I believe this has been an idea that Wong has proposed multiple times on this board, and this is the first time i've seen it mentioned elsewhere outside of SDN.
LONDON (Reuters) - A "fat tax" on salty, sugary and fatty foods could save thousands of lives each year, according to a study published on Thursday.
Researchers at Oxford University say that charging Value Added Tax (VAT) at 17.5 percent on foods deemed to be unhealthy would cut consumer demand and reduce the number of heart attacks and strokes.
The purchase tax is already levied on a small number of products such as potato crisps, ice cream, confectionery and chocolate biscuits, but most food is exempt.
The move could save an estimated 3,200 lives in Britain each year, according to the study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
"A well-designed and carefully-targeted fat tax could be a useful tool for reducing the burden of food-related disease," the study concluded.
The team from Oxford's Department of Public Health said higher taxes have already been imposed on cigarettes and alcohol to encourage healthy living.
They used a mathematical formula to estimate the effect of higher prices on the demand for foods such as pastries, cakes, cheese and butter.
However, they said their research only gave a rough guide to the number of lives that could be saved and said more work was needed to get an exact picture of how taxes could improve public health.
Any "fat tax" might be seen as an attack on personal freedom and would weigh more heavily on poorer families, the study warned.
A food tax would raise average weekly household bills by 4.6 percent or 67 pence per person.
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has previously rejected the idea as an example of the "nanny state" that might push people away from healthy food.
The Food and Drink Federation has called the proposed tax patronizing and says it would hit low-income families hardest.
It suggests that people eat a balanced diet.
The British Heart Foundation said it does not support the tax.
"We believe the government should focus on ensuring healthy foods are financially and geographically accessible to everyone," it said.
Posted here instead of N&P because I think there is more merit to discussion the logical and moral aspects. [/quote]
"If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little." -George Carlin (1937-2008)
"Have some of you Americans actually seen Football? Of course there are 0-0 draws but that doesn't make them any less exciting." -Dr Roberts, with quite possibly the dumbest thing ever said in 10 years of SDNet.
An excellent idea as long as it's accompanied by subsidies or reduced taxation of healthier foods (fruits, vegs) and/or staple foods (Bread, etc') out of the funds gained by this. (Since, unfortunately enough, unhealthy crud is cheaper even in the UK nevermind countries like the US that subsidize junk food).
Photography Genius is always allowed some leeway, once the hammer has been pried from its hands and the blood has been cleaned up.
To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.
One good thing (possibly the ONLY good thing) about Australia's GST is that "essential" items are excempt. Thus, fresh fruits and veges, bread, unprepared meat, etc is GST free.
Of course, 10% doesn't seem to make a huge difference, but it's a start.
I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.
-Winston Churchhill
I think a part of my sanity has been lost throughout this whole experience. And some of my foreskin - My cheating work colleague at it again
I don't see anything wrong with a tax of that nature. Lets be realistic, those are luxury foods and they are NOT healthy for you, so why not put a little something towards a fund to counteract society's health debt?
Of course they shouldn't gouge the fuck out of people, but in moderation I think it'd be reasonable.
You have to realize that most Christian "moral values" behaviour is not really about "protecting" anyone; it's about their desire to send a continual stream of messages of condemnation towards people whose existence offends them. - Darth Wong alias Mike Wong
"There is nothing wrong with being ignorant. However, there is something very wrong with not choosing to exchange ignorance for knowledge when the opportunity presents itself."
I hope it does some good but as the drug trade has shown, when someone is truly addicted to something, supply and demand doesn't really apply. The addict will pay what ever price is necessary to get their "fix". As Durandal pointed out, cigarettes are taxed up the ass. What kind of evidence is there linking those taxes to reduced smoking?
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
Darth Servo wrote:I hope it does some good but as the drug trade has shown, when someone is truly addicted to something, supply and demand doesn't really apply. The addict will pay what ever price is necessary to get their "fix". As Durandal pointed out, cigarettes are taxed up the ass. What kind of evidence is there linking those taxes to reduced smoking?
Cigarette taxes are so easily circumvented that it's not even funny. Virtually every pub in the country has at least in guy in it who can get you smuggled cigarettes at half the price you'd pay for legal ones. I'm not sure that would apply to fatty food; I just have a hard time imagining anyone smuggling lorries full of big macs into the country.
Darth Servo wrote:I hope it does some good but as the drug trade has shown, when someone is truly addicted to something, supply and demand doesn't really apply. The addict will pay what ever price is necessary to get their "fix". As Durandal pointed out, cigarettes are taxed up the ass. What kind of evidence is there linking those taxes to reduced smoking?
That's not the idea; the idea is to use the revenue from the tax to offset the strain placed on the healthcare system by people eating fatty foods and putting themselves on stretchers.
TithonusSyndrome wrote:That's not the idea; the idea is to use the revenue from the tax to offset the strain placed on the healthcare system by people eating fatty foods and putting themselves on stretchers.
Will that revenue also pay for the bills of the nurses who throw their backs out trying to move said over-eaters around?
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
I suggested this last year - except only taxing the fatties, rather than the food itself.
It wouldn't be fair. Trust me, there are some big people out there that are just built that way. I lived with a lady for a year who was quite a plump pigeon, and she ate like a bird. Her metabolism was just on the slow end. I ate four times as much as her and I've always been slim. It's genetics at work. They are powerful things.
You have to realize that most Christian "moral values" behaviour is not really about "protecting" anyone; it's about their desire to send a continual stream of messages of condemnation towards people whose existence offends them. - Darth Wong alias Mike Wong
"There is nothing wrong with being ignorant. However, there is something very wrong with not choosing to exchange ignorance for knowledge when the opportunity presents itself."
