Do you think it's good idea?

Do you think it's good idea?

  • No, why?

    Votes: 11 52.4%
  • Yes, why?

    Votes: 6 28.6%
  • Not Sure, why?

    Votes: 4 19.0%

  • Total voters
    21

Liebling:-)))

Sussi *7.7.86 - 18.6.09*
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
31,020
Reaction score
10
Do you think it's good idea?

Fat taxes 'could save thousands'

Tax would apply to foods high in fat

More than 3,000 fatal heart attacks and strokes could be prevented in the UK each year if VAT was slapped on a vast range of foods, say Oxford researchers.

A 17.5% rise on fatty, sugary or salty food would cut heart and stroke deaths by 1.7%, the study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health said.

One of the researchers declared the time was right to debate a "fat tax".

But the idea was dismissed in 2004 by former prime minister Tony Blair as too suggestive of a "nanny state".

The researchers from the Department of Public Health at Oxford University are among the first to try to work out how targeted taxes might have an effect on levels of illness.

The time is right for more debate on the issue of 'fat taxes'.

Dr Mike Rayner, Oxford University

They used economic data first to work out how demand would fall as the price of unhealthy foods increased, and which foods people might turn to instead - then used these results to predict the benefit on the health of the population.

Initially at least, average weekly food bills would increase by 4.6% per household.

Change for the worse

They first applied the tax only to dairy products containing high levels of saturated fats - such as butter and cheese, as well as baked goods and puddings.

Further evidence is needed on the effect of targeted food taxes before we can support a 'fat tax'

Maura Gillespie, British Heart Foundation

However, their analysis found that people would simply switch over to other unhealthy foods such as those containing high levels of salt, perhaps even increasing the risk of stroke and heart disease.

They then turned to a different measure of food "healthiness" called the SSCg3d score, where points are awarded for the content of eight nutrients in 100g of the food.

Taxing all products which scored poorly on this scale saved lives, they said, with approximately 2,300 fewer deaths a year from heart disease and stroke.

Finally, they tweaked the range of taxed products to include those foods which might not score so poorly on the scale, but may be used as alternatives if unhealthier foods were taxed.

This resulted in small additions to the list of taxed and untaxed foods to encourage healthier eating.

This approach yielded the most apparently striking results, with as many as 3,200 deaths prevented.

Dr Mike Rayner, who worked on the study, said that the third, seemingly most effective, option was "more theoretical", and less practical to implement, but called on government to consider taxing high scoring foods.

He said: "This is still at a fairly early stage, but the time is right for more debate on the issue of 'fat taxes'.

"The other thing which would have to be done is to look at the possibility of subsidies for healthier foods, rather than simply looking at increases in tax."

'Nanny state'

However, Maura Gillespie, from the British Heart Foundation, said that it did not yet support "fat taxes".

"The debate on unhealthy diets is important as it is estimated that 30% of deaths from coronary heart disease are caused by unhealthy diets.

"Further evidence is needed on the effect of targeted food taxes before we can support a 'fat tax'."

When Downing Street's strategy unit was reported to be proposing fat taxation in 2004, Tony Blair said that such a move could actually turn people off the idea of healthy eating.

He told a Labour Party Big Conversation event: "People don't want to live in a nanny state."

BBC NEWS | Health | Fat taxes 'could save thousands'


Come and discuss what you do think of this? Please share your view on this with us... :thumb:
 
I voted "no"; a "fat tax" is not a good idea.

1. I don't like a nanny state government imposing yet another tax.

2. It won't really improve people's eating habits. They will just spend more money on the junk food, and have less money left to spend on healthy food.

3. It doesn't encourage people to eat more fruits and vegetables.

4. It doesn't encourage people to get off their butts, go outside, and move around more.

5. It's just a "feel good" political trick.
 
I voted "no"; a "fat tax" is not a good idea.

1. I don't like a nanny state government imposing yet another tax.

2. It won't really improve people's eating habits. They will just spend more money on the junk food, and have less money left to spend on healthy food.

3. It doesn't encourage people to eat more fruits and vegetables.

4. It doesn't encourage people to get off their butts, go outside, and move around more.

5. It's just a "feel good" political trick.

I'm with Reba...

People are going to do what people want to do. The more any gov't imposes restrictions on people behaviors the more they are going spurn the gov't as an entity. No single group of people however enlightened knows what best for everybody. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. History has proven this over and over.

The best thing that any gov't can do is constantly educate people on the consequences of certain activities such as eating these types of food. Eventually, the message starts getting through to people. But if not, so what?!? Eventually, society balances itself out in the long haul which might not be fast enough for some people. No society has ever survived that ignores consequences like this and that is as it should be. Time always straightens out messes like this however it goes. Maybe some won't like the end result but that is really irrelevant in the scheme of things. People come and go throughout history.
 
I agree with Reba and sr171soars..it is :crazy:
 
I voted "no"; a "fat tax" is not a good idea.

1. I don't like a nanny state government imposing yet another tax.

2. It won't really improve people's eating habits. They will just spend more money on the junk food, and have less money left to spend on healthy food.

3. It doesn't encourage people to eat more fruits and vegetables.

4. It doesn't encourage people to get off their butts, go outside, and move around more.

5. It's just a "feel good" political trick.

It's bad idea, also it won't happen in USA, that's UK, lol...
 
I vote NO......Any foods we want to eat. Taxes won't control people's their wish foods list.
 
I voted no. It will not change anything. Just look at the cigarettes/alcohol taxes, they thought if increase the taxes then will make people quit, but not work! People still drinking and smoking even they are charged by taxes..
 
I think it would be a good idea. After all, obesity is linked to many other health issues which cost tax-payers millions of dollars each year to treat. I believe that if one is going to do something detrimental to their health, they should be the one's footing the bill for medical expenditures required in dealing with the consequences of those actions. Just like with cigarettes.

I consider myself to be fat, so this would be applicable to myself as well.
 
I think it would be a good idea. After all, obesity is linked to many other health issues which cost tax-payers millions of dollars each year to treat. I believe that if one is going to do something detrimental to their health, they should be the one's footing the bill for medical expenditures required in dealing with the consequences of those actions. Just like with cigarettes.

I consider myself to be fat, so this would be applicable to myself as well.

I'm with Eve on this one. I think the more tax dollars go up the more people couldn't afford to buy junk or cigarettes anymore and would make it much more easier for them to quit. I vow myself when cigarettes hit up to 5 dollars a pack I'll quit, because I wouldn't be able to afford it, it'll make it easier for me to quit. No money no cigarettes. ;)
 
Sorry sis, but I agree with Reba and sr171soars on this one...:aw:
 
I voted "no"; a "fat tax" is not a good idea.


I voted "Not Sure" but I am with Eve & Cheri. I will explain why I am not sure either it´s good idea or not.


1. I don't like a nanny state government imposing yet another tax.

I have to agree with you for that but Obesity issues could destory the Public Health Insurance millions.

Here in Germany, they add alochol, cigarettes and junk foods expensive than healthy foods and drink. That´s why we go to junk foods rare.


2. It won't really improve people's eating habits. They will just spend more money on the junk food, and have less money left to spend on healthy food.

3. It doesn't encourage people to eat more fruits and vegetables.

Well, when I was in USA and saw how expensive fruits and vegetables than in Germany are. No wonder, why the people can´t acheive to buy expensives one which is not fair. They supposed to reduce the prices for healthy foods than unhealthy foods.

I beleive it works on the people for quit cigarettes, eat cheap unhealthy foods, etc. like what Cheri says. My hubby quit smoking at 3 years ago since the price of cigarette raise up because he can´t afford to acheive it. He is not only one but many people quit as well.


4. It doesn't encourage people to get off their butts, go outside, and move around more.

The public healthy insurance and doctors are the one who can help them how to improve their healthy. The problem is cost them millions to help them... They need to go health information or spa resort to learn how to take care of themselves.

5. It's just a "feel good" political trick.

I thought the same as you as well, that´s why I vote "Not Sure".

My opinion after withnessed in USA and Britian that they should reduce the prices on healthy foods and raise the prices for unhealthy foods instead of extra tax on unhealthy foods.

Here in Germany, alochol and cigarettes are expensives, also junk foods as well... vegetables, fruits, fresh unprocessed meats, cheese, etc are reasonable prices than processed meats, unhealthy, etc. All the taxes they added to is same % (7% tax on all foods and drinks and 19% tax on all materials).

It´s very hard to find healthy food like salad sandwiches etc when I was in USA than in England... Example: We were in Cedar Point and need something to eat.. .I want salad sandwiches... None... :( all of junk foods... They should use healthy sandwiches, salads etc in the shop as the fast foods... like here in Germany... some junk fast foods and some healthy fast foods.



 
I think it would be a good idea. After all, obesity is linked to many other health issues which cost tax-payers millions of dollars each year to treat. I believe that if one is going to do something detrimental to their health, they should be the one's footing the bill for medical expenditures required in dealing with the consequences of those actions. Just like with cigarettes.

I consider myself to be fat, so this would be applicable to myself as well.

Yes that what I thought so. It cost Public Health Insurance a lot of money on obesity for treatment...

I explained Reba that those prices for healthy foods should be reduced and raise the prices for unhealthy foods, etc. instead of extra tax.
 
I'm with Eve on this one. I think the more tax dollars go up the more people couldn't afford to buy junk or cigarettes anymore and would make it much more easier for them to quit. I vow myself when cigarettes hit up to 5 dollars a pack I'll quit, because I wouldn't be able to afford it, it'll make it easier for me to quit. No money no cigarettes. ;)

Yes it work on my hubby. He quit smoking at 3 years ago due expenses. He is not only one but many people do like that. It works pretty good.

See my POV to Reba´s and Eve´s posts.
 

I voted "Not Sure" but I am with Eve & Cheri. I will explain why I am not sure either it´s good idea or not.




I have to agree with you for that but Obesity issues could destory the Public Health Insurance millions.

Here in Germany, they add alochol, cigarettes and junk foods expensive than healthy foods and drink. That´s why we go to junk foods rare.






Well, when I was in USA and saw how expensive fruits and vegetables than in Germany are. No wonder, why the people can´t acheive to buy expensives one which is not fair. They supposed to reduce the prices for healthy foods than unhealthy foods.

I beleive it works on the people for quit cigarettes, eat cheap unhealthy foods, etc. like what Cheri says. My hubby quit smoking at 3 years ago since the price of cigarette raise up because he can´t afford to acheive it. He is not only one but many people quit as well.




The public healthy insurance and doctors are the one who can help them how to improve their healthy. The problem is cost them millions to help them... They need to go health information or spa resort to learn how to take care of themselves.



I thought the same as you as well, that´s why I vote "Not Sure".

My opinion after withnessed in USA and Britian that they should reduce the prices on healthy foods and raise the prices for unhealthy foods instead of extra tax on unhealthy foods.

Here in Germany, alochol and cigarettes are expensives, also junk foods as well... vegetables, fruits, fresh unprocessed meats, cheese, etc are reasonable prices than processed meats, unhealthy, etc. All the taxes they added to is same % (7% tax on all foods and drinks and 19% tax on all materials).

It´s very hard to find healthy food like salad sandwiches etc when I was in USA than in England... Example: We were in Cedar Point and need something to eat.. .I want salad sandwiches... None... :( all of junk foods... They should use healthy sandwiches, salads etc in the shop as the fast foods... like here in Germany... some junk fast foods and some healthy fast foods.




In my area, sale tax is 1% on grocery, all of food in general.
 
In my area, sale tax is 1% on grocery, all of food in general.

All tax charges on foods and drinks in USA are not same. I have to pay extra tax for the foods and drinks which here in Germany doesn´t.

All foods and drinks are tax included here in Germany but USA doesn´t. I compared the prices on healthy and unhealthy foods between USA and Germany and must say that healthy foods in Germany are cheaper than USA and unhealthy foods in USA are cheaper than Germany.
 
All foods and drinks are tax included here in Germany but USA doesn´t. I compared the prices on healthy and unhealthy foods between USA and Germany and must say that healthy foods in Germany are cheaper than USA and unhealthy foods in USA are cheaper than Germany.

That's interesting, My own view is that it'll make a big differences in everyone's life getting healthy instead of wasting millions and millions of dollars on medical costs. I know people are responsible for their own condition, but helping others improve their lifestyles and prevent obesity would make a huge differences, so taxpayers don't have to spend so much money on Medicare and Medicaid.

People wouldn't have temptations if junk were at the highest cost where people could not easy afford, not everyone does their daily exercise, so watching what they eat doesn't do anything either, but enforced taxes to go up high would be more in help for them, keep American people in shape, healthy and have a long lasting life.

I think it's worth the try to see how far that would go. ;)
 
Another way to help cut down on obesity would be to put the same stipulations for advertising on junk food as it is on cigarettes and alcoholic beverages. When is the last time you saw a t.v. ad for cigarettes or beer? Consequently, I am not tempted to go buy a pack of cigarettes or beer as easily as I would be if I were bombarded with their images all over the t.v. every minute of the day.

I am currently on a very strict diet and every time I turn on the t.v. there is an advertisement for some kind of junk food. My mouth starts watering and it is everything I can do to muster up the will-power not to jump in my car and drive to Long John Silver's. If those images weren't showing up I wouldn't have such intense cravings.

Not only would taxing the junk food extra cause people to have to slow down and THINK before they eat, due to the extra cost, but those taxes would also go to pay for the medical expenses incurred by the ones putting themselves in that position in the first place, rather than having EVERYONE pay for the consequences of their choices in what they decide to put in their mouthes.
 
5. It's just a "feel good" political trick.

I didn´t think twice as I quoted your post until Cheri´s and Eve´s other posts come. Their posts make sense to me.

I don´t think political use fat tax as an excuse. The reason they have to raise the tax on unhealthy foods to support Public Healthy Insurance (Medicare) because obesity treatments cost Public Healthy Insurance (Medicare) millions.

Like what my hubby quit smoking at 3 years ago due cigarettes expenses. We don´t drink alochol much.
 
I voted no. It will not change anything. Just look at the cigarettes/alcohol taxes, they thought if increase the taxes then will make people quit, but not work! People still drinking and smoking even they are charged by taxes..
Good point.
 
Back
Top