Junk-food taxes are often mentioned as a way to help fund a restructuring of the healthcare system, though no one in Congress has endorsed them.The notion is catching on with the general public, however. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll last month found that 55% of respondents favored a tax on unhealthful snack foods, up from 52% in April. Support for a soda tax rose to 53% from 46%.
But there's a problem . . .
Junk-food taxes are also unfair, because the poor would be hardest hit, said fiction writer Julie Cochrane of Marshall, Va.: "I am not about to raise taxes on a single mom scraping by on a low-wage job." Still, the logic of a junk-food tax seems clear. Fattening foods tend to be cheap, and fresh produce and lean cuts of meat are often the priciest. A tax could help offset that imbalance, nudging people to eat more of what they should and less of what they shouldn't.
Not to mention the problem of creating more bureaucracy over a bag of Cheetos. And expect new legislation because, after all, what constitutes "junk food?" Would you consider a bag of potato chips to be junk food? If I buy a Hostess Ding Dong, and then go to an upscale Sprinkles cucpcake bakery, isn't it really one in the same?
I don't think the American diet of the past was all that healthy. People sat down to dinner with a lot of fats present - real butter and bread, and dinner was usually followed by a dessert. However, a lot of those calories were offset by activity and - and I think this is key - the food was not processed. Shelf-life on an item was limited, which means you had to go shopping more often. And because of the lack of globalization, people ate seasonally - sorry, no tangerines until Christmas.
So here's my proposal - tax the manufacturers. If you make a food with cheap high fructose corn syrup or added preservatives, you get taxed. Sure, they will raise the cost of the product but I am willing to bet that eventually one manufacturer will compete by making a product without it and one that people will buy more often because it won't last as long.
Does that sound crazy? Why wouldn't manufacturers make a product that lasted instead of one that - as natural foods do - begin to "go bad" forcing the consumer to either eat it or let it go to waste, and then have to buy some more?
I like the advice of one author I read regarding nutrition: If it didn't come from the ground or it didn't have a mother - don't eat it.
20 comments:
Sorry Digi, I have to disagree with you. The government has absolutely no right to tell me (or even strongly suggest) what to eat. We do not need bureaucratic nannies or health coaches. We certainly don't need to feed Leviathan with more cash. Hands off my soda and Fritos!
I agree with you, Father, but if a tax is inevitable, my point is to move it closer to the source.
Otherwise, I support you in your freedom to engage in the consumption of soda and Fritos. I will assume that they are done in moderation since the number of people who would be heartbroken to lose you to an early coronary or stroke is likely adequate to guilt you into at least that.
Right?
Otherwise, perhaps we should have a chat about end of life planning, with such topics as who gets Gunny and Katy?
;-)
Another aspect to this issue is that a number of us single folk are dependent upon pre-prepared (TV Dinner) meals as it is impractical to heat up the whole kitchen for 1 plate of spaghetti & meat balls. (I'm also "being green" by not having to wash all those pots & pans 2). Pop that TV Dinner in the microwave and I'm ready to eat in 5 minutes.
The FIRST thing: No New Taxes.
Don't negotiate with yourself, Digi!
Amen Dad! But add to it, "and fewer old ones."
And yet, he skirts (which he can do literally, favoring as he does those cassocks) the issue about his diet . . .
Here's my take: it's none of the governments f'ing business. How's that?
Besides, the cigarette tax was supposed to make health care cheaper. Did it? Hell no. This is just another excuse to control you. They can go "F" themselves!
No skirting just because I prefer to not dress like a Protestant. I actually eat fairly well without the government holding a gun to my wallet. (And don't covet the Overlords!)
Of course you do, Father. One question - how often during the week do you take a meal in the driver's seat of your car?
Actually, Dad, you've missed my point. I don't think the government should dictate our lifestyles when it comes to safety issues. hence why I have always been a proponent of legalizing drugs. But again, if a tax comes down, raise it closer to the source. I would rather a food manufacturer give me the choice of something not so processed and thus with a shorter shelf-life than frankenfood.
I would rather a food manufacturer give me the choice of something not so processed and thus with a shorter shelf-life than frankenfood.
But see, the free market is the mechanism for accomplishing this.
We'd all be eating better and cheaper if the government would just get the hell out of our way. Quit using taxes as a mechanism for social engineering. Quit paying farmers to not grow wheat or raise hogs. Quit regulating the crap out of not only the farmers and manufacturers, but also the shippers (yeah, I know Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce -- but just 'cause you can do something doesn't mean you should.
Did that blithering idiot in the article stop to think that the imbalance in the price of healthy food versus junk food might just have something to do with bungling government interference???
Anita, I don't think government interference is to blame for frankefood as much as our own ignorant selves are.
No, really - how many people care to read a food label so long as it's plentiful and cheap? The frankenfoods came out of the market demand for food that kept the buyer - usually Mom - from having to go to the market with any frequency and having to spend time actually preparing it. How many people today make things "from scratch?"
And our appetites have changed, too. A lot of the foods that were commonplace in the 50's and 60's (and I was raised in the 60's so I remember a lot of them) have gone by the wayside. Liver and onions? Cooked rhubarb, whether as a side or dessert? Tongue? If you want to see something interesting, watch the TV show "Mad Men" and see how people roder at a restaurant - I was struck when a waiter asked one woman, "Something to start, Madame? Consomme?" and she replied, "No, just a tomato juice." Now it's a fried sampler plate.
So, no - our appetites grew and the market was happy to feed us. Mind you, I can find cheap produce - but as I pointed out in my posting below regarding Whole Foods, people don't want to shop in too "ethnic" a neighborhood. More affluent people will pay more for an upscale market - so if I was growing blueberries, shoot, if I have someone willing to pay $7 a flat just because theya re "organic," I'll take advantage of that.
Digi:
I absolutey agree with you regarding your comments on how people eat now, as opposed to 30 or 40 years ago.
Also worth mentioning is the fact that when I was growing up (in the 50's and 60's), snacking between meals was unheard of and not allowed. Now, people are constantly eating.
Did you see the NYT article a few weeks ago by Michael Pollen, "Out of the Kitchen, On to the Couch?"
Anita, I don't think government interference is to blame for frankefood as much as our own ignorant selves are.
But I'm not talking about who's to blame for frankenfood. I'm talking about who's to blame for the relatively high price of real food.
Plus: I'm with Fr. Erik: it's none of the !@#$@%@$%@$!!! government's business what we eat or how we eat it.
Thank you. This site was very helpful and I so enjoyed my visit to your blog,and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-).
Samantha
Get the best FREE offers on the Best Home security Systems
I would rather a food manufacturer give me the choice of something not so processed and thus with a shorter shelf-life than frankenfood.
No matter the cost?
Good.
Whole Foods!
Having eaten C-rations, I'll take the preservatives, thanks.
No, Dad, Food 4 Less, which is a division of Kroger. Sure, you gotta listen to the mariachi music playing as you shop, but the produce is fresh and a fraction of what it costs at Whole Foods. Plus the carniceria section is to die - real butchers who know how to cut meat!
Hint to the people who run the local farmers' markets: if you had them on the weekend, I bet more people would come.
See also: Costco
BTW, I've had C-rats, too, including a can of peanut butter that was canned in 1947. I bet it was still purer stuff than the crap they make in Skippy's, with all that added stuff "to prevent separation." At least Skippy's also has a "natural" version, but even that's got palm oil and sugar added - what's wrong with just peanuts and some salt? BTW, most standard kitchen blenders are powerful enough to take some roasted peanuts and blend them into peanut butter.
No more taxes--Digi--and the government does not, nor should it ever tell us--in a "free" market what to eat--or punish us according to "their" ideas of what we should eat--we are not "slaves" yet--and I would like to keep it that way.
And you want to legalize drugs? You want the government to give us the freedom to get high if we so choose--but not eat Fritos without paying a penalty? Very odd.
Tara, I think you missed the point.
*sigh* I forsee a posting to clarify things.
Hint to the people who run the local farmers' markets: if you had them on the weekend, I bet more people would come.
In beautiful downtown El Segundo (all 3 blocks of it - Main St. not Sepulveda) they block Main Street from 3 PM to 7 PM for their Farmer's Market. I'm sure all the Chevron employee's bolting down Main to Imperial Highway love the 2 block detour...
Post a Comment