Tax Junk Food/Regulate Contents?

[Michael-5]

Weedlab said:

To the OP, well in the interest of time I'll just address the core issue and respond to your lesser points later. Personally, I see this problem like the drug issue in some sense. There is strong demand from the consumers for these products, so suppliers will respond to this since there is a market. A lot of these companies are just reacting to people, and some people buy them because they're cheap, convenient, etc. So it is a vicious cycle. Plus, these companies benefit from scale economies, so they'll have a cost advantage, which will encourage people to keep buying. Some of the 'healthy food' (well by American standards) sold by some companies are still niche, and as a result they won't benefit from scale economies (the cost advantage). In effect, this whole issue is very complex, and I think a multi-pronged strategy is needed to effect any change. That's why I think the government's role is important, but how they respond is important too. Companies won't alter their forumla, especially since they're making money from it.


All in all, I don't find consuming healthy foods to be too taxing, nor is it expensive for me. I consume carrots, broccoli, kale, other vegetables, eggs, oats, chicken, almonds, fish and fruits that don't spike blood sugar levels too much. On occasion I use brown or wild rice. That's it really, and I don't spend much at all. No breads, no flour, nothing wheat related and no processed meats like bacon.The only oils I use are coconut for cooking and olive oil for everything else. I don't use sugar, but if I feel for a sweetener I'll use some buckwheat honey. I spend very little on a weekly basis and it is not time consuming for me, at all.

People need to know more about junk food and what it does to them. It's not just the fat issue. You have to consider things like the extremely high levels of omega 6 fatty acids found in them, which promotes inflammation and causes all sorts of problems in people. That's why I'd never encourage people to eat McDonalds, but at the end of the day it is their choice.

People like stability, and the problem with fruits and berries as snakc food is price and availability fluctuate based on the season. As for Veggies, most people don't eat raw veggies, and don't care to cook them, which is odd because when you go out for fast food, people buy fries.

Company's benefit from scale economics, but their profit margins would still be high if they say reduced the amount of salt in chips. I'm not sure what happened with trans fats, I think they just got a bad rep, but in the early 2000's and late 90's chips suddenly became trans fat free, but prices didn't change. If they are willing to eliminate trans fats suddenly, I think we can push them to reduce salt and fat levels in chips, salt levels in pop, etc.

At the end of the day it's still their choice, I agree, and I agree with you about your insentives logic. We need to discourage people from eating fatty foods, and encourage people to eat healthier stuff. The Nutrition Label is a good start, but did you know McDonalds puts a second nutrition label on their Big Mac Boxes? The values for fat and salt content are the same, but they put this random dotted line which stands for some random suggested max intake, and all their values magically are below it. Stuff like this should be banned, and nutrition labels should state how much more salt/fat/sugar is in fast food then the recommended intake suggests.