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
-
You know i was really torn on this subject. I think it's great that we live in a free country and we should be allowed to make our own choices. However, obesity is an epidemic in this country and is leading people to develop serious health conditions and ultimately death because of those conditions. Parents are overweight, and not teaching their children healthy eating habits/lifestyle which leads to obesity in children where the cycle continues.
Essentially, I think that proves that the majority of Americans (who become overweight) can't make their own choices. And I understand that many people have health issues and genetics that cause them to gain weight. However, it's not as though a lot of those health complications are brand-new. However obesity is a fairly new epidemic and I don't think that fact can be ignored.
Simply raising the tax cannot completely stop obesity, there is a lot of education and other societal issues that are causing obesity. But I do think making junk food something a little less affordable will force the issue a little bit.
Yes the price of produce and groceries have gone up. But if you buy seasonally and plan your meals smartly it actually in the long run is a lot less expensive than just buying a bunch of processed food and eating out a lot.
(Edited for grammar)0 -
Yes. The tax money should be allocated to societal expenses related to obesity, like higher health care costs. Isn't that what the tax on cigarettes is for?
that never happens...
politicians use it to fund their own programs...
never cease to be amazed at how much blind faith people put in government.2 -
ButterballBookworm wrote: »What if we just taxed sugar content, sodium content, etc. Anything deemed "too high" in either regard gets taxed. I'm sure health scientists can figure out what is a good versus bad minimum number for sugar and sodium.
how about we don't, because free will and all that fun stuff...0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.3 -
Yes. The tax money should be allocated to societal expenses related to obesity, like higher health care costs. Isn't that what the tax on cigarettes is for?
that never happens...
politicians use it to fund their own programs...
never cease to be amazed at how much blind faith people put in government.
I am in complete agreement.
Being from Illinois I have seen countless tax increases made over the years that would "fix" every issue. Gambling was legalized and the taxation was allegedly earmarked for education which would resolve the pension deficit and fully fund state education for 50 years. The money was never allocated and 30 years later Illinois is currently over 200 Billion in debt. I finally had enough and voted with my feet - moving my family and business to greener pastures...literally.
The issue is complete lack of accountability of government when it attempts to play roles it wasn't meant for.
I don't understand how people can be so blind and somehow believe that "TAX IT!" will ever solve anything.5 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
Just to play devils advocate here....
Americans keep becoming larger and more unhealthy, leading them to develop serious health problems. Then that causes them to not teach good habits to their children, Who end up getting heart conditions, diabetes, etc...
Doesn't that prove that over the past several decades Americans have not been able to take personal responsibility? Eating junk food have no consequences and was just frowned upon, that would be one thing. But ultimately eating a terrible diet does lead to serious health problems and is leaving children to develop what used to just be adult problems like diabetes and heart conditions. Isn't it in a way the governments job to help our society become healthier? I get the personal responsibility aspect, but Americans are becoming more obese every year and I feel like that proves a lot of them have no personal responsibility in a way. No there are certainly many other factors that are contributing to obesity that taxing would not help or change at all. But making it harder to gain access to maybe a little bit of a start.
Not trying to be rude at all, just curious what your take on that is?0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
Just to play devils advocate here....
Americans keep becoming larger and more unhealthy, leading them to develop serious health problems. Then that causes them to not teach good habits to their children, Who end up getting heart conditions, diabetes, etc...
Doesn't that prove that over the past several decades Americans have not been able to take personal responsibility? Eating junk food have no consequences and was just frowned upon, that would be one thing. But ultimately eating a terrible diet does lead to serious health problems and is leaving children to develop what used to just be adult problems like diabetes and heart conditions. Isn't it in a way the governments job to help our society become healthier? I get the personal responsibility aspect, but Americans are becoming more obese every year and I feel like that proves a lot of them have no personal responsibility in a way. No there are certainly many other factors that are contributing to obesity that taxing would not help or change at all. But making it harder to gain access to maybe a little bit of a start.
Not trying to be rude at all, just curious what your take on that is?
Not rude at all, the only problem is that 'junk' food is not the reason that people are obese - eating too many calories is the reason that people are obese. You can (and I did) get just as fat eating healthy and wholesome food as existing entirely on 'junk' food.
And still, 57 pages into this discussion, nobody can actually define 'junk' food so wth would you tax?2 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
Well, my answer has been literally to roll up my sleeves and take direct action:
--I have helped lead the creation of two highly productive community gardens, both in food deserts
--I have put in many scores of hours of work in order to deliver hundreds of pounds of beautiful, organic fresh produce to our food banks
--Every year I start hundreds of vegetable seedlings and give them away in the community for free
--I am currently teaching a formal "how to start gardening" class at an inner city site, in addition to the informal training of children that show up wanting to help me garden, and developing a phalanx of volunteers to expand the impact we have in the community
--I am currently getting the ball rolling on an 8-week "cooking with fresh veg" course in the same inner city neighborhood as our garden, so recipients know what to do with all the kale and eggplants they are getting
--Developing curriculum and teaching elementary aged kids about gardening as well as ensuring they have access to reasonably priced seeds, etc.
This is in addition to a demanding full-time professional job, raising two children, serving on arts-related boards, and trying to find time to work in my own garden and fit in workouts, hikes and bike rides.
As you can tell, I really hate trying to control people with nonsensical taxation that lines politicians' pockets, and I really enjoy helping people become more healthy, wily, feral and self-sufficient while sticking it to The Man:
8 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
Just to play devils advocate here....
Americans keep becoming larger and more unhealthy, leading them to develop serious health problems. Then that causes them to not teach good habits to their children, Who end up getting heart conditions, diabetes, etc...
Doesn't that prove that over the past several decades Americans have not been able to take personal responsibility? Eating junk food have no consequences and was just frowned upon, that would be one thing. But ultimately eating a terrible diet does lead to serious health problems and is leaving children to develop what used to just be adult problems like diabetes and heart conditions. Isn't it in a way the governments job to help our society become healthier? I get the personal responsibility aspect, but Americans are becoming more obese every year and I feel like that proves a lot of them have no personal responsibility in a way. No there are certainly many other factors that are contributing to obesity that taxing would not help or change at all. But making it harder to gain access to maybe a little bit of a start.
Not trying to be rude at all, just curious what your take on that is?
Not who you were talking to, but junk food is usually inexpensive right? So let's say there's a 10% tax on "junk food". That $1.19 candy bar is now $1.30. How many people will stop buying it? A 12 pack of soda is $4.99, now it's $5.49 so each can went up $0.04. How many people will stop buying it? When I go to Wendy's my lunch is usually around $8.00, now it will be $8.80. Americans are just as bad at budgeting their money as they are at budgeting their calories. Only the very poorest people would be in a position where they might buy less, that's it.
Add to that that plenty of people get fat eating whole food, or some combo of whole/processed/junk food.
Add to that the manufacturers will find ways to formulate/package products around whatever qualifies something as "junk food". Or just increase prices on foods they make that aren't "junk food" to even the playing field.
It would be totally ineffective and would just give the government another revenue source to waste and cause the average person's dollar to not go quite as far.
The obesity crisis needs to be addressed, but it's the healthcare field, communities, and individuals that will need to do it. Eating is something personal and emotional, I don't think it can be solved through people's wallets.0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
Just to play devils advocate here....
Americans keep becoming larger and more unhealthy, leading them to develop serious health problems. Then that causes them to not teach good habits to their children, Who end up getting heart conditions, diabetes, etc...
Doesn't that prove that over the past several decades Americans have not been able to take personal responsibility? Eating junk food have no consequences and was just frowned upon, that would be one thing. But ultimately eating a terrible diet does lead to serious health problems and is leaving children to develop what used to just be adult problems like diabetes and heart conditions. Isn't it in a way the governments job to help our society become healthier? I get the personal responsibility aspect, but Americans are becoming more obese every year and I feel like that proves a lot of them have no personal responsibility in a way. No there are certainly many other factors that are contributing to obesity that taxing would not help or change at all. But making it harder to gain access to maybe a little bit of a start.
Not trying to be rude at all, just curious what your take on that is?
my take on that is if someone wants to sit on the couch and eat ding dongs all day then that is their personal decision. However, don't expect me, or anyone else, so subsidize someone else's bad decisions.
If you tax "junk food" to make it harder to get all you will do is create a black market for it where people go to find what they want. Just look at illegal drugs, that is supposed to make them harder to get but any kid in high school knows where to go get a bag of weed; so making drugs hard to get get by making them illegal has totally back-fired...
I am all for some kind of basic education about nutrition, but I don't want the government using the tax code to tell me what is good or bad, or using it to make me subsidize someone else's bad decisions..3 -
French_Peasant wrote: »comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
Well, my answer has been literally to roll up my sleeves and take direct action:
--I have helped lead the creation of two highly productive community gardens, both in food deserts
--I have put in many scores of hours of work in order to deliver hundreds of pounds of beautiful, organic fresh produce to our food banks
--Every year I start hundreds of vegetable seedlings and give them away in the community for free
--I am currently teaching a formal "how to start gardening" class at an inner city site, in addition to the informal training of children that show up wanting to help me garden, and developing a phalanx of volunteers to expand the impact we have in the community
--I am currently getting the ball rolling on an 8-week "cooking with fresh veg" course in the same inner city neighborhood as our garden, so recipients know what to do with all the kale and eggplants they are getting
--Developing curriculum and teaching elementary aged kids about gardening as well as ensuring they have access to reasonably priced seeds, etc.
This is in addition to a demanding full-time professional job, raising two children, serving on arts-related boards, and trying to find time to work in my own garden and fit in workouts, hikes and bike rides.
As you can tell, I really hate trying to control people with nonsensical taxation that lines politicians' pockets, and I really enjoy helping people become more healthy, wily, feral and self-sufficient while sticking it to The Man:
I'm impressed and feel very humble. Power to you!!!0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
I don't believe that many people actually have individual freedom- there are too many socio-economic and political variables. But I respect your point of view and anyway that's a whole different debate0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
I don't believe that many people actually have individual freedom- there are too many socio-economic and political variables. But I respect your point of view and anyway that's a whole different debate
Not to derail further, but please start a thread focusing on this. I suspect we will discover a major divide in a true root cause of not only obesity, but practically every issue.2 -
French_Peasant wrote: »comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
Well, my answer has been literally to roll up my sleeves and take direct action:
--I have helped lead the creation of two highly productive community gardens, both in food deserts
--I have put in many scores of hours of work in order to deliver hundreds of pounds of beautiful, organic fresh produce to our food banks
--Every year I start hundreds of vegetable seedlings and give them away in the community for free
--I am currently teaching a formal "how to start gardening" class at an inner city site, in addition to the informal training of children that show up wanting to help me garden, and developing a phalanx of volunteers to expand the impact we have in the community
--I am currently getting the ball rolling on an 8-week "cooking with fresh veg" course in the same inner city neighborhood as our garden, so recipients know what to do with all the kale and eggplants they are getting
--Developing curriculum and teaching elementary aged kids about gardening as well as ensuring they have access to reasonably priced seeds, etc.
This is in addition to a demanding full-time professional job, raising two children, serving on arts-related boards, and trying to find time to work in my own garden and fit in workouts, hikes and bike rides.
As you can tell, I really hate trying to control people with nonsensical taxation that lines politicians' pockets, and I really enjoy helping people become more healthy, wily, feral and self-sufficient while sticking it to The Man:
This ladies and gentlemen!
All it takes - one person to stand up and do something. The greatest evil that besets mankind is inaction.2 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
Well, my answer has been literally to roll up my sleeves and take direct action:
--I have helped lead the creation of two highly productive community gardens, both in food deserts
--I have put in many scores of hours of work in order to deliver hundreds of pounds of beautiful, organic fresh produce to our food banks
--Every year I start hundreds of vegetable seedlings and give them away in the community for free
--I am currently teaching a formal "how to start gardening" class at an inner city site, in addition to the informal training of children that show up wanting to help me garden, and developing a phalanx of volunteers to expand the impact we have in the community
--I am currently getting the ball rolling on an 8-week "cooking with fresh veg" course in the same inner city neighborhood as our garden, so recipients know what to do with all the kale and eggplants they are getting
--Developing curriculum and teaching elementary aged kids about gardening as well as ensuring they have access to reasonably priced seeds, etc.
This is in addition to a demanding full-time professional job, raising two children, serving on arts-related boards, and trying to find time to work in my own garden and fit in workouts, hikes and bike rides.
As you can tell, I really hate trying to control people with nonsensical taxation that lines politicians' pockets, and I really enjoy helping people become more healthy, wily, feral and self-sufficient while sticking it to The Man:
I'm impressed and feel very humble. Power to you!!!
Well...it doesn't all happen at once, so don't be too impressed.
It progresses a little at a time and builds on previous work, and we have a lot of people in the city that are working toward the same goals and doing really wonderful things from a grass-roots perspective. And you see and hear a lot of things that will just make you heartsick, but it also has so much potential, the more that you have passionate people involved. I think it's the hands-on teaching and passion and tapping into that spirit of independence and pride that will help change lives, rather than mandates coming from above, and government working at cross-purposes (taxing AND subsidizing AND paying health care bills AND buying the food).
0 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
Just to play devils advocate here....
Americans keep becoming larger and more unhealthy, leading them to develop serious health problems. Then that causes them to not teach good habits to their children, Who end up getting heart conditions, diabetes, etc...
Doesn't that prove that over the past several decades Americans have not been able to take personal responsibility? Eating junk food have no consequences and was just frowned upon, that would be one thing. But ultimately eating a terrible diet does lead to serious health problems and is leaving children to develop what used to just be adult problems like diabetes and heart conditions. Isn't it in a way the governments job to help our society become healthier? I get the personal responsibility aspect, but Americans are becoming more obese every year and I feel like that proves a lot of them have no personal responsibility in a way. No there are certainly many other factors that are contributing to obesity that taxing would not help or change at all. But making it harder to gain access to maybe a little bit of a start.
Not trying to be rude at all, just curious what your take on that is?
Not rude at all, the only problem is that 'junk' food is not the reason that people are obese - eating too many calories is the reason that people are obese. You can (and I did) get just as fat eating healthy and wholesome food as existing entirely on 'junk' food.
And still, 57 pages into this discussion, nobody can actually define 'junk' food so wth would you tax?
I would say junk food is not the only problem that people are obese as I stated, but I don't think Society should deny that part of the reason people are overweight is because of junk food. I actually recently just commented on the thread where I said basically the same thing you did, that portion control is probably the biggest reason people are overweight. You can be choosing all the right foods but if you're going back for third or fourth servings you're still going to be overweight.
I have to be honest I didn't read all 57 pages of this thread so I can't speak to what's been shared or not shared and I'm not going to go back and read it. I think they would have to come up with something standardize to categorize junk food, as in looking that the amount of grams of sugar or fat in comparison to the nutritional content. I don't know if they've done this anywhere else but I believe in schools now they don't allow candy in the candy machines, food has to meet certain set guidelines to be allowed in the machines and they would probably have to do something like that. I don't know that semantics of that because when I was in high school they still allowed candy in school, so I'm just going off of what I've heard and read.
There are many many reasons that people are obese that can't be solved with a tax, which I believe I said. However there has to be a starting point and maybe a tax is something, and maybe it's not. All I know is that when I was in elementary school, middle school, and even high school there really weren't that many overweight classmates. Of course there were some, but I also grew up in one of the most healthy states in the US. And I don't think we can deny that there is an obesity problem in the United States and it's causing people to develop serious health conditions and kids are developing what used to be adult health conditions. Forget the vanity aspect, I think this is all about health and while it is none of my business what other people eat and what other people do, I think our society needs an overhaul when it comes to health because we're not doing that great.1 -
Australia kind of has a tax on "junk" food.
We have a 10% Goods & Services Tax (GST) which applies to, well... goods and services. However, some food items are exempt. In relation to food:
GST-free food
The following foods are GST-free:- bread and bread rolls without a sweet coating (such as icing) or filling – a glaze is not considered a sweet coating
- cooking ingredients, such as flour, sugar, pre-mixes and cake mixes
- fats and oils for cooking
- unflavoured milk, cream, cheese and eggs
- spices, sauces and condiments
- bottled drinking water
- fruit or vegetable juice (of at least 90% by volume of juice of fruit or vegetables)
- tea and coffee (unless ready-to-drink)
- baby food and infant formula
- all meats for human consumption (except prepared meals or savoury snacks)
- fruit, vegetables, fish and soup (fresh, frozen, dried, canned or packaged)
- spreads for bread (such as honey, jam and peanut butter)
- breakfast cereals.
The following foods are taxable:- bakery products, such as cakes, pastries, pies, sausage rolls (but not including bread and bread rolls)
- biscuits, crispbreads, crackers, cookies, pretzels, cones and wafers
- savoury snacks, confectionery, ice-cream and similar products (see Savoury snacks)
- carbonated and flavoured beverages (including flavoured milk, flavoured water and sports drinks) unless at least 90% by volume fruit or vegetable juice
- all food and beverages sold in restaurants or for consumption on the premises (see Premises)
- hot food (takeaway)
- food marketed as prepared meals and some prepared food, including platters (see Platters and similar arrangements of food)
- any food not for human consumption
- pet food or any food labelled or specified for animals.
I can tell you now, it's done squat for the obesity problem in Australia. It doesn't stop supermarkets having sales of candy bars for 2 for $1, or multipacks of ice creams for $3, it doesn't stop McDonalds advertising 20 packs of nuggets as a snack...
Even with it taxed, people would pay it anyway, and the stores would still put it on sale and absorb the costs elsewhere. Many Australians wouldn't even know that "junk" food is taxed here. If they want it, they buy it.5 -
Gardening. WTF? Like everybody has a garden. How many Rebeccas of Sunnybrook Farm can there really be? Nevermind. I better bow out of this gentrified discussion before I get my hand slapped.
LOL! Dude, I can assure you, I am a 100% gen-yoo-wine Indiana Redneck born and bred! I am cracking up because I can't decide which part is the most gentrified...the part where I shovel horse crap, get covered with it, and haul it in bins in the back of my SUV, or the part where my daydreams consist of finding a really old, crappy, rusted 1970s Chevy truck so as to haul even more crap. Some days I get extra fancy and serve up some greens fried in bacon grease and cooked with a ham hock!
9 -
comptonelizabeth wrote: »comptonelizabeth wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »how about making healthy food cheaper instead?
So more subsidies to out-subsidize the crap that is currently being subsidized and causing the problems? Seems like a legit approach. Or maybe just pull a Venezuela, force the farmers to take a massive economic hit, and send them to jail over cauliflower and pear pricing? Explain to me the economics of this idea, and please back up your suggestions with a working knowledge of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
As has been illustrated repeatedly on this thread, that the more the petty bureaucrats and diktocrats mess with things, the more the overall market becomes screwed up, and the more unintended consequences are reaped.
So what's your answer,then?
the answer is that the governemnt has zero business/authority in being in the food business.
it is called personal responsibility and individual freedom, use it.
I don't believe that many people actually have individual freedom- there are too many socio-economic and political variables. But I respect your point of view and anyway that's a whole different debate
Not to derail further, but please start a thread focusing on this. I suspect we will discover a major divide in a true root cause of not only obesity, but practically every issue.
That's going to need a braver person than me
1 -
French_Peasant wrote: »Gardening. WTF? Like everybody has a garden. How many Rebeccas of Sunnybrook Farm can there really be? Nevermind. I better bow out of this gentrified discussion before I get my hand slapped.
LOL! Dude, I can assure you, I am a 100% gen-yoo-wine Indiana Redneck born and bred! I am cracking up because I can't decide which part is the most gentrified...the part where I shovel horse crap, get covered with it, and haul it in bins in the back of my SUV, or the part where my daydreams consist of finding a really old, crappy, rusted 1970s Chevy truck so as to haul even more crap. Some days I get extra fancy and serve up some greens fried in bacon grease and cooked with a ham hock!
Made me laugh, too. I grew up very poor. My parents grew up very poor, too. Nearly everyone I knew growing up was poor. And we all had gardens, in fact, they were considered pretty essential to making ends meet, and dramatically improved our food variety.
If you didn't have a yard, you rented a plot (you can still do this). If you had a yard, you staked out a sizeable portion. Even the least ambitious apartment-dwellers would generally keep several pots of herbs and tomatoes on their porch or balcony. Gentrified? Not hardly. These were not your pretty rose-gardens, they were hard-working plots of land where corn, peas, and squash shared space with strawberries, tomatoes, and onions; and harvest season meant hours of canning and freezing and dehydrating so that you could enjoy the bounty all winter. Generally hot, hard work, and about as far from bourgeoisie as you can get.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K 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
- 395 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 957 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions