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

Forums - Politics - Wow, Uncle Duke was WAY ahead of the curve in regarding the "Fat Tax"!

richardhutnik on 20 May 2012
spurgeonryan said:
I did not read any of the comments here.

I think it will help curb obesity like Sin tax has helped curb alcohol and Cigarettes. It feels too good to be fat, other than all the bad looks, aches and pains in your body and probably possible health problems. I am sure there are just the same amount of addicting ingredient in food and drinks ( caffiene, Cocoa) as there are in Cigarettes. All this will actually help is the government get more money to waste. We should tax watching TV too much as well.

In Britain, there is a television tax actually.  Yes, you need to pay the government for the right to watch television broadcasts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom



Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 20 May 2012
richardhutnik said:
spurgeonryan said:
I did not read any of the comments here.

I think it will help curb obesity like Sin tax has helped curb alcohol and Cigarettes. It feels too good to be fat, other than all the bad looks, aches and pains in your body and probably possible health problems. I am sure there are just the same amount of addicting ingredient in food and drinks ( caffiene, Cocoa) as there are in Cigarettes. All this will actually help is the government get more money to waste. We should tax watching TV too much as well.

In Britain, there is a television tax actually.  Yes, you need to pay the government for the right to watch television broadcasts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom


Yeah, our Government loves permits and licenses.



richardhutnik on 20 May 2012
SamuelRSmith said:
richardhutnik said:
spurgeonryan said:
I did not read any of the comments here.

I think it will help curb obesity like Sin tax has helped curb alcohol and Cigarettes. It feels too good to be fat, other than all the bad looks, aches and pains in your body and probably possible health problems. I am sure there are just the same amount of addicting ingredient in food and drinks ( caffiene, Cocoa) as there are in Cigarettes. All this will actually help is the government get more money to waste. We should tax watching TV too much as well.

In Britain, there is a television tax actually.  Yes, you need to pay the government for the right to watch television broadcasts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom


Yeah, our Government loves permits and licenses.

Ahh, you are from the U.K.  So, does the license still apply if one is doing  videogame stuff?   If one just wants to play a PS3 or 360, can they?  If so, how does one do this, get a monitor to hook your system up to?



SamuelRSmith on 20 May 2012
richardhutnik said:
SamuelRSmith said:
richardhutnik said:
spurgeonryan said:
I did not read any of the comments here.

I think it will help curb obesity like Sin tax has helped curb alcohol and Cigarettes. It feels too good to be fat, other than all the bad looks, aches and pains in your body and probably possible health problems. I am sure there are just the same amount of addicting ingredient in food and drinks ( caffiene, Cocoa) as there are in Cigarettes. All this will actually help is the government get more money to waste. We should tax watching TV too much as well.

In Britain, there is a television tax actually.  Yes, you need to pay the government for the right to watch television broadcasts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom


Yeah, our Government loves permits and licenses.

Ahh, you are from the U.K.  So, does the license still apply if one is doing  videogame stuff?   If one just wants to play a PS3 or 360, can they?  If so, how does one do this, get a monitor to hook your system up to?


You don't need a license to own a TV. Under the law, all you need a license for is live broadcasts of BBC content - so, the BBC TV channels, or watching live TV on the BBC's website (I'm not sure if their radio broadcasts are included). You can watch pre-recorded BBC content without a license (this is due to the law coming into existence before on-demand, and all that).

HOWEVER, if the TV license have reason to suspect you've watched BBC content without a license, they can fine you. They do not need to prove you have watched it, you need to prove that you have not. This is exceptionally difficult to prove. I remember one case, where the guy got away with it because he was able to prove that his TV was physically incapable of picking up BBC broadcasts.



TadpoleJackson on 20 May 2012

Well, if they add a 20% tax on unhealthy food, it will most likely put my families' business out of business, so... yeah... screw this



Around the Network
richardhutnik on 21 May 2012
spurgeonryan said:
No wonder BBC is bleh. I thik America could make big tax bucks on Tv over her. They should do that!

Hey, I like the BBC British comedies actually.  And I believe they did Dr. Who.   So, it isn't all bleh.

Anyhow, take this from a person who hardly watches any TV, but owns the Monty Python Flying Circus box set (complete).



thranx on 21 May 2012
Kantor said:
I would really rather not have the government telling me what to eat at all, let alone selectively taxing to try and coax me into eating what they want me to eat.

If somebody wants to be overweight, and they are not causing anybody any harm, and they're happy with who they are, who are you to tell them that they're wrong?


is your view on tobacco and drugs the same? Not that i disagree with it. I think that taxation like this is just one more way for the government to run your life by taking your choice away (less dollars in your pocket means less options for you to choose).



kitler53 on 21 May 2012

i am 100% against the "fat tax". government should not be that involved in our personal lives. I call Obama president not daddy. this is just a tax hike in disguise.

if any entity should be charging more money to fat people it should be the health insurance companies that have to pay out on the consequences of people's unhealthy habits...NOT the government.



sethnintendo on 21 May 2012
mrstickball said:
sethnintendo said:
SamuelRSmith said:
How about just ending all the subsidies for corn? That saves money, makes people healthier, and appeases me.


They should subsidize fruits and veggies (the good ones aka not corn which is turned into high fructose corn syrup).  Something is terribly wrong when you can buy 1000+ calories for 1 - 2 dollars of junk food / fast food yet have to spend way more money on what we should be eating in the first place.  The USA food system completely sucks and it is pretty obvious that corporations have led the USA diet to shit while profiting off of junk food that fatties can't resist.

You don't need to do that.

The vast, VAST, majority of subsidies go towards corn and dairy. You remove them, and the price of meat, dairy and cheese goes up. Therefore, by default, the other veggies are going to be significantly cheaper.

Oh, and the government saves billions, rather than spends them.

My line of thinking wasn't that good on that response.  I failed to realize your train of thought.  Your option would have the same results with no government money needed.

I want people to start eating healthier foods.  However, you might as well put a gun to most overweight people's head because they won't eat healthy.  I see most of the overweight people at my job eating terrible everyday while I bring a big container of fruit and a few crackers (I eat my main meals at home).  They are content on being fat because if they weren't then they would at least bring in something healthy to eat everyday. 



mrstickball on 21 May 2012
sethnintendo said:
mrstickball said:
sethnintendo said:
SamuelRSmith said:
How about just ending all the subsidies for corn? That saves money, makes people healthier, and appeases me.


They should subsidize fruits and veggies (the good ones aka not corn which is turned into high fructose corn syrup).  Something is terribly wrong when you can buy 1000+ calories for 1 - 2 dollars of junk food / fast food yet have to spend way more money on what we should be eating in the first place.  The USA food system completely sucks and it is pretty obvious that corporations have led the USA diet to shit while profiting off of junk food that fatties can't resist.

You don't need to do that.

The vast, VAST, majority of subsidies go towards corn and dairy. You remove them, and the price of meat, dairy and cheese goes up. Therefore, by default, the other veggies are going to be significantly cheaper.

Oh, and the government saves billions, rather than spends them.

My line of thinking wasn't that good on that response.  I failed to realize your train of thought.  Your option would have the same results with no government money needed.

I want people to start eating healthier foods.  However, you might as well put a gun to most overweight people's head because they won't eat healthy.  I see most of the overweight people at my job eating terrible everyday while I bring a big container of fruit and a few crackers (I eat my main meals at home).  They are content on being fat because if they weren't then they would at least bring in something healthy to eat everyday. 

Right.

My solution would save money, since we're currently spending billions a year on agriculture subsidies.

The obesity epidemic is (partially) a result of these subsidies. The government subsidizes corn and dairy very heavily. The result is that corn sugar is artificially cheap, therefore soda pop is artificially cheap. Corn is also used in a littany of other unhealthy products, as well as animal feed. You remove the subsidies, then soda, meat, and corn-based foods go up by 20-30% overnight. Take out the dairy subsidies, and the same thing happens there.

Comparatively, I cannot think of a single subsidy given to any fruit or veggie producer. Not one. Since their price remains, you've effectively increased unhealthy food prices by 20-30%, and saved the government billions a year.

Its a win-win.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.