Taxing fatty foods, great idea! (insurance, judgment, companies, tax)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Currently people do not have to pay the costs of eating bad, rather their bad habits are subsidized by the rest of the nation. For example, obese employees do not get charged more for health care than non-obese employees. Instead, the rates are for the entire pool but part of the pricing is the general obesity rate!
Creating a tax on unhealthy foods is a great way to start to charge people for the costs they are incurring on the system. The money can be used to overall the health care system.
The money can be used to overall the health care system.
Have you learned nothing? Money is never used for its intended purposes. Just look at the tobacco settlement monies and taxes and where it gets spent.
I agree on principal but this won't stop obesity or reduce it, just like increasing taxes on cigarettes doesn't reduce smoking rates. It just takes more money from the citizens and gives Government more control over our lives.
Want an example? A Chic-fil-a sandwich meal costs around $5.50. Even a 10% tax on that won't deter me from enjoying my sandwich (I just got a $50 gift card!). But it will just take more of my money out of the economy and put it into the bottomless pit that is our federal Government.
I'd be more inclined to support regulation that allowed classifications of people based upon the weight class (normal, overweight, obese) and different health insurance costs based upon those factors. But all in the private sector. Similar to what insurance companies are doing - they charge based upon your profile. I paid $100/month when I was single and <25 compared to $15-$20/month after that and when I was married. I don't think they should be allowed to limit pre-existing conditions however, as most people cannot control what diseases they get or their genetic history. But for what we can control, I think there should be a monetary incentive to get people to shed the pounds.
Better yet, reform the health care system through deregulation, automation and legal tort reform. Let the market lower health costs and those who are smokers, or slobs pay extra for their care. No new taxes, we need to starve the government to restart the real economy.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,873,215 times
Reputation: 6438
And they came for the fatties, and I said nothing.
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land."
I think we should tax people who don't exercise. Exercise is good for you. No one ever got hurt exercising. Have national gyms that you have to attend regularly. Have a card you have to have read by a card scanner. If you don't exercise and can't prove it, you get the "blob of slob" tax.
And they came for the fatties, and I said nothing.
Medicaid pays approximately $600/year MORE in medications for a fat person than they do their normal-sized counterparts. And that's just meds, that doesn't include anything else.
All ya'll fatties cost us more, it's a fact. Why should those of us who stay fit have to pay for you?
Anyone who thinks the government stealing your money for any reason, is a good idea, would probably benefit greatly from a frontal lobotomy. Or at least the rest of us would.
I hate to rain on anyone's parade, but under where in the Constitution does the Federal Government have the authority to tax fats in foods?
For the record, I am not necessarily opposed to obese people paying more for health care but it should come from increased premiums not from the government.
Whenever the word "tax" comes up people react negatively. The issue here is that are some serious externalities that people are not paying for, instead the costs are being amortized throughout society.
I should not have to pay more for health insurance (or taxes) because my neighborhood has decided to eat badly and is now obese, but that is exactly what has happened with the current system.
Since are health care system is both private and public, taxes would have to be used. You could not rely solely on increasing insurance for obese people because many people don't have insurance in the first place (most notably seniors). Insurance companies can already charge more for health issues, I pay 20% more for my private insurance because I have asthma. The problem is with the group policies, everyone pays the same rate. Now, this is great when we are talking about health issues that are out of your control, but bad when the health issues are within our control. In the latter case the people being good have to subsidize those being bad which gives the people doing bad little incentive to change!
Want an example? A Chic-fil-a sandwich meal costs around $5.50. Even a 10% tax on that won't deter me from enjoying my sandwich (I just got a $50 gift card!).
The tax would have to have some teeth to it to be effective. But the point is that by taxing the unhealthy food people will be paying for their bad habits instead of amortizing the costs throughout society. Charge a decent tax on unhealthy foods and you could reduce taxes else where (most obvious would be medicare taxes).
Whenever the word "tax" comes up people react negatively. The issue here is that are some serious externalities that people are not paying for, instead the costs are being amortized throughout society.
I should not have to pay more for health insurance (or taxes) because my neighborhood has decided to eat badly and is now obese, but that is exactly what has happened with the current system.
Since are health care system is both private and public, taxes would have to be used. You could not rely solely on increasing insurance for obese people because many people don't have insurance in the first place (most notably seniors). Insurance companies can already charge more for health issues, I pay 20% more for my private insurance because I have asthma. The problem is with the group policies, everyone pays the same rate. Now, this is great when we are talking about health issues that are out of your control, but bad when the health issues are within our control. In the latter case the people being good have to subsidize those being bad which gives the people doing bad little incentive to change!
You've done a good job of highlighting why the health care system shouldn't be public in the first place. I always hate when government involvement is used as a justification for more government involvement. Remember that many, if not most, of the problems with our current health care system can be traced to wage controls during WWII. Without those, employers probably wouldn't be in the middle of health insurance and it would be portable for individuals. I agree the current system needs reform but I believe we are going the wrong direction in getting the government more intensely involved. We would be much better off by tweaking some regulations to ensure choice, competition and portability for the insured.
Group health insurance rates do vary based on the health of the group but to the best of my knowledge they only vary up or down 10% from the standard rate. But you are correct that the individual rates don't vary, even within a group, except for age and sex.
I admit I have a negative reaction to the word tax. Government is so wasteful and inefficient. Programs rarely work as planned and the "solution" is typically more money and regulations.
But still, there is no Constitutional authority for a federal tax on fats, just as there is no Constitutional authority for a $.10 tax on bottles or for mandating that everyone have health insurance. (Both of these ideas have been suggested by Congressmen in the last few weeks.) But that politicians are not going to let something like the Constitution get in the way of their "good ideas!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
