Fat Tax??

Discussion in 'Community' started by Abstract, Jul 31, 2003.

  1. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #1
    http://www.msnbc.com/news/927301.asp?0sl&cp1=1&cp1=1

    So who supports the "Fat Tax"? I think it may be a good idea if a 1% tax was added to purchases at fast food restaurants, but on the other hand, don't your high taxes already account for the money needed for the healthcare system to help fat-related diseases? In Canada it does, or it should. The strain of fat people on our healthcare system has already been accounted for, I would think. Fast food didn't just sneak up from behind us like Michael Jackson at a daycare. We've known about the effects for so long that I'm sure your taxes already account for the negative effect of fatty foods on healthcare. But on the other hand, it would make fast food eaters responsible for their eating habits.

    And isn't this just a band-aid solution? If you really want to solve the problem, its better to educate people about fatty foods and health, rather than patch things up with another patch.
     
  2. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #2
    it's all patches these days

    that's why law school takes 3 or 4 years;)
     
  3. Kwyjibo macrumors 68040

    Kwyjibo

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2002
    #3
    defiantely not a solution; people who enjoy fast food will continue to enjoy fast food even at higher prices

    Example; excessive cigarette taxes have not reducded the amount of smokers or their awarness towards the issue. Also resturants in downtown chicaog have to charge a to-go tax, revenues are contributed to clenaing up litter produced by these resturarnts so extra money will not be a deterrent to the average cosnumer based on past trends. Plus I think once these things get into motion there will be quite an uproar from restaurant owners across the country...
     
  4. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #4
    It tends to be the poor that eat more fast food and food with a fat content. I had heard that after they hit the tobacco industry, that fat was next on the agenda. It's that insatiable appetite for higher taxes to support a larger government. The only answer to this problem is to never vote for another Democrat ever again. For now the Republicans are the lesser ot 2 evils. Then go after the Republicans that are against us!
     
  5. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
  6. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #6
    My prayer is that 2004 will begin the second American Revolution. If we don't take America back soon it will be lost forever!
     
  7. MacFan25 macrumors 68000

    MacFan25

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA
    #7
    As long as some of the money is used to fight child obesity then, I think that its a good idea. Child obesity is becoming a problem in the U.S., and we need to establish programs to cut it down.
     
  8. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #8
    [objectively]
    This is what they always said about the taxes on cigarettes -- that they were necessary to pay for healthcare costs borne by the government due to smoking.

    Now, however, it's not clear where that tax money went or that it ever really paid for any of the costs that the government had used to justify the tax -- rather, we wound up with states suing the tobacco companies based on those same costs. It's not clear to me that this was the way to go about things.
    [/objectively]

    If only we had some sort of...hmmm...what would you call it...like a "lock-box" or something. :D
     
  9. deryk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Denver
    #9
    I agree. Cigarette taxes are used to pay for many things and only a tiny fraction actually goes towards off-setting the health care costs caused by lifetime smoking or towards prevention and ceasation programs. (Your lucky that the to-go tax actually goes to cleaning up the litter.)

    If the fat tax were used to help people develop healthy eating lifestyles and excecise, I would support it. However, it would probably go towards other things.
     
  10. kylos macrumors 6502a

    kylos

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Location:
    MI
    #10
    i wouldn't support such a tax whether or not it was used to fight weight problems. It would be a ridiculous socialistic tax to support the government's increasingly socialistic tendencies.
     
  11. Kwyjibo macrumors 68040

    Kwyjibo

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2002
    #11

    thats what were told....but any political organization that is followed by machine like The Daley Machine can't be 100% straightforward....thats how they justify the tax I can't be sure there are extra workes because of it.
     
  12. herr_neumann macrumors 6502

    herr_neumann

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Roseville, Ca
    #12
    Who cares if they raise fast food prices, taxes, whatever....

    It isnt like the FF companies wont just lower prices to make up for it.


    The first thing they need to work on is making companies include tax into their prices.... none of this 99 cents is realy a dollar eight crap.....

    And considering the amount of old people that are retiring, they need to do something to help with the health care costs. Or, they could just tell the old people, "well the people you voted for screwed you, so no doctors for you." Like it or not that is not going to happen.

    The real solution to all this fat stuff is making FF companies put the nutritional guide (calories and fat, etc) right on the front of the item you order. So instead of a big McDonalds logo on your fries it would tell you you are eating you fat content for the day. Same with burgers etc.

    I know some sill say, "but i dont get mine the way they normally make it," well tough. You will need to go look in the book to see how you customizations have changed the values on your fat wrapper.

    Finally, why B*tch about a one 1% ( or some other insignificant number) increase if, and only if, it goes to healthcare. Now I mean healthcare not obesity or any other specialized crap. If you buy FF, you subsidize the health system. If you can afford insurance, then quit B*TCHING about pay ten cents more for you extra value meal, cuz it obviously isnt that big a deal to you. Well I guess that is ten less cents to spend on the driving range, meaning like half a ball.

    And as far as fighting child obesity, it is simple, make them get off their fat asses and do PE. I remember back when I had PE, all the fat kids did nothing. Yes it is going to be hard for them, but that is what getting in shape is, very hard. Make them workout. if they do not want to then they can fail PE.
     
  13. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #13
    first get rid of the democrats

    then get rid of the republicans

    and let the usa be run "only" by obese smokers

    wait, that's the case anyway;)
     
  14. johnnowak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2003
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #14
    Re: Fat Tax??

    The whole purpose of this is to use the tax revenue to educate people without raising the taxes as much for everyone who isn't a slobbering fatass. That's the whole point... to educate people... read more closely.
     
  15. Giaguara macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    #15
    my uncle says in finland they have made some laws .. so if an obese or extremely fat person goes to public health care system to get cured for whatever problem she / he has, the nurses and doctors will only answer "take care of yourself. lose that extra fat, and then come back to be cured." if you are too fat, you won't get health care.

    if food has always contents, how can you still get fat? if you see a "serving" of potato chips of 1 chip has 1 gram of fat .. well. why don't they use also the nutrition table for 100 g? if you know that a big mac has 36 g of fat, and big fries 27 g and a milkshake over 20 g, how can you still eat them? doesn't the knowledge of it make you not it? :rolleyes:

    my suggestions to lose the obesity stuff ..

    - contents of the food / calorie content ALSO to restaurant meals (menus). if you see on your macdonald burger package what you are eating ... umh

    - warnings. when you enter to a supermarket, any place selling food, restaurant etc: "Warning. Improper use of food (eating too much, or junk food, or not eating) might cause your health problems. The store is not responsible for your weight or health."
     
  16. NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816

    NavyIntel007

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #16
    Why does this tax money have to go to programs to curb the spending on it? The smoking tax is a penalty tax, just like the gas tax is. They don't tax gas to fund programs to show you the harms that driving does to the ozone. You smoke you pay the tax. The government should not have to pay for you being a stupid idiot lighting up every 22 minutes. Indirectly, this tax money goes to Medicare and Medicaid which lots of dying smokers latch on to at their 9th hour. So to the criers about the smoking tax it's time to Q.Y.B. or stop blowing smoke in my face and dropping butts on my beaches.

    I believe the fat tax is a great idea. It's implementation is a little off however. First off, who's to say the steak you get at a uberfancy restaurant isn't making you fat? Plus what is 1% on a $5 value meal... a whole nickle. People won't feel that penalty at all. If you flipped the script though, and made the business accountable by making the business pay a tax on all food products that fall within a range of unacceptability the business will either raise prices for the consumer or start finding ways to make their products healthier (or both). It's a win win situation. But this money in no way should pay for fatty food awareness. There's about 100 channels that talk about it every day. Fighting child obesity starts in the home. No cokes, cookies or candies... that's where it starts.

    Although it would be a bit dramatic if on your reciept it said...


    Subtotal $5.48
    Sales tax $0.40
    FAT tax $0.05
    Total $5.93

    Have a nice day!!!

    People would be like... fat tax... oh man, I am fat.
     
  17. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #17
    Re: How bout?

    Go to McDonald's and get a

    Senior Discount if you look old enough

    and slapped with the

    Fat Tax if you're too fat.

    :eek:

    It's hard to tax food for fattening food (blimp making foods), when changing the portion size could be a way of altering a persons FAT Quotient/serving.

    Though the package size may never change.

    Somewhere along the line there needs to be a calculation of meal size compared US daily requirements.

    Yes, if a meal is 100% of the daily average calories it deserves to be taxed (it's a meal 2-3 times too big).

    The sole focus of FAT content has moved people away from calorie counting, which means they eat 2k calorie meals 2 or 3 times a day. But may be eating low-FAT meals.
     
  18. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #18
    You have hit the nail on the head Kyle? This is the very problem that we need to stop ASAP!
     
  19. Giaguara macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    #19
    Re: Re: How bout?

    I think it is quite hard to eat a low-fat meal that has 2000 kcal. Well, I can try .. 2000 kcal =

    - 1 pint of pure, white sugar - or similar content of sugar in the meal - or

    - 500 g of pure proteine. That'd be several pounds of fish or meat. Sure, that'd make you sick. - or

    - No reasonable amount of vegetables or fruit can provide you 2000 kcal in a meal. Or .. 40 apples / 80 kg (200 lb) of cabbage / ... 2/3 lb of chocolate .. wait, that's not low-fat. 30 cups of low-fat cheese ... - or ...

    - Boost what ever you eat with high-sugary drinks (coke etc) or beer or other alcohol = more cals.
     
  20. jbomber macrumors 6502a

    jbomber

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Location:
    Brooklyn - NYC
    #20
    doesn't sound like the best idea to me.

    the money's mostly going to go straight toward defense spending, not towards healthcare. :(

    besides, i doubt that the tax will actually slow the sales of fast food. people aren't going to see the 1% increase as an actual deterrent. it's just more cash for the government.
     
  21. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #21
    I think child obesity has its roots more in the break down of the family structure. Most obese children come from families where responsibility isn't taught. My kids are not allowed to eat junk all of the time. All you have to do is say no. Some kids have a messed up metabolism, sure, but the majority of kids that are currently obese do not have the self discipline or the parents controlling their behavior. (i.e. turning off the T.V., saying no when they want junk food. Not buying the kids candy or soda... It isn't rocket science.)
     
  22. alia macrumors 6502a

    alia

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #22

    Wow, I guess they don't have the Hippocratic Oath in Finland! I find that disturbing and upsetting. As a daughter of two doctors, I can tell you that they would be horrified to have to refuse treatment to anyone who needed it.

    Alia
     
  23. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #23
    Re: Re: Re: How bout?

    I was exagerating, but not by much.

    See your thinking general, why not look at the food isles in stores and all the "low fat/reduced fat/diet" food lining it.

    Not everything "low fat" is low calorie.

    Using these "so-called" diet foods you probably can put together a nice 1k+ meal and still have room for a large herbal drink/juice and a low-fat desert to add another 600-1000 calories.

    Remember people hardly ever eat the portion size listed on the package, they may may normally eat several times the serving size of a "low-fat" item, heck they may even be taking a "low-fat" family entre and eating the whole thing.

    Especially if they consider the McDondald's Supersize Double Quarter Pounder Value Meal a "normal" meal as long as it comes with desert.

    Most people are definitely not going to consider a half-cup low fat ice cream a "normal" serving size.

    And will laugh at the 8 oz serving size for sugar laden drinks, even though each of these servings may add 75-150 calories each.

    Serving sizes are there on the side of food and some of them have been reduced to make people "feel" good.

    But based on some of the ways they calculate low fat food, heck Pepsi would qualify at 200 calories per can. And then there's the so-called "healthier" fruit juice drinks which can easily have 50% more calories. :(
     
  24. Gus macrumors 65816

    Gus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #24
    I honestly can't believe there are people who are talking abbout this likeit something that is a good idea.

    Two words: Personal responsibility

    If you are too fat, then stop eating foods high in fat (or carbs, more accurately). This is just a stupid tax, like most of the stupid taxes today. Tired of paying for everyone else's health care because they smoke or are too fat, then stop allowing programs like medicare, and get a real system. The points made about the tobacco settlement are true. Each state in the settlement received a ludicrous amount of money that was SUPPOSED to be used for anti-smoking campaigns and health care, but all of those states are now running with huge deficits, and have blown all of the money they received on other programs.

    Fat Tax. Geez, anybody remember their American History? I mean we were sparked to war with Britain over stupid taxes like a Tea Tax, and now we are going to have a Fat Tax? What, do we pay by the calorie? People pay health insurance, sales tax, gas tax, smoking taxed, liquor taxes, property taxes, soc. security taxes, FICA taxes, road taxes, school taxes, and now a Fat Tax? Give me a break. This country is based on free choice. If you choose to never go outside and eat Big Macs all day long, then you will get obese and have health problems, but it was your choice to do these things. Stop litigating, and take some personal responsibility. The only way this will happen is if we stop catering to people who don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. And don't give me any of this metabolic, genetic disposition stuff, because the number of people with these real problems is a small percentage of the fat people in this country.

    Sorry for the tone.

    Regards,
    Gus
     

Share This Page