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
-
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.0 -
So tax sugar but not fruit????nickiphillips1 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.
1 -
nickiphillips1 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.0 -
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 serious1 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Lone_wolf46 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.1 -
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.2 -
zachbonner_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nickiphillips1 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.2 -
This type of taxation has been tried in various places, with doubtful levels of success.0
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »zachbonner_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nickiphillips1 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.0 -
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...
4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »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...
I found eating a Pop Tart helped me to forget about most of this thread.9 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 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.
sugar has never been found to be an addictive substance, never.
That's not true. Sugar has been found to be highly addictive in multiple studies. In brain scans it was shown to be as addictive as cocaine.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/sugar-addiction-like-drug-abuse-study-reveals/
FFS, I really wish this misinterpretation would die. All that happened was that the same pleasure centers lit up between the two.
The difference is that after cocaine use, the centers dim out heavily, and repeated increased dosages are required to have the same effect, and eventually even gain normalcy. This is addiction/dependency.
This doesn't happen with sugar. Everything returns to baseline, and that's it. This is not addiction/dependency.
When was the last time you saw someone shoveling in spoonfuls of sugar? My guess is never. Handfuls of M&Ms though? Probably often.
I'm afraid that multiple scientists disagree with you, the brain does not return to baseline, it reduces dopamine receptors which mean more sugar is needed to get same "high" this kicks off cravings, etc etc just like with drugs. Please see abstract to study I posted.
The full text is behind a paywall, and even the abstract seems to have some problems.
It states sugar-laden foods, not specifically sugar. As we all know, foods end up being greater or less than the sum of their parts, based upon several factors, including but not limited to: taste, smell, mouth feel, nutritional response, etc.
If you have access to the full text, I'd appreciate you sending it to me. I would be interested to see which foodstuffs were used for these things.
I have access, it's an opinion piece which summaries studies to date. Conclusion: more research is needed.5 -
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.1 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »zachbonner_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nickiphillips1 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] 0 -
zachbonner_ wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »zachbonner_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nickiphillips1 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?"0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions