View Full Version : Fat Tax Could Curb Nation's Obesity Problem
Another example of the government sticking its nose in the private citizen's business, and it's based on data from a British study:
http://www.theindychannel.com/health/31079697/detail.html
Health experts have been trying to combat obesity in America for years and have recently suggested a new way to solve the growing problem.
A new study suggests that imposing a fat tax on unhealthy food and drinks could help slim down expanding waistlines.
According to British Medical Journal , more than 60 percent of Americans are overweight. Under the tax, a $4 cheeseburger would cost an extra 80 cents, RTV6's Stacia Matthews reported.
Some Hoosiers found the proposed fat tax hard to swallow.
"I don't think we should tax people and the way they run their lives,” one man said.
Others said a fat tax is palatable.
"I'd pay 20 percent. It's worth it,” one woman said. "I would eat a lot more healthy just to save more money.”
Researchers said a fat tax could drop obesity rates by 3.5 percent and prevent 2,700 heart-related deaths a year. The study also urged subsidies for healthier foods and veggies to make them more affordable.
Dr. Eric Wright, who heads the Department of Public Health at the Indiana University School of Medicine, said the fat tax falls right in line with other consumer products.
"We've applied tax to alcohol and tobacco and that has definitely shown through very many studies that it actually decreased use. So, the logic has been applied to fatty foods and preliminary evidence in Europe is that it’s very effective,” Wright said.
Researchers said Indiana spends $3.5 billion a year on obesity-related medical costs.
"The reality is, with two-thirds of the population being overweight or obese, that's what's driving up health care costs and you can either choose to pay now, or you can pay later,” Wright said.
Critics of the tax said people who choose to eat healthier foods should receive tax breaks and incentives.
Snip
When you hit somebody with a high tax you can change some people's habits.
But when they change their habits you lose the income.
So the list of what foods are bad expands and pretty soon everything is bad and taxed.
The tax man is like the camel trying to get it's nose into the tent.
What, is it hip to be European, now? Can't these imbeciles take a good hard look at what's happening over there and realize it dont' f.cking work?
ZonieDiver
05-18-2012, 18:08
What, is it hip to be European, now? Can't these imbeciles take a good hard look at what's happening over there and realize it dont' f.cking work?
"Over there"???
You don't have to go that far... just look to the west - California! They've killed their economy via taxes, and don't realize, or admit, it even now.
"Over there"???
You don't have to go that far... just look to the west - California! They've killed their economy via taxes, and don't realize, or admit, it even now.
My wife's paycheck just went up $280 a month because of our move to AZ with it's lower income tax. Plus, our property tax is lower, sales tax is about the same, fuel is much cheaper, government is less intrusive but they seem to be eager to change that. Four years ago we would not have needed any permits to build here. Not now. With more Californians escaping to AZ, I'm afraid they are bringing their nanny-state culture with them. We must resist them! Maybe a border fence. :D
Pat
ETA: My wife just told me that the $280 may include "catch-up" payments since the first of the year.
"Over there"???
You don't have to go that far... just look to the west - California! They've killed their economy via taxes, and don't realize, or admit, it even now.
Good point.
The problems in Cali started at the corner of Haight and Ashbury, and spiraled out. :D
ZonieDiver
05-18-2012, 18:32
My wife's paycheck just went up $280 a month because of our move to AZ with it's lower income tax. Plus, our property tax is lower, sales tax is about the same, fuel is much cheaper, government is less intrusive but they seem to be eager to change that. Four years ago we would not have needed any permits to build here. Not now. With more Californians escaping to AZ, I'm afraid they are bringing their nanny-state culture with them. We must resist them! Maybe a border fence. :D
Pat
You're too close to 'The People's Republic of Tucson' - aka 'Baja Arizona'!
In 1973 I had a bumper sticker on my pickup that read, "Don't Californicate Arizona"! Too late???
In 1973 I had a bumper sticker on my pickup that read, "Don't Californicate Arizona"! Too late???
You psychic? California was still mostly sane in 1973; Reagan was governor.
Most of the survivors of Haight and Ashbury are in the California legislature, now, Dusty.
Pat
Most of the survivors of Haight and Ashbury are in the California legislature, now, Dusty.
Pat
The rest teach in college.
Scimitar
05-18-2012, 23:45
Yeah tax unhealthy food.
Do you know who eats unhealthy food; the poor do, why, cos it's cheaper.
So let's tax the poor, and then we can turn around and give the revenue back to the poor cos we just made them poorer.
But not before we take our public sector cut for administrating it.
Morons
The Bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding Bureaucracy
You all realize that this may be good for the economy, the Prez could appoint a Czar to oversee the thousands of new federal employees that will be needed to enforce the laws governing obesity. It can be called the Obesity Security Administration (OSA) and they can advertise for openings just like the TSA does, on the boxes of junk foods. I can easily envision unemployment dipping to less than 8% if this takes hold.
" Do you know who eats unhealthy food; the poor do, why, cos it's cheaper."
I guess I like unhealthy foods but as to them being cheap I do not see it. Define unhealthy foods, I think of fast foods but they are anything but cheap. I think obesity is more of a result of volume eaten vs. what is eaten. You can tax things as much as you want but there will always be those who do not care.
TSA = Thousands Standing Around
OSA = Obese Sitting AndRound
You all realize that this may be good for the economy, the Prez could appoint a Czar to oversee the thousands of new federal employees that will be needed to enforce the laws governing obesity.
Entirely feasible if he gets another four years.
You all realize that this may be good for the economy, the Prez could appoint a Czar to oversee the thousands of new federal employees that will be needed to enforce the laws governing obesity.
"Fatty Czar" Richard Simmons - staffed with laid off McDonald's, Wendy's, etc. employees who would have the edge for those jobs as SME's on the topic.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
greenberetTFS
05-19-2012, 10:12
If this passes BT will be in lots of trouble.........:rolleyes::cool::p
Big Teddy :munchin
ZonieDiver
05-19-2012, 10:26
If this passes BT will be in lots of trouble.........
Big Teddy :munchin
No way, Big Teddy! They'll hire you as an expert consultant and you'll make the big bucks!:D
ZonieDiver
05-19-2012, 10:41
Yeah tax unhealthy food.
Do you know who eats unhealthy food; the poor do, why, cos it's cheaper.
Recent studies have indicated that this is not the case, in most instances. Perhaps TS, Penn, or one of our other knowledgeable chefs can come along and amplify/explain/modify - but, I found it to be the case years ago when I had young children.
I often bought pre-packaged foods, thinking I was saving money and saving time. What I discovered was that I was loading my precious daughters up with sodium, preservatives and other "stuff" that I didn't think was good for them. So, I stopped.
I bought fresh foods, did prep work ahead of time, cooked good meals in larger quantities and then froze the extra for quick meals when needed. Fast food became more infrequent, and only with coupons. They found they actually LIKED fish - not fried, but grilled on my Weber kettle. No more Kraft Mac&Cheese (which, I swear must have something in it that is like crack cocaine for kids!)... but homemade - with a mixture of cheeses they liked, which I let them shred, and pick the type of pasta they wanted that day.
I did save money... BIG time. I still think it holds true. The excuses that are offered today center around there NOT being grocery stores with fresh foods at reasonable prices in the lower income neighborhoods. For me, that is more of a "chicken or the egg" situation. It's not "if you build it, they will come" - it's "if you want it, they will provide it"!
MOO!
Greyshade2
05-19-2012, 10:46
I believe we may want to throw down some new tax on blatant stupidity, perhaps call it "G.I.T." for GoverMENTAL Idiots Tax, knowing how catchy acronyms are desirable these days....
BigJimCalhoun
05-20-2012, 07:59
If this passes, it would be nice to get a body fat percentage of these in congress and the senate who voted yes on it. They need to fix their own house first before legislating mine.
Though most will agree that candy bars and sugared soda-pop contribute to obesity, opinion varies as it relates to which other foods do.
My family eats lots of saturated fat - the same types of fats eaten by our grandparents. For example, we render our own beef tallow. We also believe that the 6- 11 servings of grains myth, along with corn/soybean/canola oils are causative for inflammation and obesity. There is a lot of money to be made promoting food.
(I have awesome cholesterol btw)
If this passes, it would be nice to get a body fat percentage of these in congress and the senate who voted yes on it. They need to fix their own house first before legislating mine.
Though most will agree that candy bars and sugared soda-pop contribute to obesity, opinion varies as it relates to which other foods do.
My family eats lots of saturated fat - the same types of fats eaten by our grandparents. For example, we render our own beef tallow. We also believe that the 6- 11 servings of grains myth, along with corn/soybean/canola oils are causative for inflammation and obesity. There is a lot of money to be made promoting food.
(I have awesome cholesterol btw)
Congressman and Senators would no doubt be exempt from such legislation were they to pass it, they only legislate for the rest of us.
My family eats lots of saturated fat - the same types of fats eaten by our grandparents. For example, we render our own beef tallow. We also believe that the 6- 11 servings of grains myth, along with corn/soybean/canola oils are causative for inflammation and obesity. There is a lot of money to be made promoting food.
(I have awesome cholesterol btw)
Just shot three feral pigs, and we rendered our own lard. I agree about the inflammation 100%.
Team Sergeant
05-20-2012, 09:16
The processed fast foods are full a few things to make them sell: Sugar, fats and salt.
Most obese people are eating much too much sugar, but it tastes good. And people are not cooking dinner anymore they are simply reheating/serving out of a can or premade package. These prepackaged processed foods are made by corporations that have one bottom line, make it sell. Add more sugar, salt and fat. I find it amazing to read some of the nutrition and ingredients placed on certain foods. You'll find sugar in foods that you would never think of adding if you made them yourself. Again, make it sell.
Simple good food it cheap, this has been proven but no one is cooking anymore they are all purchasing processed foods or fast foods.
Fast food, below is taco bell's Caramel Apple Empanada*. Yes that 's all the ingredients for ONE taco bell Caramel Apple Empanada*
http://www.tacobell.com/nutrition/ingredientstatement
Taco Bell's Caramel Apple Empanada*
Enriched Bleached Flour (Wheat Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid), Water, Diced Apples (Apples, Salt, Ascorbic Acid, Citric Acid), Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oil, TBHQ and Citric Acid [Preservatives]), Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Modified Food Starch, Nonfat Dried Milk, Contains 2% Or Less Of The Following: Margarine (Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Monoglycerides, Soy Lecithin, Sodium Benzoate [Preservative],Lactic Acid, Artificial Flavor, Calcium Disodium EDTA [Preservative], Beta Carotene , Vitamin A Palmitate), Sugar, Rice Flour, Glaze (Tapioca Dextrin, Dextrose, Sugar, Maltodextrin, Salt), Salt, Dextrose, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Sodium Citrate, Sodium Alginate, Sugar, Dicalcium Phosphate, Caramel Color, Sodium Bicarbonate, Food Gums ( Agar, Locust Bean Gum, Xanthan Gum, Carrageenan, Sodium Carboxymethlycellulose), Hydroxilated Soy Lecithin. Oil: High-Oleic Low-Linolenic Canola Oil, TBHQ (To Protect Flavor), Dimethylpolysiloxane (An Antifoaming Agent). CONTAINS: WHEAT, MILK, SOYBEANS
Water, Enriched Flour (Wheat Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid), Apples, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and/or Cottonseed Oil With TBHQ And Citric Acid To Protect Flavor), Modified Food Starch, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Canola Oil With TBHQ (Preservative). Contains 2% Or Less Of: Ascorbic Acid, Baking Soda, Caramel Color, Cellulose Gum, Citric Acid, Dextrin, Dextrose, Dough Conditioner (Sodium Metabisulfite), Maltodextrin, Margarine (Palm Oil, Soybean Oil, Salt, Mono- and Diglycerides, Annatto Color, Calcium Disodium EDTA [Preservative], Artificial Flavors, Vitamin A Palmitate), Natural and Artificial Flavor (Natural and Artificial Flavor, Flour, Sugar, Cornstarch, Unsalted Butter, Salt, Soy Lecithin, Dextrose, Polysorbate 80, Xanthan Gum, Annatto Color), Nonfat Dry Milk, Salt, Whey, Xanthan Gum. Oil: High-Oleic Low-Linolenic Canola Oil, TBHQ (To Protect Flavor), [COLOR="Lime"]Dimethylpolysiloxane (An Antifoaming Agent). CONTAINS: WHEAT, MILK, SOYBEANS
Now let's see a Mexican recipe for (almost) the same Apple Empanada
• 3 cups flour
• 4 teaspoons sugar
• 1 teaspoon cinnamon
• 3 teaspoons baking powder
• 1/2 cup lard or shortening
• 3/4 cup water
• 1 egg
• oil or shortening for frying
• 4 lbs apples, peeled, cored and cut into small cubes
• 2 cups sugar
• 1 tablespoon cinnmamon
• 1 cup raisins, softened in warm water and drained
• pinch of salt
• 1 cup water
• 1/8 cup water
• 1 teaspoon lemon juice
http://mexicanfood.about.com/od/sweetsanddesserts/r/appleempanadas.htm
Dimethylpolysiloxane (An Antifoaming Agent) are you kidding me?
Therein lies the problem, which one do you want to eat? One is fresh the other might have a 50 year shelf life and taste great. High Fructose Corn Syrup another way of saying "We buried that food in sugar"
If you don't know how to pronounce the ingredients or don't have a clue as to what they are you should look for your food elsewhere.
It's not just Taco Bell it's all the corporate fast food joints.
"Do you know who eats unhealthy food; the poor do, why, cos it's cheaper." Not cheaper, only faster.
Using the same amounts of food and prices I can do full "gourmet" healthy meal staying within the same exact price range. Fast food ain't cheap, but it is fast and very unhealthy.
Bon Appétit
greenberetTFS
05-20-2012, 09:36
Check out this article. A preschooler was given chicken nuggets after he had his lunch inspected and it was determined that it wasn't healthy enough. It contained a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, apple juice and potato chips. I sure am glad the government was there to save him from his turkey sandwich.Read more:
http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1mThcghi8
Big Teddy :munchin
"We've applied tax to alcohol and tobacco and that has definitely shown through very many studies that it actually decreased use. So, the logic has been applied to fatty foods and preliminary evidence in Europe is that it’s very effective,” Wright said.
I would like to see those studies. How can they be certain that the decrease, if there has been a decrease in consumption, is actually due to the tax, and not other factors such as restrictions on sales to certain age groups, or restrictions on overall marketing and advertising?
Is there coresponding data that shows a reduction in consumption of alcohol as well? Afterall that is also taxed. Yet you can find it on just about every corner you go to...supply and demand will always trump taxes.
Come to think of it, automobiles are taxed, and this makes them more expensive, has there been a reduction in the number of auto sales (as a result of this tax)?
Who does these studies anyway?
Stargazer
05-20-2012, 10:05
Researchers said a fat tax could drop obesity rates by 3.5 percent and prevent 2,700 heart-related deaths a year. The study also urged subsidies for healthier foods and veggies to make them more affordable.
With a 3.5 % margin of error ... LOL. Can't take anything that comes out of IU seriously ... :D
A study done by Berkeley shows little return on health by a 'fat tax'. They focused on diary products. The reasoning is explained in the abstract and intro.
Fat Taxes: Big Money for Small Change
http://are.berkeley.edu/~jeffrey_lafrance/working%20papers/WP-1007.pdf
Household demand for dairy products is inelastic. Price elasticities of demand also vary little
across demographic groups. A 10 percent tax on fat content has relatively little effect on the
quantity of dairy products consumed of any group. Such a tax results in less than a 1 percent
reduction in average fat consumption. A tax on dairy products would account for over four-fifths
of the fat reduction if the tax were extended to all food items. To have a substantial effect, the tax
rate would have to be extremely high. Even a 50 percent tax would only lower fat consumption
by a little over 3 percent.
There is no question that this is an issue with our society but it is lifestyle driven. Once again, it's an effort for government to steal money under the cloak of 'for your own good'. Growth of the nanny state while eroding individual liberties...
Team Sergeant
05-20-2012, 10:37
Bottom line, Socialism.
We(the federal government) know what's best for you. You will listen to us or we wil tax you until you do.
You are fat and stupid, we are fat and smart and much better paid. (Professional Politicians)
When you signed onto obamacare you didn't read the fine print, now we can and will tell you what you can and cannot eat.
Can't take anything that comes out of IU seriously
The news report was a bit vague in its comments, but I think the statement you were citing in your response was not from IU, but from the original research study in the British Medical Journal.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Stargazer
05-20-2012, 11:04
The news report was a bit vague in its comments, but I think the statement you were citing in your response was not from IU, but from the original research study in the British Medical Journal.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
I believe you are correct, Richard. When I saw Dr. Wright's comments follow, at first read I associated the numbers with him. It's an in state rivalry between IU and Purdue (I have ties to Purdue), thus the use of pink. :o
Thanks for keeping me honest!
I believe you are correct, Richard. When I saw Dr. Wright's comments follow, at first read I associated the numbers with him. It's an in state rivalry between IU and Purdue (I have ties to Purdue), thus the use of pink. :o
Thanks for keeping me honest!
I did my graduate studies at IU - It's a big job trying to keep you 'Boilermakers' honest! :D :D
Richard :munchin
I believe you are correct, Richard. When I saw Dr. Wright's comments follow, at first read I associated the numbers with him. It's an in state rivalry between IU and Purdue (I have ties to Purdue), thus the use of pink. :o
Thanks for keeping me honest!
I did my graduate studies at IU - it's a big job trying to keep you 'Boilermakers' honest! :D :D
Richard :munchin
Stargazer
05-20-2012, 12:37
I did my graduate studies at IU - it's a big job trying to keep you 'Boilermakers' honest! :D :D
Richard :munchin
LOL.... Perfect! ~set myself up for that one. Makes note, Richard is a WHOoser~ :D
Meh, BS! I work in the wellness industry(albeit in InfoSec, but being surrounded by RD, PT, ES types all day, you learn a thing or two :D ). Granted eating right definitely has a major impact on weight management, but thats only %35-40 of it all. There is a movement within the wellness industry at the moment which espouses the fact that you can lose weight by eating right but more or less remaining sedentary. Again, BS. If you want to lose weight, you need to MOVE! Changing eating habits is one thing, getting people off their posterior and moving is whole 'nother story.
My somewhat informed .002
Meh, BS! I work in the wellness industry(albeit in InfoSec, but being surrounded by RD, PT, ES types all day, you learn a thing or two :D ). Granted eating right definitely has a major impact on weight management, but thats only %35-40 of it all. There is a movement within the wellness industry at the moment which espouses the fact that you can lose weight by eating right but more or less remaining sedentary. Again, BS. If you want to lose weight, you need to MOVE! Changing eating habits is one thing, getting people off their posterior and moving is whole 'nother story.
My somewhat informed .002
Right, on, BOfH, maybe the current admin can administer a tax credit for those that add 20 minutes or 60 minutes of movement to their day....thouhh I doubt it in their current "seek to punish all mentality."
:munchin
1stindoor
05-22-2012, 07:26
My .02 cents...
Last August I was diagnosed as a Type II Diabetic. My blood sugar had been creeping up for the last several years. Though fairly fit, by civilian standards, I was falling victim to age, and being deskbound more often than less. When my doctor said my I had developed diabetes (A1C was 7.3, I was 6'1, 245 lbs, and approx 24% BF)...I decided right then and there to make major changes. In three months I dropped my A1C to 5.8, dropped 25 lbs, and brought my BF down to 17.5%.
My exercise plan never changed...no meds either.
I changed my total carb intake to less than 65 grams per meal. Less than 15 grams for a snack between meals. No more sweet tea either. Snacks which used to be pretzals or gummy bears were replaced with almonds, cashews, and peanuts.
My opinion only...it all boils down to what changes you're willing to make.
The tax issue is the same as it has been with alcohol and tobacco. Raise taxes on unhealthy foods and sodas...when the consumption goes down and the tax revenue falls...tax something else to make up the difference.
Entire post.
QP 1stindoor,
Sorry to hear that, from what you have posted, you are managing it well IMHO. :lifter
That said, you raise an excellent point about intake. I sit at a desk for most of the day, and unfortunately my exercise schedule isn't as routine as it should be, however, I have adjusted my overall calorie intake to match (for the most part) my activity level. Sure it's hard, however, like you so accurately stated, it's about what your willing to change, and having the self discipline to maintain it. I dropped about %5 BF this way, and my energy level is roughly the same(though I could use more sleep :boohoo ).
The difference between taxing alcohol, cigarettes and taxing junk food is that you can get fat eating healthy foods as well. Everyone has their "food kryptonite", mine is carbs, for others it might be dairy, sugar etc. Taxing the junk isn't going to fix the obesity epidemic, not by a long shot...
My .02