Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    The sugar tax is a good first step but needs to be followed by other actions as well. A win-win.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    I think the sugar tax should not be a measure in isolation which it seems to be. It would be just as easy to tax certain foods with high sugar, especially chocolate. A law allowing restricted opening of fast food outlets or no serving to unaccompanied children could be as effective.
    The name itself is a lie, for it's not a sugar tax - it's a levy on sugary drinks.

    It will make many families choose lower branded sugary drinks with an equally high sugar content, but the con will be in the lower price ; a price lower not due to a less sugar content but less branding.

    Alas, despite all the reports the government has been given they have chosen to ignore them.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by EricAteYou)
    The name itself is a lie, for it's not a sugar tax - it's a levy on sugary drinks.

    It will make many families choose lower branded sugary drinks with an equally high sugar content, but the con will be in the lower price ; a price lower not due to a less sugar content but less branding.

    Alas, despite all the reports the government has been given they have chosen to ignore them.
    Pray tell how many times you have said "bedroom tax".
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Pray tell how many times you have said "bedroom tax".
    I've always been against where such names have picked up colloquialisms. Whereas I know it's not it's official name , what it's called in 99% of conversions portrays the wrong image.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    You don't approve of it?
    Given that health is one of the areas where people are not rational enough to be left to their own devices i actually have no objection to government intervention. Unfortunately however this 'sugar tax' is actually just a fizzy drink tax (therefore its reach is limited) and it is also a tax on the consumer rather than production.

    To properly tackle the obesity problem we must..

    - Limit package sizing, it's well known psychologically that people will more often buy a super size pack rather than three smalls
    - Tax production rather than consumption (supply side economics is far better than demand). If you increase the cost of production the producer will use substitutes.
    - Extend the reach to all foods.
    - Don't just limit it to sugar. Have all foods per 100g taxed if they contain say more than 25% RDA of salt, saturated fat, calories.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Given that health is one of the areas where people are not rational enough to be left to their own devices i actually have no objection to government intervention. Unfortunately however this 'sugar tax' is actually just a fizzy drink tax (therefore its reach is limited) and it is also a tax on the consumer rather than production.

    To properly tackle the obesity problem we must..

    - Limit package sizing, it's well known psychologically that people will more often buy a super size pack rather than three smalls
    - Tax production rather than consumption (supply side economics is far better than demand). If you increase the cost of production the producer will use substitutes.
    - Extend the reach to all foods.
    - Don't just limit it to sugar. Have all foods per 100g taxed if they contain say more than 25% RDA of salt, saturated fat, calories.
    Even though the Danish I believe it was demonstrated a few years ago that this is the sort of thing that achieves nothing bar revenues, and does not actually change habits

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Even though the Danish I believe it was demonstrated a few years ago that this is the sort of thing that achieves nothing bar revenues, and does not actually change habits

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So, still good then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Just catching up on Andrew Marr and given the articles personally attacking Cameron in the Sunday papers i think that Boris, Gove and Patel have just got themselves sacked the moment he wins the leadership confidence vote.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Just catching up on Andrew Marr and given the articles personally attacking Cameron in the Sunday papers i think that Boris, Gove and Patel have just got themselves sacked the moment he wins the leadership confidence vote.
    Do you think he'll win it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Do you think he'll win it?
    I do.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Do you think he'll win it?
    I've no doubt. Cameron may be a bit wet for a lot but he's viewed as very safe. Frankly though, i don't think any of the candidates who'd stand against him will be popular enough to rally the party against him (Boris is popular among Tory voters but probably not as much among members, May won't stand against Cameron so early and she's probably now the establishment candidate).

    If Boris moves against Cameron so soon after the referendum he may well be seen as so divisive afterward that he'll screw his leadership ambitions for good.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I've no doubt. Cameron may be a bit wet for a lot but he's viewed as very safe. Frankly though, i don't think any of the candidates who'd stand against him will be popular enough to rally the party against him (Boris is popular among Tory voters but probably not as much among members, May won't stand against Cameron so early and she's probably now the establishment candidate).

    If Boris moves against Cameron so soon after the referendum he may well be seen as so divisive afterward that he'll screw his leadership ambitions for good.
    Which would be no bad thing. The duplicitous egomaniac would be a terrible leader.

    The no-name MPs who have called for Cameron's head are idiots, we could do no better at present.

    Fully agree with Clarke's recent comments.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    Which would be no bad thing. The duplicitous egomaniac would be a terrible leader.

    The no-name MPs who have called for Cameron's head are idiots, we could do no better at present.

    Fully agree with Clarke's recent comments.
    I don't disagree.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    OBR phone poll shows 4pc loses for remain and gains for leave narrowing the phone lead to 5pc with them.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very quiet over the battle bus all......

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Given that health is one of the areas where people are not rational enough to be left to their own devices i actually have no objection to government intervention. Unfortunately however this 'sugar tax' is actually just a fizzy drink tax (therefore its reach is limited) and it is also a tax on the consumer rather than production.

    To properly tackle the obesity problem we must..

    - Limit package sizing, it's well known psychologically that people will more often buy a super size pack rather than three smalls
    - Tax production rather than consumption (supply side economics is far better than demand). If you increase the cost of production the producer will use substitutes.
    - Extend the reach to all foods.
    - Don't just limit it to sugar. Have all foods per 100g taxed if they contain say more than 25% RDA of salt, saturated fat, calories.
    It does not matter where the tax is because the burden share for a producer tax is the same as the burden share for a consumption tax; I agree with the rest but do think taxing food penalises the responsible individuals who can control their intake.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Very quiet over the battle bus all......

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why would anybody talk about it when everybody knows all the major parties have engaged in dodgy accounting on that front?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Why would anybody talk about it when everybody knows all the major parties have engaged in dodgy accounting on that front?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Because they're not comparable. The sheer scale in this instance.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Given that health is one of the areas where people are not rational enough to be left to their own devices i actually have no objection to government intervention. Unfortunately however this 'sugar tax' is actually just a fizzy drink tax (therefore its reach is limited) and it is also a tax on the consumer rather than production.

    To properly tackle the obesity problem we must..

    - Limit package sizing, it's well known psychologically that people will more often buy a super size pack rather than three smalls
    - Tax production rather than consumption (supply side economics is far better than demand). If you increase the cost of production the producer will use substitutes.
    - Extend the reach to all foods.
    - Don't just limit it to sugar. Have all foods per 100g taxed if they contain say more than 25% RDA of salt, saturated fat, calories.
    Surely a consumer tax will trail back to hit the producers anyway? So it will still be a financial hit to producers and will still motivate action. Plus a lot of sweeteners like aspartame have shown to cause increase appetite, so there is no obvious substitute.

    I agree with all your bullet points, but still back the tax too.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Because they're not comparable. The sheer scale in this instance.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I guess I'll have to trawl through my sources and find the labour and SNP cases (ukip, lib dems, NI etc are irrelevant really) and see what tally I can reach to combat your assumed Tory case which, unless there is new news nobody has seen, is but 8 seats, one in 41.25

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 15, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.