By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Tax Junk Food/Regulate Contents?

Tagged games:

 

Tax Food with high concentrations of Salt/Fat/Sugar/HFCS?

Yes, tax anything high fat 7 12.28%
 
Yes, tax anything high salt 0 0%
 
Yes, tax anything high sugar 1 1.75%
 
Yes, tax anything with HFCS 0 0%
 
Yes, tax a combination of... 5 8.77%
 
Yes tax all of the above 10 17.54%
 
Maybe, not sure 0 0%
 
No, just lift the Corn Subsidy 12 21.05%
 
No, we can read a nutrition label fine 16 28.07%
 
See Results 4 7.02%
 
Total:55
Michael-5 on 10 April 2013
dsgrue3 said:

Man you really hate salt. I salt everything from burgers to mashed potatoes.

I don't believe labeling things like that as "WARNING: HIGH SALT/FAT CONTENT" will help at all. Most people will find it amusing more than a serious health risk. Most people only eat out occasionally and are generally pretty healthy and the fat ones don't care. People eat what they want, regardless. 

Tax, labels, whatever isn't going to help IMO.

I think because I work at a Medical Office, I've just become a bit of a health freak.

I don't think I'm as crazy as some people here, I usually eat similar stuff, and my selection of veggies is pretty limited (Carrots, Brocholli, Cauliflower, tomatos, green beans, lettuce, cucumber, onions, potatos, and for the most part that's it).

I will agree with you that it might not help, but it won't hurt at all. Still I like the idea of taxing junk food, and reducing tax on healthy food where possible. Or even tax unhealthy brands/flavours of chips and reduce tax on the better ones.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Around the Network
Fkaz on 12 April 2013
Kasz216 saWouldToYouLikeiYoud:


You said you thought less then 25% people smoke now compaired to 2003.    Which means that if you though 100 people smoked in 2003, that 24 people smoke now in 2012.

 

The great reduction of smoking since the 60's, 70's came from people being made aware of how unhealthy smoking was.  Newer younger generations smoked less because they found out how unhealthy it was, while addicted people smoked until they got to the point of where they died or were forced to quit because of harsh illness.

 

Not from cigarrette taxes.  It's the same now really.  Smoking reduction comes primarily from young people just not smoking as much as older people because younger people know better now/cancer is stimitized now... and old people who smoked dieing.

 

Education is all that changes behavior.  Taxes and regulations only hurt the poor.

 

Well also alchoholics.

 

Would the whole sugar tax apply to booze?  Afterall it's quite sugary.  A lot of ex-alchohlics actually drink TONS of soda per day because they feel the urge to replace all that sugar that was in their beer/liquor.

 

Healthy?  No.   Better then them going back to being alcholics though.


hi kas. i like u to know u banned my business partner u dumb fuck. we work in the same office with the same ip. ur stupidy cont. ur koch brother info, to you and ur ur right wing buddy'$ that jerk each other off n run this site. may be fun to u but ur losing the site money. since their are more       on the left than right and yet you let ur buddy's do whatever and if anyone on the left farts, ban. go fuck ur self oh and i would have bought pro if it wasnt for tongue punching fucktards like u. oh im at my bros house so check Ip bitch. come to.chicago u fucking pussy

User was banned for this (rambling and incoherent attempt at a) post - Kantor