Junk food tax idea gaining acceptance

Lets get real, this is another tax on the lower middle class. Who else eats cheeseburgers and big gulps on a regular basis? It's like a cheap high, a great feeling that you get off junk food, plus you make your hunger go away, how about that? two birds, one stone.
well that's mcdonald's marketing in a nutshell.

For all their bluster about taxing the wealthy to pay for government control under the guise of helping the little people, they sure as poo always return to the american cash cow that is the "dupe" class.

I am in agreement on the subject of "sin taxes." They are just too puritanical, and what is defined as a sin today may not be tomorrow.

What is healthy eating, anyway? When I was young eggs were thought to be very bad for you. Certainly you didn't eat them more than once a month. Now my doctor tells me they are a good source of protein. They are no longer on the "naughty list."

In my state there used to be no taxes on groceries. All food was considered a necessity. I'm in agreement with that.

I think we do need to raise more taxes if we are going to have all the social programs we want and reduce the deficit.

But taxing "bad"people who do "naughty" things we think they shouldn't do is not a solution. At least tax something that is used by people across the board, and not just one group.

The middle and working classes are the ones who usually end up paying a disproportionate amount of tax.

I hate to always pick on the rich, but they've been getting pretty much a free ride since Reagan. We shouldn't be so afraid of asking them to step up to the plate.

reply to post by Karlhungis


This is the best thing I've heard in a long time. People should know anyways that coca cola is actually used to remove rust

I try to limit myself to maybe a 6 pack a week of any sort of carbonated beverage. Of course everyone picks what they drink however i would like to
have some sort of chewing help when im in my 60's. Haa

reply to post by ravenshadow13

I read Nickel and Dimed. I'm aware of the crisis plaguing low income families in this country. I still hold fast to the idea that if you are not a low income family, this tax is a good idea.

And where in the Constitution does it say YOU have the RIGHT to tell ME what I can and can not eat. I view a tax to change our eating habits as a dangerous precedent to set

The creeping brain washing done by the elite is sickening. They want to control us right down to the food we eat and the amount of energy we are allowed to use.

Maurice Strong said during the Rio Conference (Earth Summit II) in 1992,

It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class -- involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing -- are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns."

Notice this is NOT an attack on the wealthy but on the MIDDLE CLASS. The wealthy elite want to reduce the middle class to the same level as the poor class. Reduce our education, reduce out health care and reduce our protein.

Clinical effects of inadequate protein intake
As outlined above, protein is the fundamental component necessary for cellular and organ function....

Similarly unless amino acids are present in the diet in the right balance protein utilization will be affected. In the World as a whole protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) is fairly common in children and adults, and is associated with the deaths of 6 million children a year. In industrialized nations. PEM is seen primarily in hospitals, is associated with disease, and is often found in the elderly.....

Clearly protein deficiency has an adverse effect on all organs. In infants and children it has been shown to have harmful effects on the brain and may have longer term effects on brain function. Furthermore, protein deficiency has been shown to have and adverse effects on the immune system, resulting in a higher risk of infection. Pg 608, 609(citations removed) books.google.com... KQ4XcbuNKpajnuiY&hl=en&ei=AzeTSp3ZNoaJtgfw1-xK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#v=onepage&q=%22brain%20function%22%20%22protein%20intake%22&f=fa lse

To put it bluntly the UN and the elite are engaged in a propaganda campaign to move industrialized nations away from meat consumption KNOWING it will impair the brain. That is why I am alarmed by this move to dictate the diet of Americans with propaganda such as

We have Is going vegetarian better for the Earth? Meat-eaters who switch to a plant-based diet save...Over one hectare of land per ton of food www.surfnetkids.com...

A United Nations report has identified the world’s rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs. The world’s 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together. www.greendiary.com...

There is also a claim that eating beef causes cancer:

American consumption of beef is less than 3 oz a day. Many people consume more alcohol a day than that. Second There have not been studies comparing consumption of grass fed vs Factory farm raised cattle fed GMO corn, wheat, barley, soy and pesticides, hormones, antibiotics and other chemicals.

“The most important research finding in this area has recently come from Jena University in Germany. Researchers there have shown that a gene used in GM canola transferred to bacteria in the guts of bees. I believe this is the first publicly documented case of horizontal gene transfer from GM crops to bacteria within any animal. This discovery may have major implications for the future of GM crops. “ www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/03/10/HOG5FOH9VQ1.DTL

If you do not believe "enviromentalism" puts money into corporate pockets read this:


In the spring of 2008:

“At a time when parts of the world are facing food riots, Big Agriculture is dealing with a different sort of challenge: huge profits..... Cargill's chairman and CEO, Greg Page, said earlier this month that "the dimensions of change in global agriculture are striking" and that the Minneapolis company is doing "an exceptional job measuring and assessing price risk." He said world grain stocks are at their lowest level in 35 years.” www.tucsoncitizen.com...

"There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. "These strategies are not sustainable."

In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:

* corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;
* switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and
* wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that:

* soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and
* sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.
www.news.cornell.edu...

Corn in the feed store $15/100 lbs
corn tortillas $240/ 100lbs
With price difference like that no wonder big ag wants us to eat the corn instead of feeding it to cows.

I do believe we should yank all the junk food vending machines out of schools and reduce the cheap carbs and up the veggies, fruit and meat in school lunches. That will have a much better impact on our kids than a tax that puts money in the banksters pockets.

Sure does seem to me like WE are the crop that THEY want to sell...and the aliens like their meat lean and non-smoked.

I wish we'd all quit hating each other in the name of personal responsibility. Its that the new sin of the science religion? Not being personally responsible by the 10 risks defined by statistics?

It used to be that when we agreed to some sort of pool - like insurance, we just agreed we'd take the risk of the collective group. Now that insurance is getting expensive, they want to maximize their profits and consumers want to quit having to pay them through the nose.

So they propagate this war on 'smokers' and 'fatties'....smokers are about smoked, but the 'war on obesity' just started. When are we going to have the war on the high risk 'high school football players and cheerleaders?" One time a co-worker had 2 sons - one a freshman, and one a senior BOTH in the hospital for football related injuries. The younger one was in traction and hospitalized for a LONG time.

According to this sort of thought, doesn't it then follow that we should not engage in any sort of dangerous activity knowingly?

Oh screw that. We shouldn't even be bickering over if soda is good or bad.
One fact we know is that it is another tax.

So is chocolate junk food? Dark chocolate has antioxidants which fight cancer. They want to tax people for eating nutritionally inferrior high priced snacks andmeals. To bail out the bankers bad mortgages, wall street inflation, and our military's advertures. Hummm..... with all the stuff going on maybe everybody should come home, and get back to work on the basic of life. Everyone is invading everyones personal space to be alittle too much. Where is the joy in freedom?

reply to post by OhZone

the ones the doctor wanted me on required a perscription...
I got something here that is over the counter, it might help a little, but well, not much.
I still prefer to get my daily vitamins and minerals from the food I eat thank you, and not from stupid little pills thank you!!
So, my point stands.
I know that I've heard lawmakers mention chocolate milk when discussing this.
I am underweight and drink chocolate milk, mainly for the calcium...
and well, I challenge anyone to prove to me a few glasses of chocolate milk, or a bag of chips with my sandwich at work, is gonna make me fat or cost you money!

ya, know, we had a problem with single parents living in proverty also, so now, well...what can I say, most of them aren't living in proverty anymore, they have welfare, and hud, and medicaid, ect helping them out. But the result has been that two parent households are getting to be less and less.
It has gotten very difficult to raise a family without their help.
I am underweight, if the country decides to form this society so that it's catering to the special needs of the overwieght, well, it's not like the welfare programs in the country, where one can just kick the husband out and go on welfare. There is no way I can put the pounds on, so I can take them off with their gov't mandated starvation diets or gov't mandates exercise programs!

maybe the fools should be taking a closer look at the problem, and what is causing it before they start taxing people in hopes of forcing them to stop eating those things that they think is unhealtlhy!!
I am willing to bet that the steak many will be eating tonight for supper is more likely to cause obesity than the small bag of chips and daily chocolate milk that I am eating!!

Originally posted by DataWraith

Originally posted by SpacePunk
reply to post by Karlhungis

 

Good. I predicted this years ago, and am seeing it happen. You fatties are going to get the same treatment the lousy smokers have been getting. Enjoy your taxes!

Sorry I have to take offence at your derogatory remarks about us FATTIES, I'm not fat, I'm just bigboned, and its not due to Junkfood as I don't eat any, nor do I smoke , I'm fat , no not fat, I'm 'cuddly' due to my metabolism.

.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T TO YOU MY MAN!

I am adding u as a friend, just 'cos I love "cuddlies"!

Originally posted by glasgowstar76
reply to post by Karlhungis

 

This is the best thing I've heard in a long time. People should know anyways that coca cola is actually used to remove rust

I try to limit myself to maybe a 6 pack a week of any sort of carbonated beverage. Of course everyone picks what they drink however i would like to
have some sort of chewing help when im in my 60's. Haa

Reminds me of the time my mom poured out some old coke into a cup without knowing there was some change in it. I put it in the fridge to keep it overnight, and the next morning, when I took it out, I found the change inside, and WHOA, NELLY!

They were as SHINY as DAY!!

And now I always think of that whenever I see Coke, and how it'll be flowing around in your digestive system, sticking to your epithelials, "cleaning" stuff out... :S

Originally posted by CapsFan8
Lets get real, this is another tax on the lower middle class. Who else eats cheeseburgers and big gulps on a regular basis? It's like a cheap high, a great feeling that you get off junk food, plus you make your hunger go away, how about that? two birds, one stone.

well that's mcdonald's marketing in a nutshell.

For all their bluster about taxing the wealthy to pay for government control under the guise of helping the little people, they sure as poo always return to the american cash cow that is the "dupe" class.

It's a tax on the middle class period. The rich don't care about tax on junk food. The poor will not care either, they will just wine about the cost to the gov't who will take more from the middle class to help subsidize the poor who can't afford the cost of the food they buy.

Originally posted by badgerprints
The cheapest foods are also the worst for you and some poor families actually rely on them for a sheer calorie per dollar basis.

This is entirely false. Rice and beans are some of the cheapest foods you can buy anyway, and they have zero fat, cholesterol and are energy rich, with extended release of energy. A head of lettuce and a handful can make a filling lunch for a buck something.

I see a lot of people (who aren't looking rich) buying processed foods which are indeed loaded with nasty stuff. This is a product of being bombarded with commercials and becoming increasingly lazy over time. I can't imagine that eating out at a fast food place if more economical than boiling and egg and slicing a tomato at home, so please don't give me this bull.

reply to post by exile1981

heck, the tax will increase the cost of feeding a family, which will increase the benefit amount for poor families...thus, well what can I say, the poor, who appearantly have plenty of food since so many seem to have the stamps to sell, will still be eating their favorite foods, so won't the ultra rich,
but, well, those of us are are that rich, or that poor, will be the ones forced to eat "healthier", many of us, by the way, who burn more calories during a day of work than some of those preaching their healthy lifestyles do in a week sitting at their desk and pushing folders...

heck, send the fatties to my shop, let them do my job, they'll either lose the weight or have a heart attack, one or the other....

the cigarette tax breezed through and people didnt complain because they dont smoke, they raised your property taxes despite a falling housing market, and people didnt complain cause they didnt own houses. now they are coming after your food. whats it gonna take for people to stand up?


tread lightly my government friends...
en.wikipedia.org...