Junk food tax idea gaining acceptance

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by milesp
I would settle for warning labels.

And let me guess, you want laws to make sure that happens.

What should be the penalty for companies that refuse to comply with this UNamerican law? A fine, jail-time?

How about the repeat 'offenders' who refuse to place warning labels on there products yet continue to sell them - should they be imprisoned?

*Or you could just hand them an unreasonable and extremely large fine... then when they cannot pay it, you throw them in jail. Like in the Soviet Union.

It's illegal to sell poisonous cigarettes and alcohol to children right?

I'm 23 and I heard a 19 year old girl tell me that PIZZA HUT actually catered the pizza in their cafeteria at lunch time EVERY DAY.

The line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why do you think everyone is so friggin' fat in this country? Personally, I don't think it's a lack of self control. I think it's a lack of information.

Here's the Today Show featuring a "dietitian" telling people to eat fast food!

www.liveleak.com...

And, I # YOU NOT, an article from Time titled, "Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin"

www.time.com...

Wake up people!


[edit on 24-8-2009 by milesp]

[edit on 24-8-2009 by milesp]

Why not?

Tax something that causes harm to people. Cuts down on the fat people in America, and thus less healthcare issues, which benefits themselves, their family, and other taxpayers.

Furthermore, I think the RICHER will be eating fast food. The poorer would be eating rice, potatoes, bread, normal stuff. Only rich people with too much money to spend will stock up on CUPBOARDS full of chips, and eat them while watching DVDs every day of the week.

I don't see what's the issue here.

Originally posted by milesp
It's illegal to sell poisonous cigarettes and alcohol to children right?

I'm 23 and I heard a 19 year old girl tell me that PIZZA HUT actually catered the pizza in their cafeteria at lunch time EVERY DAY.

The line needs to be drawn somewhere. Why do you think everyone is so friggin' fat in this country? Personally, I don't think it's a lack of self control. I think it's a lack of information.

Here's the Today Show featuring a "dietitian" telling people to eat fast food!

www.liveleak.com...

And, I # YOU NOT, an article from Time titled, "Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin"

www.time.com...

Wake up people!


[edit on 24-8-2009 by milesp]

[edit on 24-8-2009 by milesp]

I agree with you. Moderating your diet is the BEST way to remain slim and healthy. Exercise helps to keep you active and not on your butt, which will lead you to eat chips and unbelievable amounts of cookies. Much exercise will also help to work off calories (not fats, take note). Taxes on such un-nutritious food would help to make everyone healthier and readier for the future.

Isn't it "dietician", btw? I think it's an ACTUAL occupation.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by KarlG]

Originally posted by KarlG

Furthermore, I think the RICHER will be eating fast food. The poorer would be eating rice, potatoes, bread, normal stuff

Going from the first world's amazingly diverse diet to the third world staples - and you want laws to make it happen.

Pathetic.

reply to post by KarlG

Furthermore, I think the RICHER will be eating fast food. The poorer would be eating rice, potatoes, bread, normal stuff. Only rich people with too much money to spend will stock up on CUPBOARDS full of chips, and eat them while watching DVDs every day of the week.

Right on man. I don't know where these stupid poor people think that they have the right to the pursuit of happiness. We should tax everything to the point where there is no longer any blurring of the lines at all. We can finally get back to the good old days of peasants and lords. The filthy peasants will then know their place.

Originally posted by KarlG

I agree with you. Moderating your diet is the BEST way to remain slim and healthy.

There is a big difference between moderating your diet and having your diet moderated.

One implies freedom and choice - the other is orwellian totalitarianism that dictates which foods you may eat and how much and which uses force and the threat of force to manipulate you into 'moderating' your diet.

Anyone who supports this tax is unamerican - they certainly don't give a damn about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that much is obvious.

But most people who support this tax don't actually, they pretend that they do because they cannot deal with the reality of the situation. So they lie to themselves and pretend to agree with the policies and support the government as if they were on some winning team (when in actuality they are engaging in a public rationalization process which is enabling those who seek the destruction of our Republic and which encourages the removal of what few freedoms we have left).

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Exuberant1]

JD140 had it bang on.Make healthy foods cheaper and more accessible to low income families.I still think more people need to be educated on what constitutes as healthy food...as alot of people don't have a clue.After that though people can eat what the hell they like,but it's always a good thing when people have the information available to them so they can weigh the pros and cons.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by KarlG

Furthermore, I think the RICHER will be eating fast food. The poorer would be eating rice, potatoes, bread, normal stuff

Going from the first world's amazingly diverse diet to the third world staples - and you want laws to make it happen.

Pathetic.

Third world staples?!

Third world? I'm sorry, i eat baked potatoes, and buttered crab and rice, and bread every morning. You think yourself so high and mighty that you cannot eat good carb-providing food but you have to eat potato chips three meals a day?

We're talking about JUNK food here. i.e. hamburgers, chips, fries, crap. We're not talking meatloaf, crab rangoon, sauerkraut-and-hot-dog, chinese, japanese sushi, etc. THAT is the diversity that I AM accepting and eating too.

What I'm saying is that the poor WILL be eating these staples... it is TRUTH. Where can they afford sushi when they can't even pay off the mortgages? Thus the burden of tax will fall on rich people who have paid off their bills fully and can still eat a ton of sugared donuts, coke, etc. EVERY DAY.

I am NOT saying you should eat third world staples, I'm saying you can STILL eat the diverse food you want... just NOT junk food. Is that so wrong? Are you of a healthy BMI? Or are you unhealthy and ridden with illnesses/potential diseases?

Now who's pathetic?

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by KarlG

I agree with you. Moderating your diet is the BEST way to remain slim and healthy.

There is a big difference between moderating your diet and having your diet moderated.

One implies freedom and choice - the other is orwellian totalitarianism that dictates which foods you may eat and how much and which uses force and the threat of force to manipulate you into 'moderating' your diet.

Anyone who supports this tax is unamerican - they certainly don't give a damn about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that much is obvious.

But most people who support this tax don't actually, they pretend that they do because they cannot deal with the reality of the situation. So they lie to themselves and pretend to agree with the policies and support the government as if they were on some winning team (when in actuality they are engaging in a public rationalization process which is enabling those who seek the destruction of our Republic and which encourages the removal of what few freedoms we have left).

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Exuberant1]

Hey, hey, now who's talking about the Constitution. I'll have you know I ABSOLUTELY believe in the Bill of Rights.

All I'm saying is, if people can't moderate their own diet, someone HAS to do it for them. I'm all for leaving the tax un-levied if family members can make the RIGHT decisions for their children and family members regarding food choices. But how often do you see a fat FAMILY? Making poor choices? What happens to them? Should they be left to rot, with diabetes, hypertension, higher risk of liver failure and heart disease?

I'm not being un-American, I AM being American! I'm thinking of the BIGGER picture here!

From a purely health benefit then I am for this tax.

However, they taxed cigarettes to death, they are now to tax food to death, next will be booze ... you can see where this is going ...

It is all well and good, us saying "yeh tax the bad things" and then what happens when fags, booze and junk food have been taxed so bad that those industries collapse?
Tax will come after something else ... something that maybe you like, for example, an alternative topics website viewing tax

We cannot escape tax.

Originally posted by SpacePunk
reply to post by Karlhungis

 

Good. I predicted this years ago, and am seeing it happen. You fatties are going to get the same treatment the lousy smokers have been getting. Enjoy your taxes!

Sorry I have to take offence at your derogatory remarks about us FATTIES, I'm not fat, I'm just bigboned, and its not due to Junkfood as I don't eat any, nor do I smoke , I'm fat , no not fat, I'm 'cuddly' due to my metabolism. .

Originally posted by Exuberant1

One implies freedom and choice - the other is orwellian totalitarianism that dictates which foods you may eat and how much and which uses force and the threat of force to manipulate you into 'moderating' your diet.

Anyone who supports this tax is unamerican - they certainly don't give a damn about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that much is obvious.

But most people who support this tax don't actually, they pretend that they do because they cannot deal with the reality of the situation. So they lie to themselves and pretend to agree with the policies and support the government as if they were on some winning team (when in actuality they are engaging in a public rationalization process which is enabling those who seek the destruction of our Republic and which encourages the removal of what few freedoms we have left).

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Exuberant1]

After the higher tax on smokers, I just see this a just desserts... as long as it is properly taxed.

This is bull. Seriously. I am out here trying to survive on one part time income for two people because I simply can't get a job ANYwhere, including crapholes like mcdonalds and dairy queen.

We eat kraft dinner at least 6 times a week, and yeah, we get chips. Because it is the cheapest snack and because they friggin taste good.

If they try to move this law up to canada I am screwed.
I have been flat-out addicted to coca-cola for years, drinking juice actually makes my mouth get sores for some inconceivable reason.
I can barely afford it as it is, even though I only spend about 50-75c a day on the amount I drink.

My budget is literally under 2 dollars per meal.
We get meat once a MONTH!
Why? Because that single ingredient in our meal bumps us up to $5 minimum without adding anything else to it!

With bread at $3 a loaf, too, I get concerned when we eat too much of it. BREAD!

This is just...
ridiculous.
If you want to stop obesity, this isn't the way to do it.
Not to mention, the only food I get is junk food at this point really, drinking cocacola all day too, and I weigh in at a whopping 100 pounds. Considered "dangerously" underweight by my last family doctor.
So some good that will do you.


Funny someone noted the double-cheeseburger thing. I noticed too, as we got a burger each a week or two ago and it costed more than expected.
(in canada, it was never a dollar, it was 1.39)
But I think this is to fix a certain problem. It used to be that a single cheeseburger was more expensive than a double
Someone probably figured out they were being stupid.

I'm all for taxing the heck out of stuff that is unhealthy. Use the revenue to pay for the health care required by the illness the stuff causes. And use the revenue to subsidize healthier foods, so that they are much cheaper to buy. So make candy bars cost $5 each, while healthy food sells for ten cents or so.

The thing is, this stuff already does cost us the money, but the connection is invisible. We eat sugar now, and wind up paying for it years down the road. We smoke cigarettes, drink booze, and it causes us harm, but that doesn't show up for a long time.

People with healthy habits are paying for the unhealthy habits of others, since they wind up bearing the cost of health care as the drinkers and smokers get sick later in life and require expensive treatment for cancer, liver transplants, whatever.

And it's true - cheaper food tends to be unhealthy junk, meaning poor people will tend to eat less healthy stuff. Make it easier for them to eat healthy food, and make the unhealthy habits pay for themselves.

Controlling behavior is the antithesis of a free society. It is all part of a larger picture. Our government sees this as a way to tax the poor and the middle class covertly while increasing control over us.

Whoever that was that posted that only the rich eat poorly is living in a vacuum and is out of touch. You need to hang out in a convenience store sometime. I can't help but wonder if you are rich since your oblivious to the fact it is the poor who are usually in line buying that stuff? Along with children getting there sugar fix of course.

The L.A. Times, the source of this article, is one of the most biased sources in the world. They cater to the Far Left. You know the Beverly Hills, Brentwood crowd. They are teetering on bankruptcy by the way because of that. You have to understand that to understand what they are saying.

They are floating a trial balloon here if you will. They want to know how people are going to react when they start the new taxes to cover this obscenely expensive health care plan. The DNC has nearly complete control of the printed news industry. Papers like the L.A. Times and the N.Y. Times are practically puppets masquerading as legitimate news sources.

The health care plan is impossible without taxing the middle class and poor. We will see many such taxes proposed to hide the fact they are after more taxes from the middle class. This is a game they are very good at.

One of the Lefts defining points has always been about control. Look at how they are now trying to control free speech. Obama's snitch site he had to take down due to possible legal problems. The illegal unsolicited emails and the hit list the White House has now admitted too. It's all about control.

Don't get me wrong here as the Right is just as guilty. It is just different behaviors they want to control.

They see controlling behavior through taxation as a way to manipulate the public into thinking it was their idea all along. Year after year as they slowly add tax after tax until they get to their real goal; a two class society.

This all serves the other purpose of keeping us at each others throats as well. It is a slight of hand. While we spend our days arguing between ourselves they tighten the noose around our necks. As we bicker over these things they slowly take more an more power over us through this manipulation.

The truly sad part is how few realize this and how many actually think this is about their concern for our health. Obama and Bush for that matter, could give a crap less about your health or my health. They only care about power and manipulating the world to their benefit.

Smokers hate non-smokers.
Non-smokers hate smokers.
Skinny people hate fat people.
Fat people hate skinny people.
Republicans hate Democrats.
Democrats hate Republicans.
....and on and on and on....

People continue to fall into this trap and follow them down the rabbit hole. Why? Because we are control freaks as well! They know it is our nature. They use this weakness against us and in a very powerful way.

People say they want freedom. They do not. What they want is freedom for those who agree with them and only those who agree with them. Government has used this fact to control us all throughout history.

Take a hard look at the cigarette tax. What they said is that it was to get people to stop smoking and to make up for the added health care costs. Reality? The amount collected through tobacco taxes has far exceeded the added health care costs for two decades. Smokers not only cover themselves, if everyone quit tomorrow it would create a huge vacuum and the would have to increase payroll taxes dramatically. On top of that tobacco use is not going down. The poor and middle class are more likely to smoke so it is they who bear this burden.

The same thing will happen with this. No matter how much they tax behavior it will never be enough. The pigs who eat at the tax trough will never be full. Slowly decade by decade they control us more and take more of our hard earned resources from us to be in a huge part wasted by inefficient bureaucracies.

Obama and this health care debacle is not a new beast, just a different beast. The beast must be fed and so there must be more taxes. His legacy will be more control and less freedom as he retires to his real goal in a mansion on Martha's Vineyard. If anyone thinks he cares about your health, you are living in a dream world. He needs our money and he needs to pump his ego by putting himself in the history books. One need only look at the thinly veiled rage in his eyes whenever somebody asks him a probing question to understand him.

reply to post by KarlG


You are right you are looking at the bigger picture.

You are promoting the bigger picture of a HUGE government.

Originally posted by Solomons
JD140 had it bang on.Make healthy foods cheaper and more accessible to low income families.I still think more people need to be educated on what constitutes as healthy food...as alot of people don't have a clue.After that though people can eat what the hell they like,but it's always a good thing when people have the information available to them so they can weigh the pros and cons.

What was healthy a few decades ago, is beginning to be viewed as unhealthy.
I grew up eating food fried in lard, eggs fried in butter, ect...guess what...there was less obesity, less cancer, less diseases back then.

Aspertame, flouride in the water, growth hormones in our meat, the people who are to make the decision as to that is healthy what isn't seem to need an education! My diet would be much more healthier if I could just go back to how my mom fed us, even with the lard and butter fried eggs!

Dawnstar, bone rebuilding capsules do NOT have to be prescription.
You can buy them in the Vitamin Store.

Why is there such a problem here with figuring out what “junk Food”is?
Why are you saying that taxing it would be a hardship on poor people?

It is obvious that such a candy, cake, cookies ice cream, pies and pastries are JUNK
Food. Any kind of soft drink is junk. Potato chips are expensive compared to Fresh.
If poor people can afford these things they should pay the tax like anyone else.
All those things lack nourishment. Consuming then regularly can lead to health problems.

Chicken is not expensive. Turkey is not expensive. Potatoes are good wholesome food.
In season many veggies are reasonably priced. Grapes…I eat a bowl of them every day.
I buy about 5 pounds a week. My son likes them too.

How many of you have seen some of these poor people walk out of the grocery store with their carts laden with the likes of chips, soft drinks and snack crackers. All junk! And frequently they have a carton of beer.
If they can afford $12 for a 6 pak, they can afford to buy wholesome food for the family.

I am all for taxing the sugar laden junk.
White sugar should be $10. A pound. That would turn people to brown sugar which at least has some nourishment in it by way of the molasses.

There should be a massive ad campaign vilifying this junk food, work it into every show (like they have other things.) We would wind up with a healthier population.
If you want to eat the junk food, you will pay not only the tax, but you will eventually pay with ill health.
And then you will get to use the Sickness Insurance. That you had been paying for.
The following is an excerpt from a time line with regard to food and health:

“1900:
cancer is the tenth leading cause of death in the U.S., responsible for only three percent of all deaths. By the end of the 20th century, cancer will be the cause of 20 percent of all deaths in the U.S.
Diabetes affects less than one-tenth of one percent of the U.S. population; by the end of the 20th century, almost 20 percent of U.S. citizens will contract types I or II diabetes.

Asthma and related immune system diseases are virtually nonexistent; by the end of the 20th century at least 150 million people worldwide will be afflicted.

Breast cancer in women is very rare in 1900; by 1960, breast cancer will affect one in 20 women; by 2005, one in three women will develop breast cancer.”
100 year lie

But that’s not the whole solution, you have more to think about.

“No one knows exactly how many synthetic chemicals have been unleashed on this planet. A generally accepted figure — necessarily an estimate — is that 100,000 are in use worldwide, with more than 1,000 new chemicals entering the marketplace every year. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency keeps a list of about 85,000 in its registry and of these only a small fraction have ever been tested individually for their impact on the health of human beings. Many fewer still have been tested for their synergistic (multiple interaction) impacts on health.”
100,000 synthetic chemicals

I prefer that the government NOT impose taxes on things in order to discourage their use. This goes for tobacco, unhealthy foods, and anything else that may eventually come to be heavily taxed. I want to be free to make my own choices without taxes influencing the choice.