fat tax!

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
Post Reply
Tsakali_
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:46 pm

fat tax!

Post by Tsakali_ »

has anyone heard of this?

I think it's a good idea but the weak tax they are considering won't do much of a difference, atleast it's a start

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_det ... dline/2336
busetibi
Posts: 3178
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2000 8:00 am

Post by busetibi »

another great american idea.

so what happens if your underweight and like eating cheese,meat, butter etc ?
why should you pay more because some fat fucking slob doesnt know when to stop eating?
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Transient »

If they can tax cigarettes, they should be able to tax hot dogs.
Tsakali_
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by Tsakali_ »

busetibi wrote:another great american idea.

so what happens if your underweight and like eating cheese,meat, butter etc ?
why should you pay more because some fat fucking slob doesnt know when to stop eating?
most of these combinations of foods never stop being unhealthy no matter your BMI
don't be an ass
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Transient »

While I tend to agree with the concept, this made me laugh:
In addition to fat taxes, fashionable "preventative" policies include a minimum purchase age for designated foods, zoning restrictions on certain restaurants, and even stocking some snack foods out of customers' reach (behind the retail counter, right next to cigarettes and pornography) .
User avatar
seremtan
Posts: 36021
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:00 am

Post by seremtan »

fat tax = :dork:
Twinkie-tax inventor (and CSPI scientific advisory board member) Kelly "Big Brother" Brownell also wants to "get away from these arguments about personal responsibility."
of course - she'd lose those arguments
busetibi
Posts: 3178
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2000 8:00 am

Post by busetibi »

Tsakali_ wrote:
most of these combinations of foods never stop being unhealthy no matter your BMI
don't be an ass
i wasnt aware i was being an ass.
anyone can eat anything, as long as its in moderation.
key word being moderation,
most fat cunts dont know the meaning of that word.
Tsakali_
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by Tsakali_ »

yup and the government needs to babysit us as always

I say don't give respect to those who don't earn it, and alot of the general public doesn't
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

The idea of having a minimum age for buying unhealthy foods is a good one -- it's hard for a parent to keep their kid healthy, if the kid can just buy whatever he wants on his way to school and stash it in his locker. So personal/parental responsibility goes out the window.

But as far as taxing, I think it's a ridiculous notion, and another attempt at social engineering.

That being said, if insurance companies can charge higher rates for at-risk drivers, then how can we justify NOT having a fat tax if we were to go to a public healthcare system?
That makes it a little trickier.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

to be consistent, they should tax all food products that have trans fats in them.

there's also the problem of controversy over what constitutes risky food.

for example, not everyone believes butter is bad for you.
Hannibal
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Hannibal »

yeah, this will work. :olo:

Fattaca!
Tsakali_
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by Tsakali_ »

R00k wrote:The idea of having a minimum age for buying unhealthy foods is a good one -- it's hard for a parent to keep their kid healthy, if the kid can just buy whatever he wants on his way to school and stash it in his locker. So personal/parental responsibility goes out the window.

But as far as taxing, I think it's a ridiculous notion, and another attempt at social engineering.

That being said, if insurance companies can charge higher rates for at-risk drivers, then how can we justify NOT having a fat tax if we were to go to a public healthcare system?
That makes it a little trickier.

I agree that their credibility on this issue is running low, and it prolly IS just another way to create more capitol for the feds.

another problem with this is that instead of penalizing the general public with yet another tax, they should make healthy food more attainable, cause healthy foods tempt to be much more expensive.

I know from experiance that grocery shopping can turn into just another substitute of fast food because crap food is simply cheaper (unless you want to stack up on shit like beans etc.) after all when necessity calls the bottom line is filling up the refrigerator
shadd_
Posts: 2512
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:02 pm

Post by shadd_ »

[xeno]Julios wrote:to be consistent, they should tax all food products that have trans fats in them.

there's also the problem of controversy over what constitutes risky food.

for example, not everyone believes butter is bad for you.
canada is well on the way to getting rid of it from all foods. go to any store and you'll notice the no-trans fat label on every bag of chips and box of crackers.

iirc there is even a bill pending to ban trans fat from food in canada altogether.
User avatar
Captain
Posts: 20410
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:50 am

Post by Captain »

Throw the fat fucks in an incinerator. Just do it.
eepberries
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:14 pm

Post by eepberries »

This idea is fucking ridiculous.
Post Reply