Fat food tax?

[Codner pharmaceuticals]

The Lancet today suggests tax on foods that make people fat.

Is this a good idea making Amex pies more expensive or should fat people think about not eating as much and exercising more?

 

[Beach Hut]

This is a good debatable subject akin to when a fat bastard goes into McDonalds and asks for a burger so should they be refused as too fat, if they were pissed and went into a pub they could be refused to be served.

 

[Norman Potting]

Obesity problem - tax it.
Smoking problem - tax it.
Drinking problem - tax it.
Not green enough - tax it.
Simples - works every time, or possibly not.

 

[sten_super]

Yes, tax it, and I say that as a bit of a fatty. If I'm going to cost the NHS more when I'm older (which is a distinct possibility) then I should put more into it.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Taxing or banning things the government doesn't want people to eat / smoke / do is just a sign of a very unimaginative government. Besides there is already a tax on fast food - it's called VAT. I would strongly object to further taxes on things I enjoy just because some fat bastards can't control themselves.

 

[Simster]

The Lancet today suggests tax on foods that make people fat.

Is this a good idea making Amex pies more expensive or should fat people think about not eating as much and exercising more?

With government coffers needing to be topped up, this would be my choice of tax. Much better than adding the cost to VAT across the board anyway. The health service is creaking, and these fat tossers are a major burden. At least smokers and drinkers pay their way, so it's about time fatties did the same. I don't like the fact that my taxes pay for stomach stapling, or treatment for entirely preventable heart disease.

 

[APACHE]

If the public like it - Conlibs will tax it- can't have the masses enjoying themselves, we're all in this together.

 

[mikes smalls]

I've advocated a tax on unhealthy food in conversations with my brother who has a degree in politics.
He assures me that they have done studies on the possibility and the conclusion was that it would in fact become a tax on the poor who eat the least health diet.
Using taxation as a detterent doesn't work as people are just as addicted to the sugar in these foods as they are to alcohol and nicotine. The answer has to be education as with most of the problems in our society.

 

[Acker79]

What food makes you fat? Any if you eat enough. You'd be taxing everything. It isn't any particular foods that make people fat it's eating too much (with respect to the level of activity/exercise you do). Food is essential to survival, alcohol and smoking is not. So people have to buy food, and if all food is taxed because when eaten to excess it can cause fatness, those that eat in moderation are punished. (Before people talk about moderation drinkers being forced to pay tax, I repeat my previous point about people needing to eat to survive).

The other suggestion that often comes up in this debate is the idea of taxing fat people based on bmi, but then you'd get into issues where muscular people in peak condition pay more than someone who is just in the obese range because they are quite muscular and muscles weigh more than fat.

It's an interesting idea, and the comparisons to the way smoking and drinking are taxed and treated do, at least on the surface, appear appropriate given the effets on society and the nhs, I think it is a little unworkable, in a fair way.

 

[Badger]

My only annoyance with it is if I fancy treating myself to a burger or a Mars Bar I don't want to have to pay extra tax just because some porky chubsters can't control themselves. I think it would be far more amusing if it was a point-of-sale tax and the person behind the till had to make a judgement call on whether to charge extra because they were fat or clearly on their way towards it.

 

[Simster]

I've advocated a tax on unhealthy food in conversations with my brother who has a degree in politics.
He assures me that they have done studies on the possibility and the conclusion was that it would in fact become a tax on the poor who eat the least health diet.
Using taxation as a detterent doesn't work as people are just as addicted to the sugar in these foods as they are to alcohol and nicotine. The answer has to be education as with most of the problems in our society.

Actually that is a fair point. Fast food is popular partly because it is so cheap. You'd need a carrot and stick approach to getting people to eat more healthily but I'm not quite sure how subsiding healthy foods would work.

 

[nicko31]

How about

If body BMI >30, then +1% national insurance contributions

Exemption for genuine illness and diability, done..

 

[Acker79]

My only annoyance with it is if I fancy treating myself to a burger or a Mars Bar I don't want to have to pay extra tax just because some porky chubsters can't control themselves. I think it would be far more amusing if it was a point-of-sale tax and the person behind the till had to make a judgement call on whether to charge extra because they were fat or clearly on their way towards it.

You'd get groups of fatties outside shops asking thin people to buy them food, like with kids getting adults to buy cigarettes. I have a funny mental image now

 

[public school boy]

Why not just have A Fat Bastard Tax.

 

[magoo]

Taxing it isn't fair on those of us who can control ourselves or like me, can't put on a pound

 

[Badger]

You'd get groups of fatties outside shops asking thin people to buy them food, like with kids getting adults to buy cigarettes. I have a funny mental image now

Haha that would be hilarious, I can picture it now:

Fatty: "Can you get us a King Size Twix and some Wotsits?"
Thin kid: "Only if you get us 10 Malborough Lights"

 

[Gwylan]

He assures me that they have done studies on the possibility and the conclusion was that it would in fact become a tax on the poor who eat the least health diet.
Using taxation as a detterent doesn't work as people are just as addicted to the sugar in these foods as they are to alcohol and nicotine. The answer has to be education as with most of the problems in our society.

I agree. It would just make poor people poorer.

Having said that, it's a fact that we are getting fatter and this could prove a drain on health resources. We certainly need better education and tougher food labelling. - food companies and supermarkets have resisted that for years but it's time to get tough. And more choice too particularly for places with kids - some of the leisure centres, holiday camps, tourist attractions we've been to are a disgrace in terms of catering.

And let's have a bigger push to get people cycling - there was a survey earlier this week that pointed out that cycling added £3bn to the UK economy in terms of healthier individuals.

 

[Codner pharmaceuticals]

You'd need a carrot and stick approach to getting people to eat more healthily but I'm not quite sure how subsiding healthy foods would work.

I think this is more a kebab and stick approach...

 

[HovaGirl]

Obesity problem - tax it.
Smoking problem - tax it.
Drinking problem - tax it.
Not green enough - tax it.
Simples - works every time, or possibly not.

Smoking is already taxed to the hilt. Fags in the UK cost twice as much as fags in Greece and four times as much as fags in Bulgaria.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Haha that would be hilarious, I can picture it now:

Fatty: "Can you get us a King Size Twix and some Wotsits?"
Thin kid: "Only if you get us 10 Malborough Lights"

Very Monty Python like