4 Answers | Add Yours
Just from a libertarian point of view, who is the government to tell us how much we should weigh, what we should eat, etc? If I am a small government advocate, I would want them to have as little control over my individual choices as possible. Fattening foods are bad for us certainly, but a government that can regulate us this closely and intimately seems intrusive.
Add to this the fact that poorer citizens tend to be heavier on average, because much of the food that is cheapest to purchase is also the least nutritious. Fast food chains have catered to this population with cheap and convenient food that is typically high in saturated fat and cholesterol. So a Fat Tax would unfairly discriminate against poorer Americans. We call this a regressive tax.
I assume that you are talking about a tax on food that is fattening.
The best argument against such a tax is that it is too hard to determine what food is good for you and what food is bad for you. Any food can be bad for you if you eat too much of it. So how will you decide which foods are good and which foods are bad?
If you are talking about a tax on people who are overweight, that's not a good idea either because there is no exact connection between being overweight and being unhealthy. It is also difficult to tell exactly who is overweight and who is not just by looking at statistics.
man incessant warfare, war on drugs, terrorism, poverty and making the world safe for creeps urr democracy. when has war on anything stop the problem their trying to fix? no, fat tax is a foot in the door for taxing all food including supplements.it is all based on lies, half truths and junk science.
you want less of something you tax it, you want more you subsidize it. so if we want less junk science lets tax that so we get less of it. lets tax government so we get less of it.
the end never justifys trampling people's rights, if we could keep more of our money we could afford to pay for our own medical care. it would also make gov stick to it's limited areas of our lives. cross state line commerce and foreign affairs. everything else is state or individual areas of control/choices.
government has more money then they tell us anyway, fiat currency is only paper, and they can print up any amount they need. Government/corporation is notorious for lying, so why would anyone want to support anything they want to do. they cannot be trusted. also obesity is only a pretext for the real agenda, which is total control....google drug war failure and poverty levels in the world including the united states. they are up and worse not down and better. I do want to say there are individuals in government that are honest however and try to do right. it is the bad apples that are the problem.
Also called the Twinkie tax, the fat tax concept was pioneered by Kelly D. Brownell, a professor of psychology at Yale University, who wrote about it in the New York Times in 1994. Dr. Brownell outlined two proposals, the first of which suggested a 7 percent to 10 percent tax on unhealthy foods. The tax revenue would then subsidize the sale of healthy foods. The tax would apply to broad types of foods or target certain fatty foods. Brownell's alternate proposal stated that a lesser tax could be used to fund public programs promoting healthy and responsible eating.
Researchers at Oxford University and Nottingham University claim that a 17.5 percent Value Added Tax (VAT) on unhealthy food could save up to 3,200 lives a year. The tax would effectively save lives by reducing demands for unhealthy foods, consequently reducing occurrences of serious complications from obesity,
We’ve answered 319,655 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question