There's a tax on cigarettes. I wouldn't smoke as it is but I damn sure won't pay 5-8 bucks for a pack of cigarettes. A tax on soda, which is pretty cheap actually, is not a bad thing. Fewer people can afford to get it as much, which is good.
Like it's helped here. The nation of fat asses doesn't looked like it's helped much. If people want something they still go and find a way to go and get it. And hell, sometimes pop is still cheaper than bottled water.
Focusing on fast food joints may be the way to go though.
Self-EpidemicFeatured By OwnerFeb 20, 2013Professional Digital Artist
The poor are living extravagantly, if you see how much of their income ( percentage ) is spent on food in comparison to the rich, they really just cannot afford it.
Making things more expensive is not going to stop people, its just going to make people to spend more money, what people need is education. School was never good at teaching me what to eat, drink, or the repercussions of said food, and I think they should. However, not just children. The adults need to sit down and see what they are doing to their children.
The watershed is actually a good idea though, the less children see it the bettter, imo.
Self-EpidemicFeatured By OwnerFeb 21, 2013Professional Digital Artist
The parents DEFINITELY need education, the generation of children that are younger than us ( if we were to have kids I guess? ) are the first generation that may not out live their parents, due to obesity. That is bad.
I think nowadays children are spoilt a lot more than they maybe would have been, a lot of them get pretty much anything they want, and a few pence won't stop parents buying their children what they like.
Also, Ban McDonalds and other major fast food restaurants from selling shit food so cheaply and get the FSA to do a major survey on whats in these foods, After the horse meat scandal this NEEDS to be done. Fuck knows whats in there that the FSA and don't even test for
I think its quite a good idea I hate fizzy drinks, Water is the way to go! Bring down the price of water and up the price of the sugar filled shit, A 500 ml bottle of water is €1.50 here while a bottle of coke is €1.20! WTF is that shit?
And I think there should be a ban on fast food advertising COMPLETELY. Even on site advertising such as logos and big brightly lit signs that attract fat people like a moth to a flame.
People need to get healthier and I don't just mean the fat people! I would give a guess and say half the population don't get enough of the essential nutrients they need to feel good naturally and instead they go and get antidepressants from their doc, Just look at those poor Americans
Unless you go on long road trips I don't understand why you would pay so much for a bottle water. I heard somewhere that everyday 7% of america eats at McDonalds, and if it is true, it doesn't surprise. I think the parents are to blame mostly, mine always make sure I get my veg and cook half decent meals but I have a friend who used to get about 5 takeaway pizzas a week. Parents are starting to get more lazy and spoil their children more.
Its just really the 500ml bottles. I can get a gallon of decent water for €1.99 so it doesn't make sense And now we here in Ireland are going to have to pay for what water we use from a tab in 2014, so we are screwed either way 1 minute showers.
And yeah, The Americans take the piss with fast food. If 7 percent eat at McD's I wonder how many eat at all the other chains combined. all of them? But, I can't talk, I used to take the piss with them also when I couldn't afford a weeks worth of home cooked meals and good food.
I think the idea of adding taxes to soda is petty, ineffective and lazy. the notion that increasing the charge of a soda to prevent implies it's some strange source for people getting fat. Soda has a ton of sugar in liquid form, you don't need Scooby Doo to solve this mystery. I find the argument for why the tax is being put up as useless.
If you really want to change people from drinking soda, you don't force people to consume more of their resources to do it, you change the mores of the society to do it. The US did two major things to reduce smoking in: Impose a tax and socially try to change and educate the public about the dangers of smoking. I'm going to put more faith that telling people that smoking causes cancer, lowers your life span, reduce your immune system etc. were much stronger arguments that forcing people to pay more.
Yay for regressive taxes! Those stupid poor people don't know what's good for them, we'll just tax them out of the bad-for-them market. Really only financially successful people are smart enough to know what they should and should not be doing.
I will start by saying, again, the doctors put this idea forward. So it isn't a government conspiracy theory for total control. Also in the UK the gov. pays for our healthcare, obese people suffer more ailments so the government pays for there treatment, if they need a mobility scooter, benefits if they can't work, help in the home if they are severely overweight. So by reducing consumption of unhealthy foods they could hope to reduce expenditure in some sectors and increase elsewhere.
The doctors do not make tax policies. Doctors thought it would be cool to give twins various diseases to see how different treatments affected them. Doctors should not be making choices on liberty. They should operate within the constraints of liberty for all.
*** Also in the UK the gov. pays for our healthcare, obese people suffer more ailments so the government pays for there treatment, if they need a mobility scooter, benefits if they can't work, help in the home if they are severely overweight. So by reducing consumption of unhealthy foods they could hope to reduce expenditure in some sectors and increase elsewhere. **** This is exactly the mentality that nationalized healthcare brings, and is the basis for my argument here: [link]
You proved my point with your statement. Nationalizing healthcare gives government the power to dictate the free rights of individuals to live how they want when it only should be effecting themselves. Moreover, you place a few non-elected people (board of doctors) responsible for restricting the liberty of everyone.
Again, why stop at fast food or soda? Why not make the one approved diet for all and any wavering is unlawful? Why not make sofas illegal? Your television only works for 30 minutes a day. You only get 30 minutes of video games and 15 of those have to be brain-enriching puzzles. Homosexuality is gone. In fact, sex at all is gone unless it is at a government approved lab and can be monitored so disease transmission is minimized. Cars that go over 40kph will be outlawed so traffic accidents will go down.
People should have the liberty without penalty to choose what they want to eat. People should have the liberty to sell whatever food they want without unfair taxes being levied on their business simply because uptight liberals don't approve of your choices. Making the individual responsible for their health makes the liberty of their own choices reasonable.
Once again, the doctors are not making the choices, there are not imposing the tax. They have just presented the IDEA of a tax. I haven't even heard anything about the gov. debating it.
Yeah I won't read that link I don't care enough.
They are hardly dictating how we live, they are making decisions to use money as effectively as possible because the economy is a shithole at the moment. The doctors are not responsible for putting taxes in place, and once again, they only offered the idea of a tax.
Nice little over the top paragraph there, just taking things a little too far.
Yes. It is the government who applies the policy. Back to square one of the analogy.
*** Yeah I won't read that link I don't care enough. *** No worries. It just predicts the argument you presented in your OP.
*** They are hardly dictating how we live, *** Saying what you can and can't drink. What you can and can't eat. What you can and can't breathe into your lungs. Not sure how this isn't dictating how we live.
*** to use money as effectively as possible because the economy is a shithole at the moment. *** It is crap because of these overbearing regulations by the government that destroy liberty. That more and more money is taken out of the hands of people and put into ineffective and inefficient governments.
I think this is a good idea. My fiance and I don't normally drink soda because it's a bit expensive here (around 3 euros for a 2 liter). Removing soda from our diet has made us noticeably healthier. This could work, but it isn't enough on its own. Fast food should also be raised in price. It should not be cheaper to buy a greasy hamburger than a salad.
If obesity is an epidemic, if diabetes is costing 20 billion dollars a year in medical expenses, if education for personal health decisions is non-existent or failed, the government needs to do something to at least try and slow the leak until something easier/better can be done.
I posted it like a year ago, one medical report estimated (based on yearly averages) that diabetes related medical expenses in the United States will flirt with one trillion dollars a year in the United States.
At some point the self destructive habits of the individuals will become too much of a burden for the entire nation to deal with. You're looking at lost productivity connected to poor health, premature death, disability, and the costs of health care. Life shouldn't be a struggle. The quality of life shouldn't be diminished because of poor eating habits. Is that really freedom or gross stupidity?
Suicide is illegal but intentionally becoming a diseased fool is perfectly okay?