I would like to know what our readers think of the notion, a fat tax. Greatly increasing
(7 to 10 percent) the tax on high fat and calorie, low nutrient foods. Personally I think it is marvelous, just as I
think a high tax on cigarettes and alcohol is a great idea. Take the money and make fruits and vegetables
more affordable, this would have to lower the amount of money spent on obesity related health problems. Obesity
is directly related to many diferent aspects of the health industry such as diabetes, cancer, heart disease, not to
mention plastic surgery, or even gastric bypass operations. It is a growing epidemic and westerners need to make
immediate changes.Note: The contents of this blog are for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice or substitute for professional care. For medical emergencies, dial 911!
The controversial "Fat Tax"
I would like to know what our readers think of the notion, a fat tax. Greatly increasing
(7 to 10 percent) the tax on high fat and calorie, low nutrient foods. Personally I think it is marvelous, just as I
think a high tax on cigarettes and alcohol is a great idea. Take the money and make fruits and vegetables
more affordable, this would have to lower the amount of money spent on obesity related health problems. Obesity
is directly related to many diferent aspects of the health industry such as diabetes, cancer, heart disease, not to
mention plastic surgery, or even gastric bypass operations. It is a growing epidemic and westerners need to make
immediate changes.Reader Comments
(Page 1)2. If you took the fat tax money and used it to make low-fat foods free people would still buy almost as much fatty foods.
The poor should not have to eat food that kills them, but coercing them to eat healthy seems unethical too. And let's face it, that's who would be effected by this tax.
I sense a little resentment against those who can get away with eating just about anything without consequences.
3. I think another way of putting the Fat Tax might be better: mandate smaller portion sizes for fast food restaurants etc. The idea being that people learn to get by with less and still be satisfied. This takes direct aim at the "more value for money" idea that has been pounded into the American consumer which results in people who don't care if they're stuffed to their chins as long as they feel they got their money's worth. The focus should be on walking out of the meal not hungry or stuffed but satisfied - that feeling of satisfaction should be what you paid the money for, not the extra pound of beef.
This hit me the first time I visited France where I was shocked at the prospect of surviving the next few weeks on the tiny portions they gave out in French restaurants everywhere. By the end of the second day I couldn't imagine eating anything more than that.
I'll grant you the difference might be haute cuisine (more fatty) vs. regular food (larger portions) but reducing the fat content in an already small portion can have bigger effects imo.
Just my $0.02.
4. Who do you think pays the 60 billion dollars it takes every year to treat the obese people in America. It isn't the lawmakers, or government. It is our tax dollars, and we need to address the fact that it is costing so much, and the problem is preventable.
1. A few thoughts:
This would be a major conundrum for politicians that would involve many, many (lobbying $$) groups - just taking the hamburger in your feature photo -- it would most prominently affect the the National Beef Assoc., USDA, Ad revenue, jobs etc. etc. Hardly passable in today's market.
But more importantly, do you think people would stop eating "fatty" foods if prices were increased? I don't think this is the reason why people stopped smoking.
Elizabeth
www.diabetes24-7.com
Posted at 9:56AM on Jan 13th 2006 by Elizabeth