Turn on thread page Beta

Sugar tax and offers ban 'would work' says report watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Sugar tax? Now I'll be unhealthy AND poor.

    In short, it doesn't matter if the price goes up, food craving is food craving and I'd buy a £1 freddo if I had to
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ruthless Dutchman)
    Sugar tax? Now I'll be unhealthy AND poor.

    In short, it doesn't matter if the price goes up, food craving is food craving and I'd buy a £1 freddo if I had to
    The price of freddos rising to £1 would probably lead to civil war though.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    On the contrary, I think the evidence tends to show people are price sensitive. You may not realise it consciously of course.



    Wow, holy authoritarian Batman! You want the government to ban sugary things? So a bag of sugar would be illegal?



    Quite. If obesity is the problem, then surely a calorie tax would be more appropriate. But that would effectively be "make all food more expensive"!





    You could argue that is what a sugar (or calorie) tax is doing, assuming the money would be diverted to treatment and prevention of the health effects of obesity.

    And some people might eat a lot, but excrete most of it through exercise, so they don't face the bad consequences of being overweight.

    Perhaps a "fat tax" would be the solution. Every year, people have to line up at their local weighing centre and have their BMI measured. They would then pay tax based on their value, a but like council tax on their property. Sounds fine to me
    Ah yes, BMI, heavy taxation for sportsmen and people with certain medical problems too?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    I'm still going to eat chocolate, only now my pockets will be lighter, meaning less money for healthy foods! Nice one, gov'ment.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlenorthernlass)
    I'm still going to eat chocolate, only now my pockets will be lighter, meaning less money for healthy foods! Nice one, gov'ment.
    if I recall correctly you voted for this government..


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Odd socks)
    if I recall correctly you voted for this government..


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I didn't, I voted for UKIP.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlenorthernlass)
    I'm still going to eat chocolate, only now my pockets will be lighter, meaning less money for healthy foods! Nice one, gov'ment.
    The idea has been proposed in a report, but the government has rejected the idea of a sugar tax.
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by RFowler)
    The idea has been proposed in a report, but the government has rejected the idea of a sugar tax.
    Oh good, I can keep eating chocolate in peace. I've discovered that light blue lindts are the most gorgeous things ever:yum:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    In my opinion, instead of a minor tax on sugar, healthy food should be made cheaper. Many people would eat healthy if they could afford it, but it is a more expensive option than ready meals or fast food>:c
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlenorthernlass)
    I didn't, I voted for UKIP.
    ah my mistake, you voted for the other right wing ******s


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Ah yes, BMI, heavy taxation for sportsmen and people with certain medical problems too?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yes, my emoticon was meant to indicate sarcasm in case that wasn't clear.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    Yes, my emoticon was meant to indicate sarcasm in case that wasn't clear.
    Ah, emoticons don't really show well on my phone. Scratch that.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I was in a shop today at lunchtime looking a drink.

    Most 500ml fizzy drinks were £1.25ish
    330ml Lucozade was 95p
    1 litre Lucozade was £1
    750ml water was £1.05
    500ml water was 79p

    I wanted the 750ml water but I bought the £1 Lucozade, as it was the best deal.

    I am completely against a sugar tax but I do think prices really need to be sorted out. I don't think 1 or 2 litre bottles of juice should be cheaper than the 500ml versions or that multipacks should be sold at £1, when the single items are going for 60-80p. I think minimum prices for food with high sugar content might work instead of a tax, and there should be maximum prices for healthy items and bottled water.

    I do think food manufacturers should be encouraged to stop adding sugar to food in the first place, but I imagine they would need to start cutting it out very gradually.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 

1,772

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

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.