Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

why is the sugar tax bad?? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by difeo)
    So you say your diet is good and then go on to say you eat too much and a lot of it is *****y food (3 cans of pepsi in one day, creme eggs, doner kebab, barely any veg)... okay

    Being fat doesn't mean you're always stuffing your face. It does mean you eat too many calories.
    And you just assumed that was my regular diet so instead you just saw the bad things.

    I eat potatos just not much other veg mostly as it takes up a lot of space in the fridge (though just bought a new fridge so buying more) as funnily enough I prefer veg to meat hence me buying that large salad at a takeaway and chucking out 4/5 of the meat from the kebab and eating the bread and salad.

    But you ignore the notion that maybe I ate too much in the past hence me not gaining any more and assume I eat too much now.

    FYI that was the first donner kebab I have had in about 3 months, I eat 1-2 take aways a week if that and if I do I eat nothing else before or after.

    Just as it was the first creme eggs I had in 2 weeks, the only thing is I eat little veg though its my favourite food type.

    Part of the reason for that is I live thriftily and go to supermarkets late so I get reduced products.and that almost always ends up as things like pies.

    So why focus on the bad things as thats what you want to see? Why can't you accept that you get some fat people in better condition than some thin people?
    If I said I never ate bad foods you would claim I am in denial or lying wouldn't you?

    My diet can altenate between living off things like chicken and rice, pork chops (ones without bones/fat) pork stir fry, chicken burgers, home made spaghetti bolognaise, home made lasagne, home made fish pie.

    Because I mentioned what I did on 2 days do you think that is the norm?

    I never meant my diet was good just it wasn't as bad as you might think nor am I stuffing my face.

    Thats why I don't gain weight much if at all and lose it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    Fat? Polyunsaturated fats, plant sterols, fish oils etc. are thought to be healthy. Fat isn't taxed is it?



    But cigarette consumption has fallen hugely over the decades. Taxes have well established effects on consumption.
    No, fat isn't taxed you're right but it was more the awareness of it (i.e. people being more careful with their sugar intake like they are with their fat intake) that I was in approval of.
    As for cigarette consumption I would say the decline is more due to the smoking ban in public places.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Personally i dont care. It doesnt affect me too much (only drink sugary drinks a few times a month). I do think it is just a sneaky way for George Osborne to generate a tiny bit of extra cash for his budget because he hoped people wouldnt care much. However too many liberals in this country so people ***** about everything and claim it hurts their rights. What needs to be done is taxes on all high sugar and salt products, not just one. Education isnt the issue. Its just that these products are cheap. And people like cheap so they buy. Its just a weak, lame attempt by thr government to do "good" without really thinking it through.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pereira325)
    Personally i dont care. It doesnt affect me too much (only drink sugary drinks a few times a month). I do think it is just a sneaky way for George Osborne to generate a tiny bit of extra cash for his budget because he hoped people wouldnt care much. However too many liberals in this country so people ***** about everything and claim it hurts their rights. What needs to be done is taxes on all high sugar and salt products, not just one. Education isnt the issue. Its just that these products are cheap. And people like cheap so they buy. Its just a weak, lame attempt by thr government to do "good" without really thinking it through.
    They are not cheap when they are mostly sugar and salt which costs pennies and they charge a few quid for that every item, you are buying empty calories that fill you up.

    The cynic in me says the government has just taxed it as they know its something that the general public are addicted to in the sense its in almost everything they buy food wise so they have no choice whilst with cigarettes and alcohol people may not use them so they don't get the money.

    What I worry about is soft drinks already have a massive mark up and if on a night out and you are a non alcohol drinker or even tipsy and wanting to stop most places already charge you just as much if not more for a soft drink than alcohol due to promotions, I have seen £1 bottles of alcohol and even £1 pints when the same places charge almost £2 for a small glass of soft drink!

    So people will drink more alcohol causing more problems for the police, A+E visits etc.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This may have already been said (haven't read all this thread) but from a purely econonic standpoint...

    Taxing demerit goods such as sugary drinks doesn't always work (and probably won't in this case) because drinks like Coke tend to be price inelastic. There aren't substitutes to full sugared colas - the closest thing is diet colas but people don't see these as perfect substitutes, so people will continue to buy full sugared drinks. Therefore all this does is raise more revenue for the government.

    Last opinion - I personally don't want the government getting more of our money for it to waste away on what it decides we need
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    It's a good sweetener for the government purses
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pereira325)
    Personally i dont care. It doesnt affect me too much (only drink sugary drinks a few times a month). I do think it is just a sneaky way for George Osborne to generate a tiny bit of extra cash for his budget because he hoped people wouldnt care much. However too many liberals in this country so people ***** about everything and claim it hurts their rights. What needs to be done is taxes on all high sugar and salt products, not just one. Education isnt the issue. Its just that these products are cheap. And people like cheap so they buy. Its just a weak, lame attempt by thr government to do "good" without really thinking it through.
    Why should a healthy person like myself pay more for sugary, fatty or salty food I like because of other people who can't (or won't) exercise a bit of self control?

    Simple question. I've asked it many times before and never had a satisfactory answer.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:

    true story
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by limetang)
    Firstly, unhealthy food is often cheaper than healthy food, so while a tax on unhealthy stuff is arguably a good thing, that needs to be coupled with subsidies on healthy food
    It's a complete myth that 'healthy food' is expensive. We're just a lot less willing to spend our money on food now because of how cheap mass produced has become. We take food for granted massively. Apparently 50 years ago we used to spend approximately 30% of our income on food, whereas now it's less than half that number. So no, healthy food doesn't need to be subsidised, we need to stop being tight with our money when it comes to the one of the essential things that keeps us alive and healthy
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomclarky)
    It's a complete myth that 'healthy food' is expensive. We're just a lot less willing to spend our money on food now because of how cheap mass produced has become. We take food for granted massively. Apparently 50 years ago we used to spend approximately 30% of our income on food, whereas now it's less than half that number. So no, healthy food doesn't need to be subsidised, we need to stop being tight with our money when it comes to the one of the essential things that keeps us alive and healthy
    What you fail to realise is that food prices vary by area and many people cannot cook right and food quality varies, supermarket chicken and the such is bulked up with water and can have added salt in.

    And people often have less time to cook so want pre made food.

    Give me a home cooked meal over a ready meal or take away 99 times out of 100.

    Even give me a salad over a takeaway.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What causes tooth decay ?

    What causes obesity ?

    Sugar is not the answer to both questions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    What happened to parental and personal responsibility? I hate the nanny state.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sequin Rugby)
    What happened to parental and personal responsibility? I hate the nanny state.
    I'm not a fan of the nanny state but I would however say the levels of salt sugar and fat is way too high in foods which have easy substitutes to make them taste either the same or very similar rather than a tax I would rather legislate


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I'm not a fan of the nanny state but I would however say the levels of salt sugar and fat is way too high in foods which have easy substitutes to make them taste either the same or very similar rather than a tax I would rather legislate


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Or just stop buying junk food for yourself and your family. Businesses don't sell that for which there is no demand. What happened to making educated and informed choices? Nobody is forced to buy anything and all products are labelled.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    They are using the £520m revenue from the sugar tax and investing it back in to schools. I cant see how this is any bad considering the price increase will only be a few pennies higher.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sequin Rugby)
    Or just stop buying junk food for yourself and your family. Businesses don't sell that for which there is no demand. What happened to making educated and informed choices? Nobody is forced to buy anything and all products are labelled.
    Sorry that's complete crap the labelling is confusing, not standardised across all labels and unless you prepare everything from scratch then you are almost certainly eating too much of something bad for you.

    As an example is there really a need for original coke? No there is not their is Coke Zero and Diet Coke both with zero sugar.

    I'm not 100% sure but I think there is more than the rda in one can, that's just not acceptable.

    Then there is the lazy and stupid people society ends up paying for because we fail to educate even if we did label everything correctly in a standardised matter.

    It may be convenient for narrative to be libertarian about everything but it isn't right in practice.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Makbkuan)
    They are using the £520m revenue from the sugar tax and investing it back in to schools. I cant see how this is any bad considering the price increase will only be a few pennies higher.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If schools need more money which we don't have it should come from General taxation


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by democracyforum)
    What causes tooth decay ?

    What causes obesity ?

    Sugar is not the answer to both questions.
    Sugar contributes to both
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    a man gotta eat
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Sorry that's complete crap the labelling is confusing, not standardised across all labels and unless you prepare everything from scratch then you are almost certainly eating too much of something bad for you.

    As an example is there really a need for original coke? No there is not their is Coke Zero and Diet Coke both with zero sugar.

    I'm not 100% sure but I think there is more than the rda in one can, that's just not acceptable.

    Then there is the lazy and stupid people society ends up paying for because we fail to educate even if we did label everything correctly in a standardised matter.

    It may be convenient for narrative to be libertarian about everything but it isn't right in practice.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why buy Coke at all? What happened to drinking water? Diet Coke and Coke Zero are actually worse: they just replace the sugar with aspartame.

    I agree with your point about the lazy and stupid. I don't think society should end up paying for people's bad habits - they should pay for it themselves. Privatise NHS.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
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.