tspikes51

We've hit a new low. On the way home the other night, I heard a guy on the radio talking about some proposition for a tax on fatty foods. My initial thought: People are totally retarted. We don't think about the real causes for obesity: not exercising, which is caused by excess TV watching and internet browsing. I have had the same diet for years now. I was fat for a long time, and then about a year ago, I worked really hard in marching band and lost about 40 pounds, and I looked and felt great. I didn't do anything physical that winter, and I gained back more than I lost. I am now fat, and need to excercise, but can't find the time to do it. Cheeseburgers aren't the problem, people are.

__________________
"I'm telling you, we need to get rid of a few people or a million."
-Maddox

blitz.fenix

Why don't they lower the cost of healthy foods. It's a bummer for people like me who want to put on a few pound sbut will have to pay extra money to do it.

Tracybrian

True-that. But if we could raise a little money by making it more expencive for peeps to eat Fast Food I see nothing wrong with it. We could call it the Super-size tax.

CityOfAngels

And then next we can have the masturbation tax, because everyone knows the reason guys can't get girls is because they're always at home matsurbating instead of wasting all their money on women.

Or how about a shitting tax? It sure would take care of the problem of people taking too long in the bathroom.

Y'know what, I have another great idea! The fucking tax! That would take care of overpopulation in a jiffy!

/sarcasm
Seriously, the only extra tax they really need is the stupidity tax, so we can tax the idiots who come up with ideas like the fat tax.

__________________
The words "love" and "life" go together. It is almost as if they are one. You must love to live, and you must live to love, or you have never lived nor loved at all.

gh0ti

I really only see negatives to doing something like this. My main concern is that it just simply adds more bureaucracy to our daily lives. I lean more towards the libertarian mind set, keep the Government out of my life. Tobacco gets taxed, but does it keep people from smoking?

[SEMI-OFFTOPIC]
If it’s about the money, why don’t we save several billion dollars every year, and make a heck of a lot more from legalizing and taxing marijuana for recreational use?
[/SEMI-OFFTOPIC]

__________________
I ain't often right but I've never been wrong
It seldom turns out the way it does in the song
Once in a while you get shown the light
In the strangest of places if you look at it right

Bill O'Rights

Cigarettes aren't the problem...people are.

See where I'm going here?

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Cynthetiq

Snack Tax went into effect some time ago...

it didn't curb the companies nor the people.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

ICER

You know, Instead of "all you can eat" places, we should have "all you should eat" bars. informing ppl what would be their best choice.

__________________
What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary?
One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society.
The other is for housing prisoners.
~~David Letterman

Tracybrian

Yes but what if the funds from the tax went to a national effort to educate our children on eating right or maybe to feed the poor. It wouldnt slow people down but people obviously have to learn how to eat right. I hate big brother and all that fight the power stuff but.

World's King

Fat is as Fat Does.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Glory's Sun

I got to agree with BOR.. if you're gonna tax the hell out of cigarettes because of the danger then damnit tax the hell out of mcdonalds

MSD

It's called the lottery

ninety09

I also agree. If something is bad for people, it should be discouraged.

vox_rox

Instead of making it difficult or more expensive to live in an unhealthy fashion, they should make it easier/less expensive to live a healthy and active lifestyle.

Taxes become an addiction for government and a burden on all people, so that is not, and as has been said already has proven not to be, a successful appraoch to smoking/drinking/snaking/whatever.

If you're fat, you should realize the health risks, find a way to modify your lifestyle and deal with it yourself. Same with smoking. Same with whatever. It's up to you to take personal responsibility, or live with the consequences. Not th egovernment. Not society. YOU.

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

sprocket

More taxes? Greeeeaaaaat... its not a bad thing to encourage people to be healthy.. but I doubt this will work as expected. Anyone know how the plan to spend the money this thing is supposed to bring in?

__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

guthmund

Who needs personal responsibility when big daddy government can tell us what's good and what's bad and tax appropriately?

Fat tax? Bite me. If you think that by taxing the "bad" stuff is going to discourage anybody from partaking, I have a box of hammers I'd like to watch you match wits with. I'd like to see statistics on how many 'smokers' don't smoke because the tax is too high. Smokers don't stop buying cigarettes because they cost more, they just find other ways to make up the difference. A dis-incentive tax. Please. It may cost a bit more, but folks will find a way to smoke.

Tax fatty foods? Are you out of your mind? Do you think people cram their faces with cheeseburgers, pop-tarts and pringles because they're cheap? It's because they taste good. The 'cheap' is just the metaphorical icing on the cake. Cheeseburgers are great. Pop-tarts are fantastic. Pringles? Tasty mmm. All cheap? All right. People aren't going to stop buying excessive amounts of 'fatty foods' just because they cost more, they're just going to find a way to make up the difference. If the vast majority of folks had to choose between three boxes of "healthy snacks" or a single box of Ding-Dongs, guess what they're going to pick? How many of them are going to fork over more than a couple of dollars for a double cheeseburger in the interest of slimming America down?

The government has gotten into the exceptionally bad habit of just addressing the symptoms without understanding the underlying problem. They want to fix the 'bad' stuff? Educate us. Real facts from real professionals showing us what really happens.

I don't need another "Mom & Dad" to forbid the bad, wrong and immoral, but I hardly ever ignore a friend who's trying to help me.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

Drider_it

my tiff with this is .. i didnt ask all the overweight americans to eat till they dropped.. gain 50-100 lbs. I went to our local mc donalds and asked for my big mac supersized and they said they didnt do it anymore. Yet again I find it strange how a number of "political correct" groups can just decided what is good for everyone.

mmmmm solient green


It should be everyones choice what they eat. Next up meds. oh you cant have that perscription. we need you to take this one. and we will charge you your house for it.

thing is if these people are "too far" why should the rest of us be punished. put a bear tracking collar on them and be done with it. shock them if they pick up a 2000 carb burger. Me, I eat like a pig yet i dont gain weight. its cuz i work and actually eat healthy meals at the house. strange how that works.

whole point is. not our fault. they needed to look at the individual level not an "across the board" opinion poll and research poll. if millions of americans are killing themselves each year by stuffing a burger down thier throat, it really is thier fault. "oh they cant help it." yeah i can understand that seeing how i smoke and do a bit of drinking. and i get taxed out my arse for it. Good should be like that. yet the ones that dont smoke dont get taxed for it. no not really. if you dont buy a pack of smoke s you dont get taxed, but i do. yet if i go buy a burger or such i get zapped cuz "mr. happy fatty" needs to cut back? bah.

liberals sigh

__________________
It means only one thing, and everything: Cut. Once committed to fight, Cut. Everything else is secondary. Cut. That is your duty, your purpose, your hunger. There is no rule more important, no commitment that overrides that one. Cut. The lines are a portrayal of the dance. Cut from the void, not from bewilderment. Cut the enemy as quickly and directly as possible. Cut with certainty. Cut decisively, resoultely. Cut into his strength. Flow through the gaps in his guard. Cut him. Cut him down utterly. Don't allow him a breath. Crush him. Cut him without mercy to the depth of his spirit. It is the balance to life: death. It is the dance with death. It is the law a war wizard lives by, or he dies.

Dostoevsky

More government and higher taxes won't solve our 'fat' problem. Jesus that's a stupid idea. Fat people should eat less and exercise more, end of story.

I know it's politically incorrect to talk about fat people and their eating habits, but damn, think about how many times you see a fat person walking around eating a fatty snack or eating 3 times what you are in a restaurant or cafeteria.

I'm living in France now where the population is VERY fit relative to America's. It's so rare to see a fat person here that I probaby only see 1-2 per week. It's not their diet that keeps them thin, it's their net caloric intake. People here eat less and walk around more.

Here's an easy formula to figure out if you are going to gain or lose weight regardless of what you eat:

Calories IN (food/drink) - Calories OUT (exorcise/metabolism) = Weight gain or loss

If you take in more calories than you burn on a daily basis, you will get fat.

If you take in and burn about the same number, you'll stay at the same weight.

If you take in fewer calories than you burn, you'll lose weight.

It's not rocket science, fatties just aren't motivated enough to lose that weight. This is just the politically incorrect truth.

__________________
Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own highest value and, like all of man’s values, it has to be earned.


It is not advisable, James, to venture unsolicited opinions. You should spare yourself the embarrassing discovery of their exact value to your listener.

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Nisses

/me looks up the table in his manual to "proper Nisses operation"...

nope, can't seem to find my metabolism rate in there?

That's not a formula, it's abstract sense... but you can't exactly measure it with a ruler, can you.

And I pass through France on an occasional basis... Seems the fat people just flock to me then, since I see my share of them, as I see em here in Belgium.

A tax like this won't do any good, unless it's money that is used to actually do something useful. Hell, if the revenue of that was used to lower the cost of healthy food, I'd prolly be all for it

__________________
Moderation should be moderately moderated.

fatbob

i don't think that they should tax fat people or, more correctly i guess, fatty foods to help fat people loose weight, i think they should tax it to pay for the extra strain that fat people put on the nhs...
smokers more than pay their way with the tax they pay on their 'vice' so should fat people.
(written from a uk perspective)

__________________
change happens when those who don't normally speak get heard by those who don't normally listen.

Macheath

What about a "fitness tax" instead?

Can't let those 90 pound McDonald-swilling girly-men get away with not paying their fair share as those silly "fast metabolism" arteries of theirs gradually clog up with mountain dew and twinkies.

dksuddeth

lets keep throwing more personal responsibility out the frickin window, shall we?

BOR - people have a choice to smoke or not, just as they can choose to eat a cheeseburger or not. I don't see where you were trying to go with that.

Discourage things that are bad for you? Crossing the street can be bad for you, should we discourage that also?

where the heck is common sense going today?

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

lurkette

Does anybody have any data on whether "sin taxes" work to discourage the behavior they're directed at? Do states with higher taxes on cigarettes/alcohol have lower rates of smoking/alcoholism?

I would think that a more effective way to decrease obesity would be to encourage schools and employers to make it easier for people to build exercise into a daily routine. Bring back phys ed (although I HATED gym), give kids extra credit for extracurricular physical activity, have gyms and showers onsite at work and build in time for exercise during the work day, etc. SAS, one of the largest and wealthiest privately-owned companies, here in NC, has a lot of these "wellness" perks on-site, and for them it's not just a matter of employee retention (they have KICK ASS bennies and perks), it's also a matter of keeping their insurance costs low. Small companies can lose their ability to pay for health care if even one person has a serious illness. Since so many things are obesity-related (diabetes, heart disease, joint and muscle problems) it would make sense for the places where people spend the bulk of their time - schools and work - to give heavy incentives for exercise and healthy lifestyles. Seems like that would work a lot better than taxing personal choice items that, in small doses, are not in and of themselves unhealthy. Having lost my post-graduate-school weight, my BMI is now dead-smack on in the middle of healthy for the 3rd year running, and I still eat buttered popcorn and french fries occasionally. But I also know I have to eat other healthy foods and exercise or I'll put the weight back on.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

Cynthetiq

When I worked at Saatchi & Saatchi Advertising 7 years ago they had a good physical ed outlook.

Aerobic classes every hour on the hour from 8am - 8pm

Gym on site. It was at the top most of the building and you had to walk up 1 flight up from to the roof. Sign at the bottom of the stairs said,"Your workout begins here." Dues based on sliding scale based on pay. One just needed to bring a pair of shoes. They provided everything from shirts, shorts, towels, to soaps for shower.

Massuese to come to your office or desk for 15 min back rubs

It's not impossible, but knowing what I know now... it was expensive. Now that S&S is in bad financial position I'm not sure if they still have the facilities.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Charlatan

Here is something to add to the discussion. It doesn't really apply to Americans.

In Canada, as many of you know, we have public healthcare. Inevitably people who abuse their bodies (smoking, drinking, etc.) will cost more money to care for later in life.

When my Mother-in-law's hips needed to be replaced due to arthritis we visited her during her recovery. The ward was full of overweight women (it was a woman's hospital) who's knees had to be replaced because they had blown their knees due to carrying the extra pounds. This is just one example of how overweight (by this I mean really overweight) people cost more for the system in general. There are all kinds of other conditions that can arise from obesity that need to be treated.

I am torn on this issue. On one hand I would never deny anyone the right to proper health care coverage. On the other hand why should society shoulder the burden of someone's self destructive nature (i.e. smoking, drinking, overeating, etc).

Part of the issue that needs to be worked out is where do you draw the line on a fat person. When is the issue that they are fat, a condition and when is it due to "laziness and lack of self control"? With a smoker you can treat an addiction and you can institute policies to encourage less smoking.

I'm not sure what the answer is.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

flstf

Why should those of us who have superior genes and immune systems, who can smoke and drink all we want and still be healthier and live longer than our smoke-free alcohol free fellow citizens, be forced to pay more? It's not our fault they inherited weak immune systems.

Why should those of us with high metabolisms who can eat all we want and stay healthy be forced to pay more because of fat people with low metabolisms? It's not our fault they inherited low metabolisms.

As we learn more about DNA we will be able to determine at birth those of us who have good immune systems and those suseptable to all kinds of diseases. Then we will be able to set up a system where everyone pays their fair share. If you are destined to have a low metabolism, you will pay more for your McDonalds.

It's not fair to tax all tobacco, alcohol and fatty foods when so many of us can handle them just fine, just to make up for those born into families with weak genes. Soon we should be able to determine which people should be encouraged to reproduce. If your family has bad genes and you decide to reproduce anyway then you will have to pay more for the same benefits. What could be fairer?

Note: The above is just a joke, or not.

OFKU0

If the money goes towards educating people who eat fast food, then I would support that. With billions and billions served shit like Mc Donalds, it seems educating the masses is long overdue.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

Charlatan

That is really the way I see things going. In Canada we used to have the Participaction thing in school. It was supposed to encourage exercise.

The other thing I see happening is what is happening right now in Canada:

1) the Ontario government is taking steps to ban all smoking in public places and work places. They are talking about making laws so that cigarettes cannot be displayed in stores (they can sell them just not display them in the open). The idea being that you make it increasingly difficult to find a place to smoke them and limiting the ability to market them.

2) The labelling and possible banning of things like trans fats. I believe Denmark is the only place that has banned trans-fats and that Canada has been looking into doing the same.

I don't see these trends going away, only becoming more prevalent. If we are going to pay for Universal health care we must take steps to educate and disinsentivise the use of harmful products.

flstf... healthy people don't pay more than anyone else. We all pay the same. The issue is more that people who lead an unhealthy lifestyle frequently end up being a drain on the system.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

flstf

I understand. But why should those of us that can handle an unhealthy lifestyle and still be healthier and outlive others have to suffer through all these anti-smoking taxes etc.. It's not our fault that others are born with weak immune systems from families that pass on their weak genes.

Of course the above is mostly a parody but I am concerned about a government that is hell bent on taxing lifestyle choices. What's next, taxing people who don't get enough sleep or people who don't get enough exercise or eat the proper government diet or reproduce even though they have inferior genes?

Cynthetiq

sorry... that's called living in SOCIETY.

I don't have kids, I don't plan on it, and if I did I wouldn't send them to public school but to private school.

I pay taxes that subsidize public schooling. I don't like it, I didn't like it watching my father pay for our tution knowing that he was also paying for public schools that I do not use.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

portereight

Why stop with taxing what may harm us? Why doesn't the government do more to protect it's citizens? Perhaps they should provide us each with a giant bubble. We'd live in this hamster ball like orb, and have our daily needs brought to us by a certified government approved agency. We should also have them replace any item we may bump into with it's NERF equivalent. Can't be too careful.

flstf

I understand that living in a society requires one to pay for things that benefit us all even though we may not partake of those particular services. I just don't want to see the government to be overly concerned about our lifestyle choices. There are so many so called unhealthy things that we choose to do.

I would hate to see bureaucrats pouring over our choices and taxing what they consider to be bad for us. Half the time they are wrong anyway. High carb and low carb diets being the most recent. A few years back there was a study that showed high cancer rates from eating charcoal broiled steak, and on and on.

I don't want the government micro-managing our lifes. We are supposed to be "the land of the free and home of the brave" and most of us already have mothers and fathers. I'll get off my soapbox now, LOL.

Charlatan

I'm not sure how it effects the US but my issue lies in the fact that we have public healthcare in Canada that we all have to pay for... just like the Public School system.

I completely agree with Cynthetiq's point... Society.

In America, I'm not sure how this plays out. There is a very strong tradition of individual "freedom" in the US... Many believe you should have the freedom to do what you want as long as it isn't hurting anyone else but yourself. What place does the government have telling me how to live my life? I should be able to eat what I want if I want to. If I want to be 5'5" and weigh 600 pounds, that's my business.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

mo42

Will the tax discourage people from eating fast food? No.

Will it provide a strapped-for-cash government an income boost? Yes.

Now, I'd prefer if the government would quit spending so much on random crap, but barring that, it'd be nice if social security and medicare and such didn't all collapse when the boomers retire, which would undoubtedly cause a massive economic recession. The government needs more money, and this seems like an okay source to me.

__________________
It's not getting what you want, it's wanting what you've got.

Asuka{eve}

To me the cost of good food isnt that much more than bad food.

sexymama

This tax isn't about encouraging people to eat healthier; it is about making money for the government. The money won't go for health care. It may go for a good cause, I don't know. But I do know I won't fool myself into thinking this is about encouraging a healthier lifestyle.

__________________
If you can go deeply into lovemaking, the ego disappears. That is the beauty of lovemaking, that it is another source of a glimpse of god

It's not about being perfect; it's about developing some skill at managing imperfection.

funkeodor

And since so many boomers are overweight from living a lifestyle in which they believed "If what I'm doing only hurts me and no one else then what does it matter!" The economy will be strained by many over weight people in the coming few years. If someone wants to be 5'5'' and 600 pounds and believe that it is their business and and doesn't affect anyone else is first of all completely self centered and two, lacks any thought of foresight. Since gargantuan (you know, I've always liked that word, gargantuan, but it's so rare that I get a chance to use it) people are more likely to get clogged arteries and have several heart attacks. Before so many medical breakthroughs these people generally died at much younger ages for their own stupidity. However in more recent years these people of numerous rolls of fat have become a burden to society due to the fact that often enough the people that are fat are mid to low income people who can not afford health care and the society pays their costs. With the number of people retiring and more and more people depending on social security and medicare since they were far to dimwitted and once again, lacked foresight, to plan their own retirement they let society take the burden for them. This makes the gov't tax people more since there are more people collecting 'benefits' and less people working. Which brings up the real question that I wonder. Since the dollar is relatively weak right now, and taxing people more and more takes the money out of people's hands and more often than not is squandered away which means the gov't needs more money. Ultimately this money is put back into the hands of the enormous fatsos that are the problem to begin with. In turn this seems likely to be a situation in which inflation could become out of hand and (while in turn erasing the national defecit), could create another 'great depression' in which once again we're all in poverty! The best option I see is the elimination of fat people all across this country. every should have to take a BMI test and if they have more than 30% fat, shoot em. Or, better yet, have them fight national games to the death! They could reenact older battles. We could have our president, or perhaps we could call all of our presidents in the future the High Caesar (or High C for short)(He would also have to be a porn star and would always shout "OH YEAH! DRINK SOME OF HIGH C!"), then they decide if they live or not with the traditional thumbs up (good) or thumbs down (die fatso!). The tv ratings would be huge across the world. The people in the middle east would be happy for seeing americans die, and in doing so they would stop their wars since we would be fighting it for them! with this they would watch the battles and be enthralled with the ads in which would support the U.S. economy. The EU would be happy again because they could once again sell their manufactured goods at a lower price than the americans and wouldn't have to compete directly with us. Kim Jong Il would also be happy to see americans die and thus stand down in the nuclear arms race since his destruction of americans is already being replicated. This would put us on a far better track to get our economy on track. Screw going to mars, instead, lets stop the future great depression from happening and instead just concentrate on killing all the fat people. The world would obviously be a better place for it! I once heard that the best way to end a piece is with a quote because it shows humility and that others may know more than yourself. So as the great and wise Homer Simpson, "Oh come on Marge, the only reason we don't move out of this dunghill is because of my court ordered ankle bracelet"

vox_rox

This is hilarious. Although not practical, and certaintly not very fair, I can see this working across the board for a wide range of things.

Give Michael Jackson a shock every time he says "who's your daddy?"

Imagine if you could've chocked Liza Minelli everytime she opened a pill bottle?

Shock George W every time he says something stupid (maybe the shocks wouldn't stop?)

Yup, I see applications for this.

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

Suave

I really don't think you needed the "sarcasm" tag there. You laid it on pretty thick. Just thought I'd mention that the majority of industrialized nations do not have a high enough birth rate to even maintain their current population, so that tax wouldn't make any sense anyway. Yes, I did take a joke seriously, and yes I am being anal.

__________________
"Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions." - Albert Einstein

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." - Plato

lurkette

Sigh. I hate that we're arguing about the ideology of whether the government should tax unhealthy behaviors and not the SCIENCE of whether such taxation works to accomplish the goal or not.

The ideology is important (and probably juicier to argue about), but it's secondary IMHO to the point of utility. If this works to curb obesity, thereby bringing down health care costs and increasing productivity and overall quality of life, then I don't mind it - it benefits everyone. But my guess is that it would be ineffective and just get people pissed off about government interference.

Incidentally, (threadjack coming up here) I don't hear anybody bitching about the government interfering in personal consumption behavior by subsidizing the hell out of agriculture and oil so we can have cheap oranges in December and gas that costs less than milk so we can drive huge cars instead of funding public transportation. If you don't object to government action that affects one set of behaviors (public transportation issues), why do you object to it when it affects another set (public health)?

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France