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

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    On the sugar tax, it probably won't surprise people that I'm very much against it. I don't think it's really going to decrease the amount consumed in the forms of items it's going to be taxed in, and just be a revenue booster for the government. I'd much rather see changes to the way these people are treated, for example, making them pay for certain amount of treatment they may need from being obese, etc...!
    So instead of tackling obesity before it happens you prefer to let them become obese and charge them for attending hospital? That's silly.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    It also goes against the founding principle of the NHS, that the healthcare is universal. I feel like people take that for granted when it comes to themselves but want to take it away from others a lot. Like there are non smokers who say that smokers should pay for treatment if they get lung cancer, well no because i pay my tax towards the NHS as everyone else does so that no matter what i have healthcare. And i dont care how right wing anyone is, thats a ****ing beautiful thing and it should be protected at all costs.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And its also blatantly unequal as people who smoke the most don't necessarily end up with lung cancer, the way diseases appear varies so much between persons (for genetic reasons as yet unknown) that its also incorrect as you'll find people like me (hypertensive, on meds, not overweight, not diabetic but family history)

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    So instead of tackling obesity before it happens you prefer to let them become obese and charge them for attending hospital? That's silly.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No not at all. There are also many other things that should be being done, but I just don't think that a sugar tax is one of those things. I really don't think it's effective at all.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    So instead of tackling obesity before it happens you prefer to let them become obese and charge them for attending hospital? That's silly.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    When you say "tackle obesity before it happens" what ypu really mean is "act as if you're tackling obesity before it happens". These sorts of measures do not tackle obesity, all they do is tax for the sake of taxing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    When you say "tackle obesity before it happens" what ypu really mean is "act as if you're tackling obesity before it happens". These sorts of measures do not tackle obesity, all they do is tax for the sake of taxing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You say this as though it's beyond debate:

    http://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral...1-2458-13-1072
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26094232
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...case-sugar-tax
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    More significant than my HMS Hood post last week, today marks 100 years since the Royal Navy's bloodiest day, with questionable strategy and necessary laziness stemming from it leading to the loss of over 6,000 men.

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Those studies do not examine the impacts on the industry where there is reported to have been job losses, nor do the studies focus on the other criticisms of a sugar tax. It is not known if the substitutes to sugar are more dangerous because the substitutes have not been used for long enough to know the long-term effects on human bodies, the tax will hit the poorest harder who will pay lots in but will receive nothing back, and there is no evidence healthier alternatives will be sought.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Those studies do not examine the impacts on the industry where there is reported to have been job losses, nor do the studies focus on the other criticisms of a sugar tax. It is not known if the substitutes to sugar are more dangerous because the substitutes have not been used for long enough to know the long-term effects on human bodies, the tax will hit the poorest harder who will pay lots in but will receive nothing back, and there is no evidence healthier alternatives will be sought.
    The argument made was that the sugar tax does not see a decrease in the use of sugar. I was responding to that.

    These are all fair points btw, but I'd be surprised if some of the common sugar substitutes hadn't been pretty well researched for products like zero-sugar soft drinks. The tax will probably hit the poor hardest, which is unfortunate, but the same result arises when you tax cigarettes or cheap alcohol.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Those studies do not examine the impacts on the industry where there is reported to have been job losses, nor do the studies focus on the other criticisms of a sugar tax. It is not known if the substitutes to sugar are more dangerous because the substitutes have not been used for long enough to know the long-term effects on human bodies, the tax will hit the poorest harder who will pay lots in but will receive nothing back, and there is no evidence healthier alternatives will be sought.
    Sugar shouldn't be seen as a protected industry, this will incentivise firms to invest in "healthy" produce with lower sugar content.

    This will physically force them to drink water instead of 2L of Coke, that's not punishment.

    Aspartame increases hunger for instance, but making foods LESS sweet would suffice.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    When you say "tackle obesity before it happens" what ypu really mean is "act as if you're tackling obesity before it happens". These sorts of measures do not tackle obesity, all they do is tax for the sake of taxing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    From TDAs articles;

    reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption by 20% and mean BMI by 0.16 (95% uncertainty interval [UI]=0.06, 0.37) units among youth and 0.08 (95% UI=0.03, 0.20) units among adults in the second year

    gain 871,000 quality-adjusted life-years

    result in $23.6 billion (95% UI=$9.33 billion, $54.9 billion) in healthcare cost savings. The tax would generate $12.5 billion in annual revenue (95% UI=$8.92, billion, $14.1 billion).
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    The It's a Shame account is active again.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    ICM phone also shows massive gains for brexit 42 (-5) remain, 45 (+6) leave.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    ICM phone also shows massive gains for brexit 42 (-5) remain, 45 (+6) leave.
    I'm hoping that we do choose Brexit - I was briefly toying with voting remain, but Cameron's put paid to that.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I'm hoping that we do choose Brexit - I was briefly toying with voting remain, but Cameron's put paid to that.
    You and me both (bar me being pro brexit since I started considering the question)
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You and me both (bar me being pro brexit since I started considering the question)
    I've always been pro-Brexit as well, but thought that it would be worth reconsidering that stance in light of the referendum. However, Cameron's doomsday warnings are off-putting and it would have been nice to see a positive pro-EU stance put forward. I think that Cameron should definitely stand down as PM once the referendum is over though - if we vote to leave, we can't trust him to negotiate the best deal for Britain and if we vote to stay, his lies make him totally unfit to be PM.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I've always been pro-Brexit as well, but thought that it would be worth reconsidering that stance in light of the referendum. However, Cameron's doomsday warnings are off-putting and it would have been nice to see a positive pro-EU stance put forward. I think that Cameron should definitely stand down as PM once the referendum is over though - if we vote to leave, we can't trust him to negotiate the best deal for Britain and if we vote to stay, his lies make him totally unfit to be PM.
    So how can you go from being pro brexit to considering voting to remain when nothing really changed in the alleged renegotiation? And if we vote leave he will almost certainly put somebody pro brexit in charge of negotiations
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Reversing the private contracting of leisure centres could be one step in the correct direction.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So how can you go from being pro brexit to considering voting to remain when nothing really changed in the alleged renegotiation? And if we vote leave he will almost certainly put somebody pro brexit in charge of negotiations
    There were personal reasons which I had to consider when the referendum campaign period started; the renegotiation has nothing to do with my viewpoint as it wasn't worth the paper it was written on.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    Not voting Brexit because:

    A) I can't vote
    B) It's a stupid name
    C) Actual reasons
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Not voting Brexit because:

    A) I can't vote
    B) It's a stupid name
    C) Actual reasons
    Such as wanting USE
 
 
 
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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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

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