-depressed-by-soda-tax-philly

    A good friend of mine lives in Philly and has been saying that the point of the tax was revenue, not actually cutting soda consumption, so this is ironic as well as predictable, yes.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    On the other hand, I'm kind of hoping this thread morphs into one on the interstate commerce clause soon, the way it's going!
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    edited March 2017
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    On the other hand, I'm kind of hoping this thread morphs into one on the interstate commerce clause soon, the way it's going!

    It's interesting thinking of this and the recent discussion of Philly, because while I was growing up, with living quite close to the river and thus NJ (where I live now), I can remember it being quite common for people to go to the Garden State for all sorts of things like gas and booze and cigarettes because they were so much cheaper there. Philly has always taxed the daylights out of everything.

    If I'm not mistaken, people on the other end of the city were just as likely to go to Delaware for some things too.

    This once again points to the issue being that those most hurt by taxes on goods are those stuck in the inner city without the means to travel to avoid them.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    On the other hand, I'm kind of hoping this thread morphs into one on the interstate commerce clause soon, the way it's going!

    It's interesting thinking of this and the recent discussion of Philly, because while I was growing up, with living quite close to the river and thus NJ (where I live now), I can remember it being quite common for people to go to the Garden State for all sorts of things like gas and booze and cigarettes because they were so much cheaper there. Philly has always taxed the daylights out of everything.

    If I'm not mistaken, people on the other end of the city were just as likely to go to Delaware for some things too.

    This once again points to the issue being that those most hurt by taxes on goods are those stuck in the inner city without the means to travel to avoid them.

    Yeap. The poor may get some benefit from the way income taxes work, but they are hit far harder, as a percentage of their income, by all of the ridiculous taxes put in place in attempts to inflict social engineering.
  • LilacLion
    LilacLion Posts: 579 Member
    I wish they'd tax processed food, all meat and dairy. It would fund Medicare/aid from sales of the things that cause most of the sickness. If the Big Packaged Food Corporations, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, The Sugar Association, The Egg Board, Dairy Business Association and all the rest want to act like the Tobacco Companies then they most certainly should be taxed like them.
  • nickiphillips1
    nickiphillips1 Posts: 114 Member
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    edited March 2017
    LilacLion wrote: »
    I wish they'd tax processed food, all meat and dairy. It would fund Medicare/aid from sales of the things that cause most of the sickness. If the Big Packaged Food Corporations, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, The Sugar Association, The Egg Board, Dairy Business Association and all the rest want to act like the Tobacco Companies then they most certainly should be taxed like them.

    Meat, dairy, and sugar don't cause anything negative, assuming a healthy body (no lactose intolerance, diabetes, etc.). Overconsumption of all foods is causing the ailments you are likely thinking of.

    ETA: I lost over 100 lbs., by my lowest weight, and improved all of my health markers, eating all of the things I just mentioned. I'm also regaining weight slowly eating them, because I looked like an X-Files alien at 150, and decided that I needed to strap on some muscle.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited March 2017
    LilacLion wrote: »
    I wish they'd tax processed food, all meat and dairy. It would fund Medicare/aid from sales of the things that cause most of the sickness. If the Big Packaged Food Corporations, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, The Sugar Association, The Egg Board, Dairy Business Association and all the rest want to act like the Tobacco Companies then they most certainly should be taxed like them.

    How is "processed food" defined in that scenario, and how much is the tax.

    That raises food prices a lot, though (and really just cutting off the subsidies would seem to be a better option). Raising food prices hurts the less well off, and raising food prices on shelf-stable things (like canned items, whatever else could be included in processed -- when I was young and didn't know how to cook I ate a lot of dried rice and beans, packaged, that I added veg to) certainly does even more.

    Raising the cost of lean meat and eggs probably doesn't help the weight problem in the US, either.
  • This content has been removed.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.
    So tax sugar but not fruit????
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.

    Healthy food (including fruit and veg if you buy wisely) isn't that expensive.

    On the other hand, my local supermarkets sell an insane amount of hugely marked up pre cut fruit and veg. That is expensive, IMO.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    LilacLion wrote: »
    I wish they'd tax processed food, all meat and dairy. It would fund Medicare/aid from sales of the things that cause most of the sickness. If the Big Packaged Food Corporations, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, The Sugar Association, The Egg Board, Dairy Business Association and all the rest want to act like the Tobacco Companies then they most certainly should be taxed like them.

    Hoping not serious
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Enough with the taxes already. People should exercise some self control and just don't eat it. It's that simple.

    I would tend to agree, but with 70% of the US population obese or overweight, how's that working out?

    that is their choice and is called free will. If someone wants to gorge themselves to the point of obesity then they are free to do so. Government has no right to be regulating personal decisions on food choice.

    If we were living in the old west where when someone did something stupid, destroying their health, they just crawled back behind the barn to die and the buzzards and coyotes took care of the carcass, I'd be in full agreement with you.

    Now when someone exercises their free will by gorging themselves on Coke, Ding Dongs, candy bars doughnuts, or whatever, society has to pay to fix the problem via higher taxes, higher prices on good and services, etc.

    That is a false argument. Society pays for those things because the government has determined that it has the authority to take from one person and provide to another, which if you read the Constitution the government has no authority to take my wealth and give it to someone else to subsidize their poor choices.

    Regardless of your interpretation of the Constitution we have taxes (taking your money) paying for obesity related poor choices (subsidies) in the form of Medicaid, Medicare, paid health insurance for government employees/military, etc.

    Which of these things has been declared unconstitutional?.

    I would suggest starting with the tenth amendment and working back from there. Taxes were originally to provide for the common defense, not to provide well fare, medicare, medicaid, etc, etc..

    Didn't answer the question. Which one of the programs mentioned have been eliminated due to the laws establishing them being declared unconstitutional?

    None but it does not make them unconstitutional..which is why I referred you to the tenth amendment.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    bpotts44 wrote: »
    I am normally a libertarian, but sugar is not any sort of essential nutrient and it is definitely addictive and abused which causes societal costs that we all bear. Alcohol and cigarettes are similar in that vane. I wouldn't be opposed to taxing sugar or HFCS.

    So...why exactly does society bear this cost to begin with? This is anti-libertarian.

    Society bears the cost of sugar and HFCS via government subsidies. Your taxes are paying for sugar and corn to be grown, increasing availability and artificially depressing the prices. This makes it cheap to use in food...and food companies like cheap ingredients. Society also bears the costs of the healthcare associated with sugar and HFC overconsumption...like type 2 diabetes..via higher health insurance premiums and higher Medicare/Medicaid costs.

    Avoiding the question posed.

    I asked why?

    That's a really complex thing to answer. Most farm subsidies were set up in the Depression era because people were starving, the economy had tanked and the post WWI era was one of isolationism. They currently cost around $20B/yr in taxpayer funds. Higher healthcare premiums are because everyone that a healthcare company covers is in a risk pool...the higher the prevalence of ill health, the higher the costs to pay for the medical care..these costs are then apportioned out so that the healthy are subsidising the care of the sick. Medicare/Medicaid costs are going up and they are considered entitlements...or a sacred cow...in the budget..so the government pays whatever the cost is no matter how much it goes up. Extra funds are drawn from other taxes to cover any deficit. If it gets too much, the Gov can raise the %taken from each pay check in Medicare/Medicaid taxes. The government has the authority to do this for the general welfare of the US per article 1 of the Constitution. What gets funded or not funded is determined by the political process in Congress via the annual budget bills...which is influenced by lobbyists and constituents.

    You keep using that term "general welfare clause " but you don't seem to understand what it means.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    edited March 2017
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.

    Healthy food (including fruit and veg if you buy wisely) isn't that expensive.

    On the other hand, my local supermarkets sell an insane amount of hugely marked up pre cut fruit and veg. That is expensive, IMO.

    one of the biggest rip offs in the entire store

    Not gonna lie, I buy precooked and peeled hardboiled eggs. The markup is huge, but I hate peeling eggs so much that I couldn't care less. The ones I buy in the carton are used for cooking only, where it's crack, pour, toss.
  • TonyB0588
    TonyB0588 Posts: 9,520 Member
    This type of taxation has been tried in various places, with doubtful levels of success.
  • This content has been removed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.

    Healthy food (including fruit and veg if you buy wisely) isn't that expensive.

    On the other hand, my local supermarkets sell an insane amount of hugely marked up pre cut fruit and veg. That is expensive, IMO.

    one of the biggest rip offs in the entire store

    Not gonna lie, I buy precooked and peeled hardboiled eggs. The markup is huge, but I hate peeling eggs so much that I couldn't care less. The ones I buy in the carton are used for cooking only, where it's crack, pour, toss.

    I am with you on peeling eggs. My solution is just that I almost never eat them hard-boiled.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    I guess I can't blame newcomers to this thread for not going back and reading 40 some pages of comments, and to be fair, there was a lot of crazy drivel in the middle that I wish I could forget...
  • This content has been removed.
  • BeChill73
    BeChill73 Posts: 75 Member
    Here in Australia, fresh produce and wholefoods do not attract tax, whereas processed foods (as well as other goods and services) have a 10% tax on them.

    Personal responsibility is one thing, but with poor food choices being so cheap, easy and available you get lower socioeconomic families feeding their kids non nutritious foods because its what they can afford (in both time, effort and money). We already have a mandated 30mins of physical activity per day in primary school (ages 4 - 12ish) but I'd like to see more cooking classes in all years of schooling, as well as free or cheap (govt funded) cooking classes for beneficiaries, so that throwing together a cheap healthy meal or lunchbox becomes second nature and treat foods go back into the realm of "sometimes" foods.
  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.

    Healthy food (including fruit and veg if you buy wisely) isn't that expensive.

    On the other hand, my local supermarkets sell an insane amount of hugely marked up pre cut fruit and veg. That is expensive, IMO.

    one of the biggest rip offs in the entire store

    Not gonna lie, I buy precooked and peeled hardboiled eggs. The markup is huge, but I hate peeling eggs so much that I couldn't care less. The ones I buy in the carton are used for cooking only, where it's crack, pour, toss.

    lol, I don't cook hard boiled eggs because I hate to peel them.

    Been planning to try the trick in the egg thread, where you can peel several in just a few seconds, the shell comes off like it was unzipped.
    [video]https://youtu.be/FkWISKfgqZ0[/video]
  • TonyB0588
    TonyB0588 Posts: 9,520 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I think we tax food with sugar, corn syrup, and other types of "bad" ingredients added. Then not tax the vegetables, fruit, and other foods that don't have those ingredients added.
    People complain that healthy food is too expensive.

    Healthy food (including fruit and veg if you buy wisely) isn't that expensive.

    On the other hand, my local supermarkets sell an insane amount of hugely marked up pre cut fruit and veg. That is expensive, IMO.

    one of the biggest rip offs in the entire store

    Not gonna lie, I buy precooked and peeled hardboiled eggs. The markup is huge, but I hate peeling eggs so much that I couldn't care less. The ones I buy in the carton are used for cooking only, where it's crack, pour, toss.

    that's less egregious as hard boiled eggs are multiple steps and like a half hour procedure in total

    Er, hard boiled eggs?? The title of this thread is "Should junk food be taxed?"
  • This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.