The major difference I see between cigarette and sugar water companies is that the former had an extensive campaign to cover up the adverse health effects of their products. I doubt any Pepsi exec or pr person would openly tell you that their product causes "diabetes, obesity, kidney disease and oral decay" but I see little evidence that they're actually trying to hide those facts from us.
As someone who doesn't ever smoke or drink pop I have no problem with a heavy tax being levied against people who choose to use these products. If this is what is clogging our hospitals with entirely-avoidable and expensive-to-treat illnesses, raising health costs for all of us, then yes, this seems fair.
The problem of course with going after the sugar water industry is that this isn't the only place where people getting their sugar fix from. A can of Campbell's tomato soup has 12 grams of sugar in it for instance. If we actually do want change how people eat in the U.S., and it's obviously in our best interest to do so, then every product with more than X grams of sugar per serving should have this label.
It won't happen any time soon I don't think. The food industry is extremely well organized and a powerful lobby in D.C. Every Senate and House office from a state with a M&M factory or Coca-cola plant always has tons of free samples on hand. Little perks and kickbacks like this go a long way.
Last edited by Locobot; 07-15-2005 at 12:49 PM..
|