# Obesity Tax



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 28, 2010)

Did anyone else see this and get as filled with rage as I did. Why does the government think they have the right to start taxing foods to fight obesity. A former surgeon general actually compared obesity to 9-11, calling it the terror within and said it is destroying our society. Don't these morons have more important things to worry about.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqJwUMiue2Y


----------



## RJI (Jan 29, 2010)

I can see both sides of the argument on this one. 
You shouldn't be told by the government what you can and can't eat but at the same time there are so many obese Americans who are no longer productive members of society. How many members on just this forum are collecting SSI because they are too fat to work but continue to eat crappy foods rather then going on a diet and not burden the tax payer? 

I'm all for eating what you want and living whatever lifestyle makes you happy until that lifestyle infringes on my tax dollars and i have to support your fast food habit. 


Also have you been to an elementary school lately? When i was in grade school during the late 70's early 80's you might have had 1 fat kid per 30 kid classroom, now its more like 10 per class and these are some of the laziest kids i've ever seen. So maybe something does need to be done to prevent an entire generation of not just extremely overweight kids but lazy overweight kids.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

RJI said:


> I can see both sides of the argument on this one.
> You shouldn't be told by the government what you can and can't eat but at the same time there are so many obese Americans who are no longer productive members of society. How many members on just this forum are collecting SSI because they are too fat to work but continue to eat crappy foods rather then going on a diet and not burden the tax payer?
> 
> I'm all for eating what you want and living whatever lifestyle makes you happy until that lifestyle infringes on my tax dollars and i have to support your fast food habit.
> ...



Social Security shouldn't exist.


----------



## chicken legs (Jan 29, 2010)

So can i get a tax break for buying organic foods and vitamins?


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

chicken legs said:


> So can i get a tax break for buying organic foods and vitamins?



Not currently.


----------



## chicken legs (Jan 29, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Social Security shouldn't exist.



LOL..

Idk about going that far. Social services like that are what separate us from 3rd world countries.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

chicken legs said:


> LOL..
> 
> Idk about going that far. Social services like that are what separate us from 3rd world countries.



Not really, but I don't feel like getting into another lengthy debate.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 29, 2010)

I support taxing junk foods. It's not only fat people who are facing health issues cos of crap food.

And crap foods are just as bad as smokes or alcohol...so why not tax it too?


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> I support taxing junk foods. It's not only fat people who are facing health issues cos of crap food.
> 
> And crap foods are just as bad as smokes or alcohol...so why not tax it too?



lol, taxes have reduced tobacco and alcohol consumption??


----------



## Melian (Jan 29, 2010)

chicken legs said:


> So can i get a tax break for buying organic foods and vitamins?



Yeah....if they decreased the price of some other food to match the low price of shit quality foods (so the average poor citizen, GRAD STUDENTS, for example ) still had a cheap option and could afford to eat, I would have no problem with them taxing the shit out of fastfood and the like. 

However, if they just want to tax things and make it just generally more expensive to eat, well fuck that.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

Using taxes to control human behavior is completely unethical and sets a dangerous precedence. Only market forces can drive the price of organic foods down. Government involvement in pricing always ends badly.


----------



## RJI (Jan 29, 2010)

chicken legs said:


> So can i get a tax break for buying organic foods and vitamins?



That would be the way to go to promote healthy eating. 

i mainly eat organic veggies and fruit and my Super Greens and Vitamins are not cheap.


----------



## Melian (Jan 29, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Using taxes to control human behavior is completely unethical and sets a dangerous precedence. Only market forces can drive the price of organic foods down. Government involvement in pricing always ends badly.



Well, in a perfect world, they would take the money obtained from taxing the "junk" foods and use it to subsidize "healthy" foods, thus decreasing cost. They won't, of course, so it is a moot point.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 29, 2010)

I also really wish the price of organic foods would come down. It also angers me that I have to go through so much trouble to obtain milk that hasn't been pasteurized.


----------



## chicken legs (Jan 29, 2010)

Once again "the man" is trying to cover up their mistakes. I like what Earnest Nagel posted about Dr. Weil on what is in so called "health foods and most medicine. The FDA has has been treating American health from a Capitalistic view. Americans have been consuming genetically altered (GA) food for years with unknown consequences. We have been given medicine like Birth control and Rogaine without consideration to what it might do to the next generation. But hey..we are the "want it now" generation...so I guess we have to sleep in the bed our forefathers made until we get memory foam beds and then have robots like Wall-e dump it...somewhere when we get old.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jan 29, 2010)

The taxes are not meant to curb behaviour but rather to recoup losses the state or federal government suffers on health care.

I'd just take obesity out of the equation and promote lifestyle changes that can affect health such as eliminating foods high in sugar and sodium and fat, and that have empty calories. As Donni points out, everyone can suffer ill health from consuming those foods, not just fat people. Plenty of skinny people get high blood pressure or high cholesterol.



> Also have you been to an elementary school lately? When i was in grade school during the late 70's early 80's you might have had 1 fat kid per 30 kid classroom, now its more like 10 per class and these are some of the laziest kids i've ever seen. So maybe something does need to be done to prevent an entire generation of not just extremely overweight kids but lazy overweight kids.



I was talking with a younger friend about this. We realized that when i was in elementary school we had long recess periods where you'd play four square or tetherball or just run around. We also had gym class where you played sports. Lots of today's kids don't have that and they also are not active because they are parked in front of the xbox and not playing hide and seek or hopscotch.


----------



## RJI (Jan 29, 2010)

LoveBHMS said:


> The taxes are not meant to curb behaviour but rather to recoup losses the state or federal government suffers on health care.
> 
> I'd just take obesity out of the equation and promote lifestyle changes that can affect health such as eliminating foods high in sugar and sodium and fat, and that have empty calories. As Donni points out, everyone can suffer ill health from consuming those foods, not just fat people. Plenty of skinny people get high blood pressure or high cholesterol.
> 
> ...



We used to have about 30 mins of play time in the schoolyard before class officially started, then 30-45 mins after lunch. We also had gym class that had us outdoors most days just being active. 
When school was out we didn't run home to play video games etc we played kick ball or some other activity.... these kids today even the thinner ones are not in the greatest of shape. 
When i was a kid groups of us would walk 4 miles to the big toy store to buy Star Wars figures, then walk home. My nephews and nieces won't even walk a block to get milk at a corner store. They aren't fat but they sure are lazy and i doubt in very good cardio vascular condition.


----------



## chicken legs (Jan 29, 2010)

Living in Vegas where everything is shipped in... we're also in between an air force base, Area 51, and Yucca Mountain...I have noticed people who are born and raised here (like myself) are not very healthy (week constitution)...(we are going to look like Total Recall in a few years). When I'm out and about, I have learned to see the traits of where people are from. Like, I can tell who grew up on a farm. They feel like Superman (strong constitution) to me because of the foods they ate...aka Escapist and my mom. On the flip side, people like my dad (week constitution) who lived in cities for generations show more industrial linked diseases and growth. 

Anywho..I am veering into the evolution of the human species..


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jan 29, 2010)

RJI said:


> We used to have about 30 mins of play time in the schoolyard before class officially started, then 30-45 mins after lunch. We also had gym class that had us outdoors most days just being active.
> When school was out we didn't run home to play video games etc we played kick ball or some other activity.... these kids today even the thinner ones are not in the greatest of shape.
> When i was a kid groups of us would walk 4 miles to the big toy store to buy Star Wars figures, then walk home. My nephews and nieces won't even walk a block to get milk at a corner store. They aren't fat but they sure are lazy and i doubt in very good cardio vascular condition.



That's what i mean. My friend pointed out that blaming food is a small part of it, Mcdonalds and 7-11 have always been around. Kids today are very lazy and not active at all. And that is just about health not size. Many SS posters on here talk about having been active as kids--walking, playing sports, hiking, even weight lifting. I think that is a far bigger problem than obesity.


----------



## squurp (Jan 29, 2010)

RJI said:


> I can see both sides of the argument on this one.
> You shouldn't be told by the government what you can and can't eat but at the same time there are so many obese Americans who are no longer productive members of society. How many members on just this forum are collecting SSI because they are too fat to work but continue to eat crappy foods rather then going on a diet and not burden the tax payer?
> 
> I'm all for eating what you want and living whatever lifestyle makes you happy until that lifestyle infringes on my tax dollars and i have to support your fast food habit.
> ...



Whoa, buddy. Someone can link to my lengthy post in another thread. Obesity is not a simple issue as you make it. Taxing people for being fat is not much different than taxing students who need special education services in school. I strongly disagree with it. I won't go on about the details- read my other post.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Jan 30, 2010)

squurp said:


> Whoa, buddy. Someone can link to my lengthy post in another thread. Obesity is not a simple issue as you make it. Taxing people for being fat is not much different than taxing students who need special education services in school. I strongly disagree with it. I won't go on about the details- read my other post.



But it's not about taxing the people themselves. It's about taxing the high-calorie foods.

I'm an obese guy and I don't disagree with this. Cigarettes are taxed, alcohol is taxed, and high-calorie foods should be as well. They're just as much a detriment to health as tobacco and alcohol.

Especially if public healthcare becomes a reality, the taxpayers would be footing the bill for unhealthy activities that people choose to engage in. I don't really see what's wrong with that.

It's the same reason they have seatbelt laws. Healthcare ain't cheap.


----------



## djudex (Jan 30, 2010)

I think I could get behind the idea of taxing poor health choice foods if the government agency in charge of the portfolio could be trusted to use the money garnered to do tings like subsidize healthier food choices and exercise programs but frankly I just don't trust the gov that much.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Jan 30, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> But it's not about taxing the people themselves. It's about taxing the high-calorie foods.
> 
> I'm an obese guy and I don't disagree with this. Cigarettes are taxed, alcohol is taxed, and high-calorie foods should be as well. They're just as much a detriment to health as tobacco and alcohol.
> 
> ...



Taxes on alcohol and tobacco have not reduced consumption of these products. I know here in Ohio last year more alcohol was consumed than any year in our history. People who have unhealthy habits die earlier. That's less years on government healthcare effectively saving tax money. The government shouldn't be involved in healthcare anyway. Every state that has instituted seatbelt laws has had an increase in accidents and an increase in fatalities from accidents. the moral of the story is that our government has gotten way too big and out of control. it needs to be knocked back down to where it is supposed to be.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Jan 30, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Taxes on alcohol and tobacco have not reduced consumption of these products. I know here in Ohio last year more alcohol was consumed than any year in our history. People who have unhealthy habits die earlier. That's less years on government healthcare effectively saving tax money. The government shouldn't be involved in healthcare anyway. Every state that has instituted seatbelt laws has had an increase in accidents and an increase in fatalities from accidents. the moral of the story is that *our government has gotten way too big and out of control.* it needs to be knocked back down to where it is supposed to be.



I agree wholeheartedly about this. It shouldn't even be an issue. What people eat, I mean. It's just the society we live in where everyone has to be babied by big daddy government. The death of personal accountability.


----------



## likeitmatters (Jan 30, 2010)

is when someone is gaining weight and growing to a very large size that they apply for disability and that is where the problem lies. I have no problem with a guy or gal growing as big as they want but I feel they should be refused any kind of disability of any sort and no food stamps either.

I see this kind of thinking in the gay community and from personal experience and I feel it is just wrong.

I have a pet peeve about sitting on airplane and some rather large adult wants to sit next to me and when I put my arm rest down they start getting rather terse at me because I want my seat all to myself...I say to them sorry I paid for the seat and I am not sharing it with you...and smile.


----------



## tk31 (Jan 31, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Taxes on alcohol and tobacco have not reduced consumption of these products. I know here in Ohio last year more alcohol was consumed than any year in our history. People who have unhealthy habits die earlier. That's less years on government healthcare effectively saving tax money. The government shouldn't be involved in healthcare anyway. Every state that has instituted seatbelt laws has had an increase in accidents and an increase in fatalities from accidents. the moral of the story is that our government has gotten way too big and out of control. it needs to be knocked back down to where it is supposed to be.



I couldn't agree with you more; the government has no right to interfere in those situatiions.


----------



## likeitmatters (Jan 31, 2010)

when I was very young and in school we had 1 one hour of playtime out in the school yard and pe which seems to have disappeared for the most part from what I have read through the years.

Like I said, have you noticed the people on disability or on some kind of help from the govt tend to be larger than most others? I can only tell you what I see here in south carolina and where I have traveled and seen.

I tend to agree with you about that it wont stop people from eating what they should not be eating or even slow them down because look at the price of cigarettes, they have not slowed anyone down or stopped for the price nor has alcohol or beer.

but the govt will do what the govt always does and does not listen to anyone now or ever....


----------



## PeanutButterfly (Jan 31, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> I agree wholeheartedly about this. It shouldn't even be an issue. What people eat, I mean. It's just the society we live in where everyone has to be babied by big daddy government. The death of personal accountability.



Amen. Everytime the government gets involved it manages to make matters worse. Trying to force people to eat a certain way isn't going to make much of a difference, especially if we don't address the causes of such high fast food consumption. I'll confess I didn't watch the video (I can be one of those lazy '90s kids sometimes...) but what are they planning on doing? Taxing everything? Chinese food? Pizza? Pasta? Dunkin' Donuts? Who decides what's "obesity proof"? A lot of times it's not necessarily what you're eating but how much of it.

I can see the arguement for fast food being taxed, I think it's totally gross and personally never eat it, but then healthy food needs to come down in price. There are a lot of families that actually live off of the stuff! because they can't afford much else. Thats a societal problem that the government isn't willing to address and a major root of America's reliance on these places. Look at people below the poverty line, families with both parent's out of work, students with so much debt that they need $400 a month to pay back student loans. I'm not saying that everyone who eats fast food is in these kinds of situations BUT those who consume it the most generally are. If these people could afford free range chicken instead of the mystery meat at MickeyD's a high percentage would probably switch over. 

Like others have said, I would be for it if it were specifically against the fast food industry AND I knew the money was going towards something productive. Most likely it won't.


----------



## Isla620 (Jan 31, 2010)

For every First-World politician spewing rhetoric about the obesity "epidemic," there's some poor ship-breaker in Bangladesh who can't buy enough calories on his meager wages to maintain his body weight because we've essentially outsourced all our exercise to him. Both the US and UK have undergone a major shift in the past 40 years to service-based economies, moving nearly all their manufacturing offshore. This translates into significantly fewer physically demanding jobs, and fewer calories burnt by the populace in general. This is the dark side to the way we've chosen to structure our society. But, of course, it's more politically expedient to just blame the fat people and make their Cheetos expensive. In times of confusion and change, people love scapegoats. It distracts them from what's really going on.

Speaking strictly from my own self-interest, I wouldn't want to see junk food taxed because I want more BHMs around, not less. However, I find myself strangely titillated by the idea that the policy wonks who thought this up probably did so over a big stack of pizzas.



likeitmatters said:


> I have a pet peeve about sitting on airplane and some rather large adult wants to sit next to me and when I put my arm rest down they start getting rather terse at me because I want my seat all to myself...I say to them sorry I paid for the seat and I am not sharing it with you...and smile.



Oh, send them my way! Everytime I fly, I cross my fingers that I get seated next to a BHM who should have been made to buy two seats. Squish me, please! I'd be a happy, happy woman if there were some system to deliberately book my seat that way. Sort of like a combination travel agency-FFA/BHM matchmaking service.


----------



## squurp (Jan 31, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> But it's not about taxing the people themselves. It's about taxing the high-calorie foods.
> 
> I'm an obese guy and I don't disagree with this. Cigarettes are taxed, alcohol is taxed, and high-calorie foods should be as well. They're just as much a detriment to health as tobacco and alcohol.
> 
> ...



and



> is when someone is gaining weight and growing to a very large size that they apply for disability and that is where the problem lies. I have no problem with a guy or gal growing as big as they want but I feel they should be refused any kind of disability of any sort and no food stamps either.
> 
> I see this kind of thinking in the gay community and from personal experience and I feel it is just wrong.
> 
> I have a pet peeve about sitting on airplane and some rather large adult wants to sit next to me and when I put my arm rest down they start getting rather terse at me because I want my seat all to myself...I say to them sorry I paid for the seat and I am not sharing it with you...and smile.



Again, see my post on the other thread. The problem with taxing these foods is that it assumes a direct causal relationship between them and obesity. This Causal relationship has never been shown (in fact it has been refuted in several studies). Rather the best they can do is very loosely correlate. Before taxes are levied, there needs to be a clear causal relationship. SMoking has a direct causal increase in the risk of lung cancer, for example. this has been scientifically established. This is a far far more complicated picture with diet. 

http://www.newsweek.com/id/213807?GT1=43002
http://www.newsweek.com/id/215115/page/2

anyway, see the other post.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Feb 1, 2010)

squurp said:


> and
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I do agree with you on this. I do not see these foods as a direct cause of obesity. Also obesity does not cause illness.


----------



## chicken legs (Feb 14, 2010)

HOLY COW!!!!!

This is you are what you eat...EXTREME STYLE...


----------



## escapist (Feb 14, 2010)

chicken legs said:


> HOLY COW!!!!!
> 
> This is you are what you eat...EXTREME STYLE...



Surprisingly that was only enough Beef for me to make 1 meal out of it :eat1:  :happy:


----------



## CyraEm (Feb 17, 2010)

I dunno. I like big men, but I don't want them to be unhealthy. I would never want my husband to be facing health problems because of my preferences. And I think obesity more refers to the kind of people who require, y'know, scooters.


----------



## Buffetbelly (Feb 19, 2010)

Better than taxing soda is just removing subsidies and price supports for growing corn. Cheap corn leads to cheap high fructose corn sweetener (HFCS) and cheap meat. Without government subsidies for corn, soybeans and cane sugar, the price differential between healthy food and less healthy food would be way less. 

But I don't object to taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages. Something has to be taxed, and if it's politically feasible go for it. 

Regarding disability, being disabled is really fattening due to the forced inactivity. Not all the fat people in wheelchairs were fat before they became ill --it often works the other way.


----------



## dublover42 (Feb 21, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> I also really wish the price of organic foods would come down. It also angers me that I have to go through so much trouble to obtain milk that hasn't been pasteurized.


I was with you until here...

Why would you go through the trouble of trying to obtain unpasteurized milk? yuck


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Feb 21, 2010)

dublover42 said:


> I was with you until here...
> 
> Why would you go through the trouble of trying to obtain unpasteurized milk? yuck



It is so much better. I'm addicted milk. I drink around a gallon a day. Have since I was 5.


----------



## fat hiker (Feb 22, 2010)

Buffetbelly said:


> Without government subsidies for corn, soybeans and *cane sugar*, the price differential between healthy food and less healthy food would be way less.



Actually, far from subsidising cane sugar, the US government mollycoddles US sugar cane growers by jacking up the domestic price of cane sugar (through import taxes) to the point where bakers, brewers, etc. feel they have to use high fructose corn syrup to keep down the price of their products.

US sugar prices, wholesale and retail, are nearly twice what they are in Canada - and Canada doesn't even grow sugar cane, we import it all from Brazil and Costa Rica! Corn syrup is more expensive here than sugar is. The reverse is true in the USA.

A quick comparo in the grocery store will show you. Cookies and jam in the USA are inevitably sweetened with corn syrup - except the most expensive brands - while in Canada jams and cookies are almost always made with sugar, as corn syrup is expensive and gives a sharp, nasty edge to baked goods that sugar doesn't.

But, you know, gotta protect those cane growing jobs in Louisiana and Texas....


----------



## Wanderer (Feb 23, 2010)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> It is so much better. I'm addicted milk. I drink around a gallon a day. Have since I was 5.



Not to mention, a truly organic milk is more chemically pure anyway... none of the hormones, chemicals and such. It tastes Mmm-Mmm Magnificent!


----------

