Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Do you think that obese people should have to pay for hospital treatment related to their condition?

    Do you think that obesity is a problem in this country and if so do you think that this is as a result of junk food being too "in your face" and cheap and that this type of food should be taxed and removed from schools?

    I only ask because I had an argument with a friend in which my opinion was that it should be a persons choice to eat what he/she want and that it shouldnt be the government's problem to "nanny" everybody and make sure that everybody was eating healthily. Ok, good nutrition should be well advertised and taught in schools but at the end of the day if somebody wants to eat junk food than they will, and should be able to make that choice for themselves. What do you think??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As with all arguments related to possible "self-inflicted" conditions there are two side to the debate. Some people may not eat healthily or exercise, but others may be obese through no fault of their own - you cannot discriminate against anyone seeing as we live in a welfare state.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Smokers get treatment for their self-inflicted illnesses, but pay through the nose via tax to more than cover the cost. I don't see why people should be stopped from eating whatever they like, but if its costing the NHS then taxing it highly would be fine by me.
    Interesting idea. Perhaps you should adjust the taxation of food depending on the extrenalities of it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    to encourage people to eat healthier, perhaps vegetables and fruit should be v cheap, but stuff like chocolate have high taxes- although, that would hurt Fairtrade =0/
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    I agree with taxing foods that will cause people to be unhealthy therefore cost the NHS, but don't think we should be persuading people by other means into eating certain things - what about freedom of choice?
    people will have freedom of choice, as they have freedom of choice to smoke
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Only in a restricted sense. The lower prices of fruit/veg/whatever will indirectly force people into buying them.
    which would be both better for the people, and for the environment
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Yes but that's not the point, the point is people should have complete freedom of choice. If they are damaging their health then that's their business, and extra taxes on health damaging products would pay for their healthcare. It seems to me to be rather unfair to enforce a lifestyle on people just because the alternatives are seen as unhealthy.
    I'm not suggesting that certain foods should be banned because they are unhealthy, I just think that there should be a tax on certain foods. this tax could be used to treat disorders caused by obesity, as well as raising the price of certain harmful foods and thus discouraging peole from eating them. what it could do, if managed properly is to bring down the price of healthy food, so that people on a very low income do not have to subsist on foods like white bread and baked beans.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    But by taxing the food thought to be bad for you, you wouldnt lower the prices of the food that is "good for you". Food will be altogether at higher prices and the extreme poor will find it difficult to buy enough food. One of the reasons people buy junk food, as well as it tasting good is because it is cheap and easy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by onlylittleme)
    But by taxing the food thought to be bad for you, you wouldnt lower the prices of the food that is "good for you". Food will be altogether at higher prices and the extreme poor will find it difficult to buy enough food. One of the reasons people buy junk food, as well as it tasting good is because it is cheap and easy.
    the extra taxes on junk food could be used to subsidise the production of healthy food, so it could be sold more cheaply
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think there should be a tax on unhealthy foods. What about people who like eating them but don't get obese and therefore aren't a drain on the NHS?

    I don't want to live in a nanny state like that. I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself which foods I want to eat and I am aware of the consequences. Food should not cost more or less depending on how healthy it is.

    What should be done is more to help parents give their children healthy meals. A lot of parents are too busy these days, to pay proper attention to their children's diet and find it easier just to give them money to fill up on crisps and McDonalds.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mioniel)
    I don't think there should be a tax on unhealthy foods. What about people who like eating them but don't get obese and therefore aren't a drain on the NHS?

    I don't want to live in a nanny state like that. I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself which foods I want to eat and I am aware of the consequences. Food should not cost more or less depending on how healthy it is.

    What should be done is more to help parents give their children healthy meals. A lot of parents are too busy these days, to pay proper attention to their children's diet and find it easier just to give them money to fill up on crisps and McDonalds.
    I'd go along with much of that. It's none of government's business what I put in my mouth. I'm an adult with a brain, not a retarded 8 year old, and I don't need some government stooge to tell me what, when, and how much to eat. Good God! What's the world coming to when we can't even feed ourselves?!

    And of course "fat taxes' penalize the poor. It is after all the poorer sections of society that tend to eat more at McDonalds and not the middle income earners.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Which is crazy seeing as McDonald's isn't exactly a cheap meal. I suppose its The Ritz to some people.
    That's true. It's the convenience of it that I think appeals more than the price.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    That's true. It's the convenience of it that I think appeals more than the price.
    Thats true... It's not the idea of it being cheap or anything, it's more to the fact that it's fast and convenient, as Howard said.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    did anyone hear about the people who tried to sue Mac Donalds for making them fat?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by riffraff)
    did anyone hear about the people who tried to sue Mac Donalds for making them fat?
    This is the next area for mass tort litigation. Gonna be bigger than tobacco and asbestos this one!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Fat people should pay a higher sewage rate, and also more National Insurance, considering they use it more than others. Knees giving way etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ToshTrent)
    Fat people should pay a higher sewage rate, and also more National Insurance, considering they use it more than others. Knees giving way etc.
    Actually, perhaps they use the sewage system less as they obviously retain more food than they expel.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think they should make them pay fat tax or not treat them, same to smokers. They know full well that if they are fat/smoke/drink a lot/do drugs, then they will probably need hospital treatment in the future. Why should people who do things in moderation pay for people who are too stupid to realise/to ignorant to care, that what they are doing will both destroy their health and make the rest of us pay more in tax to keep them alive?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    YEAH!!! i agree
    In fact furthermore, if i were McDonalds, i'd say 'our food is fat and bad for you, but u knew that before u came in. As long as people are willing to pay for it we will supply it, and if u make yourself sick it's your fault'!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by claire1985)
    I think they should make them pay fat tax or not treat them, same to smokers. They know full well that if they are fat/smoke/drink a lot/do drugs, then they will probably need hospital treatment in the future. Why should people who do things in moderation pay for people who are too stupid to realise/to ignorant to care, that what they are doing will both destroy their health and make the rest of us pay more in tax to keep them alive?
    But in the case of smokers they pay for their own health costs and a lot lot more (11.5 billion a year in tax on tobacco versus 1.5 billion a year in the costs of treating tobacco related diseases)

    The question therefore might be reversed "why should people who smoke subsidize non-smokers health care"?
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
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: April 15, 2004
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
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.