Would a 20% tax put you off buying sugary drinks?

Poll

Would a 20% tax put you off buying sugary drinks?

Doctors are demanding a 20% tax on sugary drinks, apparently:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jul/13/doctors-tax-sugar-drinks-uk-obesity-bma-children

But is it the right thing to do? Would it put you off? I think education is probably a better option.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

*pitseleh*

Original post by TomatoLounge

But is it the right thing to do? Would it put you off? I think education is probably a better option.

The thing is, 'education' by itself has been shown to not be very effective.

If you want people to give up something that's bad for them, it tends to need quite a lot of strands (advertising the health implications, increasing the price, improving education, altering the physical appeal of the product, banning advertisements for the product etc) coming together before you start to see change.

Doctors asking for a 20% increase in prices is not doctors saying 'we're washing our hands of the patient education aspect of lifestyle changes'. They're suggesting the price increase in addition to the education already being provided - since clearly that isn't working by itself.

Reply 2

Rakas21

I don't drink such drinks myself (bar alcohol or an occasional swig of coke) however I don't think that this will be sufficient to have a big impact. I think the best solution is to tax the production rather than consumption of such products, if you make them so expensive to produce that it becomes less profitable then producers will use abatement technologies or substitutes.

I hear education being said a lot but I honestly don't believe that people are capable of rational choice when it comes to health given that we already know obesity and the like is bad, yet obesity rates are increasing.

Reply 3

Studentus-anonymous

Original post by TomatoLounge

Those doctors can **** off in a time machine back to Germany 1930 ~ 1945 and live in the sort of paradise they envision for themselves.

Doctors have no business discussing taxes anyway. They're doctors, stick to doctoring. And yes, that means fixing my ass regardless of my lifestyle.

****ing hate this fad of calling for taxes and bans and all this **** just because some people can't ****ing control themselves.

Reply 4

Stevo F

Original post by TomatoLounge

Whilst I think it's a good idea for the people who regularly drink sugary drinks, it's unfair on the people who occasionally and responsibly drink them.

I'm more inclined to go for the argument that if you have a self inflicted problem, for example lung cancer from smoking, health issues from over-eating, or liver problems from drinking too much, you should be made to pay for, or at the very least contribute towards, your treatment.

Reply 5

quentinhamilton

It wouldn't bother most people for sure

Reply 6

SecretDuck

Not at all.

Something which I don't see being mentioned in these debates is that sugary drinks and junk food in general have been manufactured to hook people on them, so the food companies get repeat business. And the brain activity after consuming sugar and the brain activity after consuming a drug are worryingly similar.

The obesity crisis always victim blames and points the finger at victims of addiction, rather than the food companies who make the addicting junk food and sugary drinks.

Reply 7

Cheskahb

I saw an article which said that cranberry juice was going to be included in this. Quite annoyed considering many people including myself buy cranberry juice for medical reasons.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 8

cosmicluma

Likely to be a positive thing long-term helping to prevent obesity

This study finds higher prices are associated with a lower demand: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24225016

Reply 9

Dez

Original post by TomatoLounge

There already is a 20% tax on soft drinks. It's called VAT. :p:

Reply 10

cosmicluma

Original post by Cheskahb

Cranberry juice often has added sugar to make it taste better so would be covered under a tax on SSBs (sugar sweetened beverages).. I'm not sure if it's possible to buy cranberry juice without the added sugar

Reply 11

Tiger Rag

Original post by Cheskahb

Isn't the sugar in that natural? Whereas the sugar in coke and the like quite clearly isn't.

It wouldn't bother me. I rarely drink anything other than water, tea and coffee. (no added sugar to either) However, as another user said, it is unfair on those who don't go mad and drink them all the time.

Reply 12

TomatoLounge

Original post by OU Student

The sugar quantities aren't really natural as juice is just refined fruit. Its fruit where they've taken out most of the stuff that isn't sugar and water. Delicious.

Reply 13

Nortus

No, it would not put me off, but I would be in favour of NHS privatisation as these doctors would piss me off too far to continue to pay for public healthcare.

The same way I received a fine for using a mobile phone while parked and voted Conservative to make sure the ******* lost his job or had a severe pay cut.

I'm not going to pay more money because other people are fat. I already pay VAT - use that VAT to subsidise healthy food and stop punishing responsible people for their irresponsible peers. They clearly want revenge on the public for their 1% pay rise limit. I would be very happy to see an increasing black market though. We may as well be the first country to actually have a black market for Coca-Cola because clearly out leaders are too Nazist to allow us to maintain a normal life so we have to resort to ridiculous measures.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 14

cosmicluma

Original post by OU Student

Original post by TomatoLounge

The sugar quantities aren't really natural as juice is just refined fruit. Its fruit where they've taken out most of the stuff that isn't sugar and water. Delicious.

Cranberry juice has added sugar on top of what's already there otherwise it'd taste pretty bad (the main ingredient on the label is sugar), whereas other fruit juices wouldn't apply as the sugar usually isn't added on top. But yeah, refinement of fruits causes the fructose sugar to become extrinsic instead of intrinsic (inside cells) and so is more soluble and used by the body more quickly

Reply 15

A level sufferer

We supposedly live in a free society where individuals make their own choices yet we are subject to taxes on cigarettes (non smoker) and soon anyway sugar. People should be allowed to muck their lungs up if they so chose to or get diabetes if they want without being dis incentivised by the Government

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 16

Emily.97

Original post by Cheskahb

What medical reasons?

Reply 17

lyrical_lie

Original post by Emily.97

What medical reasons?

Helps with kidney infections and UTIs.

Reply 18

Emily.97

Original post by lyrical_lie

Helps with kidney infections and UTIs.

Oo, interesting.

Reply 19

Cheskahb

Original post by Emily.97

What medical reasons?

Slightly embarrassing but I get water infections a lot, had a case earlier this year when I had one for over 3 months and no antibiotics were working, saw a specialist had cameras etc and my urethra stretched. Specialist suggested cranberry juice and cranberry extract tablets

Posted from TSR Mobile