Boris Johnson is wrong about sugar and sin taxes
Quote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...taxes-2qtckzdlx Quote:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...sin-taxes-food/ |
Sugar is the new tobacco, I hear.
|
I really disagree with "nanny" taxes like this. I'm okay with taxes on luxury items (like alcohol) and I'm okay with the high taxes on tobacco because the money is directed toward health care programs to pay for caring for people with all the diseases they got from smoking. But the sugar taxes don't do that--they're just solely there to tell people what to eat and drink.
If they were going to fund something that was better for people, like, I don't know, more protein and fewer carbs in school lunches, maybe I could deal with it, or even care for people with diabetes and kidney disease and educate people about reducing carbohydrates. There's a purpose and a sensible cause and effect. But at best they're going to "nutrition education" which just tells people to eat sugar in other forms these days. The suggestion that high fat foods are next on the tax list just shows that they don't understand why people shouldn't eat sugar and it's just random. |
Quote:
Agree completely. Setting a precedent for taxing sugar, regardless of how unhealthy it is, means that anything is fair game. Given the vast knowledge that governments possess on nutrition :bash:, this practice will go sideways in no time. |
Sad but true, taxation reduces use. Not that I like this tactic but it works. Its a back door tactic.
Talked to a friend that gets food stamps and the new program encourages purchasing $40 a month of fruits and vegies, and upon use that amount is replaced in the account. A reward for buying fresh fruits and vegies. While there at friends I talked about DANDR. We conversed for ten, fifteen minutes. That is, three over weight adults discussing foods. A week later they asked me about getting a copy of DANDR. MAYBE we need to keep reaching out to people. Yes, most dont care. But what about the one or two exceptions. We dont know who that will be. In this case , success is family I know well. They are interested in change. Grass roots have an effect different than government. Government uses a one size fits all method. Like making peduatrition guilt mothers into feeding low fat milk. |
Go Boris! "...Boris Johnson will end the “continuing creep of the nanny state” if he becomes prime minister, starting with a review of so-called “sin taxes” on sugary, salty and fatty foods."
No more sin tax on fatty foods!! Keto on. |
I think the nanny state has been fairly effective against tobacco. Also against things like cholera...
Not having a problem with the efforts against tobacco, I guess I get down to just what they should be bothering with. Sugar and fat are a bit different than tobacco, in that how we approach them has an effect on their health effects. In some dietary contexts, cutting fat probably does make things better--that is, there are lower fat diets that don't seem to cause harm in a not already compromised population. And of course populations where high fat doesn't seem to be a problem. So I'm against taxation not because I'm against taxation, but because there really isn't just one way to approach things. How about a second breakfast tax? Or a tax on any food eaten outside of an eight hour window? And salt--I'd say salt from the shaker is probably mostly harmless. Salt in a snack food that's both fatty and carby and low in protein and maybe even sugary? Maybe not a good idea. I tend to think the threat of taxation is almost as good as the taxation itself here--without anything really to back up the claim. At least it puts the idea that sugar should be approached with caution in people's minds. |
Quote:
Every time someone complains about joint pain, knee pain, foot pain, etc. , I mention that low carb has worked wonders for my foot and joint pain. Sometimes they leave that alone, sometimes they want to know more... My low carb evangelizing has had a ripple effect - my sister has lost weight and gotten off 3 meds. In turn, one of her friends has lost 30 menopause pounds and is feeling great! Philadelphia has a soda tax. It was supposed to fund pre-k. Hah! Instead, the money goes down the government black hole and kills lots of jobs for city dwellers (particularly in the grocery and restaurant industries). Commercial properties that previously would have sold to restaurants or stores sit vacant. I'm no fan of taxes anyway, but Philadelphia's soda tax was an especially stupid one. |
Quote:
Totally disagree. The numbers are there - I used to work at a place that funded a new Pre-K program with soda tax money. Nothing is ever perfectly run but nowhere is sitting vacant because of the soda tax - commercial real estate is booming overall in the city. However they gripe, the businesses are doing fine. If their business model is dependent on primarily the revenue from selling sugar drinks, I am fine with them being forced to change their business model anyway. I mean, seriously, half the supermarkets just switched to selling booze. They will be fine. |
I'm not particularly fond of the "nanny state" argument. It's just a blanket statement that can be applied to any law that someone might disagree with. Helmets for cyclists, seatbelts in cars, traffic lights at intersections, the drinking age, the voting age; would you argue that any of these laws are "nanny state"? Better to argue each issue on its own merits imo.
I've given my views on sugar tax in other threads already, but fwiw I'll say it again here: I'm not opposed to the concept, but there are other things I'd rather see done before it gets to that point. Get rid of farming subsidies that artificially promote the growth of grains, seed oils and the like. Ban loss-leading in supermarkets. Change the dietary guidelines. Better controls on drug and junk food advertising, and so on. All of these things can benefit the consumer without the need to directly raid their wallet, and with any luck, these sorts of measures may be enough to get the message through without the need for a tax at all in the end. |
Thanks tess. Lets keep keto rolling.
Talked to MIL, she us firmly in the low fat camp . Shes happy with six pounds off since June 1st. Doesnt want to hear fat is good. |
Quote:
When I compare my low fat experience (crazy levels of exercise, hunger an hour after eating, slooooooooow loss and then, within 6 weeks, NOTHING) with now, it's like one of those burgers that looks like a used steel wool pad compared with a delicious grass-fed burger :) |
Quote:
Quote:
Finally, I don't know if you've noticed the number of boarded up gas stations that used to rely on the soda sales. I don't know for a fact those are casualties of the soda tax but I have second hand info that at least one not far from me is. Statistics can lie. Real life people have been badly hurt by the soda tax. I'm not trying to argue with you as you've stated very plainly that you don't care if businesses that relied on soda are suffering. That's a fair point of view. I just don't want the last impression of the Philadelphia soda tax on this thread to be that there was no collateral damage. |
Quote:
I have come to regard all "nanny state" complaints as those of whiners who don't want to consider others, even themselves. You know what doctors call motorcyclists who ride without helmets? Organ donors. The basic toddler reflex of "No! You can't make me!" belongs with toddlers. There wasn't any outcry at making our giant corporations in charge of everyone's food, was there? What could go wrong? When the writing for tobacco appeared on the wall, what do you think all the cigarette companies did? They bought up giant manufactured food concerns like Nabisco which made COOKIES. They moved from one addictive substance to another. So expect to see the soda companies following suit. |
Quote:
I don't live in NJ, but do work in a grocery store (in neighboring PA). The company I work for has always systematically cut hours, especially certain times of the year, when business is naturally a little slower. (It's all hands on deck on weekends, and during the run up to holidays though. During the HallowGivingMas season you could go from 12-18 hours/week to suddenly working 30-40+ hours, depending on the week of the year, and which dept you work in. If there's snow or a hurricane in the forecast, you can almost count on them begging you to come in for a few hours and help handle all the excess customers. Such is the nature of the grocery business.) But I digress... Part of the generalized cut in hours is due to the fact that they're trying to shift as much business as possible to online ordering, offering discounts to customers who order online. At first you had to order online the day before, and set up a time to pick-up your order at one or two specific locations in the county the next day. Then they added the option of delivery service. Now, they have the option to pick up in as little as 4 hours, at any of our stores in the area. They do have employees going through the store, picking and packing the groceries for those orders, but since all those employees are already trained for other jobs in the store as well, if they don't happen to have any orders to fill, they're put on other jobs in the store until they're needed to fill orders placed by online customers. This of course saves labor hours as they shift people around to fill immediate needs, rather than paying more people dedicated to certain jobs for their entire shift, whether there's anything for them to do or not. Half the registers in our store are dedicated self scan registers - why pay 10 cashiers when you can get away with paying one person to handle a 10 register self scan area? They recently converted 3 of the 10 regular registers to convertible self-scan/regular registers, so that's 3 more self scan registers (2/3 of the registers in the store). Sometimes they have a 2nd person to monitor those registers (1 person being paid to handle 3 registers, also saving labor hours), but not always, so sometimes the self scan attendant who is already handling 10 registers needs to run over and fix problems on those too. More labor hours saved. They cut bagger hours by installing carousel bagging racks on some of the registers, so that the cashier could automatically bag everything as soon it's scanned, rather than needing a separate bagger standing at the end of the register to bag items. The limited number of baggers now spend most of their time retrieving carts from the parking lot. They've even managed to cut janitor hours, by having a robot go around the store to check for any hazards that need to be cleaned up, rather than paying an employee to patrol the aisles for hazards. When the robot finds a hazard, it makes an announcement calling the janitor to clean up the hazard. This interrupts the janitor from emptying trash cans/cleaning restrooms/etc, but overall saves on labor hours. (I have no idea how much that stupid robot cost the company, but apparently The Powers That Be think it was worth it to save a few labor hours each day) So yeah, I don't doubt that the soda tax in NJ is affecting employee hours due to reduced sales, but there are probably many other factors involved too. Retail sees certain costs as being somewhat uncontrollable (rent, repairs and upkeep, utilities, taxes, etc), but labor hours are a factor they can control to a certain extent, so they're doing everything they can to cut them as much as possible. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:47. |
Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.