France To Tax Fatty Foods For Healthcare

I think the biggest reason we tend to resort to this type of fast food, is we are time crunched. A lot of us are working more than one job and maintaining a home and family, we don't get 3 months off like congress. We don't have nannies. No we drive our kids to childcare and pick them up, and now those fuel bills have increased but our pay checks haven't. Bills have to be paid including childcare, house has to be cleaned, kids have to be picked up, have to clock in at work...just when does time to prep a healthy dinner or grow a garden work into the quotient?.

 

You can't tax people into personal responsibility no matter what the studies say. You can only form a society with certain values set by example. And then allow that some will have to struggle to meet the lowest levels of acceptable behavior. Instead of looking down on them and adding more barriers, perhaps we should be giving them a hand up.

 

\
An odd occurrence it is, that spare time is a luxury among the hardest working of people.
However, even with fast food out of the picture, many, many foods that one could (and likely must) pick up at a supermarket are far from healthy, and buying organic is a joke on many budgets. Most of the unhealthy food is the result of what it takes for food production companies to make the most money.

Due to time and monetary constraints, the working class can't lead a fully healthy lifestyle. Maybe that's why it's not "upper class"

*Although, actually considering the OP, this isn't such a ridiculous thing. The French do have socialized medicine, and taking care of everyone is something that someone with that system has to deal with. If I could get cancer and not go flat-broke, I might deal pretty well with chipping out a few extra francs for that le big mac and side of freedom fries

 

No confusion.
I was just adding three varying studies over the last few years.
All seemingly contradictory.
I'm not quite sure which one I believe.
I tend to swing towards the "Fast food and sedentary lifestyle: a combination that leads to obesity".
This probably does not account for all the increase in obeseity over the last 20-30 years...as I also agree with the study: Sedentary Lifestyle Not To Blame For Obesity".
Like you say, it is a "multiplicity of problems that contribute to obesity" - that probably is closer to a truth.
It is more likely an individual personal issue why people are obese.

Obesity has been an issue for well over 150 years, probably longer.
We can point the finger at places like McDs.
But, IMO that has more to do with pointing the finger at places like that for all the ills of the world.
Regardless if it is true or not.

Like you add

"If it were up to me, I'd ban McDonalds or put as many sanctions on them as possible. They ruin.....and environment..."

Which has little to do with obeseity.

How about banning every outlet that sells fatty food?
How about banning the chip shops UK kids flock to at dinner times?

I agree.
That seems to be what is occuring here in the UK.
The gov' seem to have woken up.
And upto this date have chosen not to go down the Tax route.
Shucks, they seem to agree with you as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4287712.stm

 

Because people have been conditioned from birth to see the government as some sort of benevolent father figure that wants what is best for them. There are some people who actually believe this "fat tax" is for their benefit. I know -- sad, but true.

 

http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/HPV/HPVHOME.htm

CDC reports almost 8,000 adverse reactions to “Gardasil” HPV vaccine in U.S.

Should parents worry about HPV vaccine

HPV Vaccine Blamed For Teen's Paralysis

Three Girls Dead, Others Hospitalized After HPV Vaccine

Gardasil -- New video reveals hidden dangers

 

Wow. You're against analysis of things with numbers?

I was actually going to post a study that said that alcohol taxes decreased consumption. And then you had to go and say that. I'm not sure how that defies common sense in any fashion.

That's kinda a pathetic argument Zep. Of course studies can be cheated. But if you see their methodology it can be recreated and their can be no doubt.

 

Oh, and as far as the thread goes, France is a republic and is free to levy whatever taxes it chooses to pay for whatever programs it's people support.

Fatty food's a vice and will probably be taxed like one in the future.

I don't consider having to pay an extra .60 for chocolate an infringement on my basic civil rights.

 

Gee, maybe we should have a calorie tax and a carbohydrate tax as well. I mean, any person with half a working brain knows that there are plenty of foods that are low in actual fat, but loaded with calories and sugar, which ends up making people just as fat and unhealthy. Then again, governments rely on a dumbed-down public that is completely incapable of asking themselves serious questions, so it makes sense that some people are biting on the chum and thinking it's for thier own good.

I hear nothing about taxing foods containing chemicals (toxins), artificial sweetners and additives like MSG. I am hearing nothing about high fructose corn syrup, which, if anything, is what is really behind the obesity epidemic in the West. So now fat is the boogeyman and we all must turn to the state like good little collectivists and embrace their "solution" of more regulations and more taxes. Yeah, I am sure that is going to save lives.

I am sure that if such a thing is written into law, the people behind it will be laughing themselves all the way to the bank.

 

Much as I in part agree with Rat that this is taxing something which is more or less just seen by the general populace to be the cause of the problem, rather than many other more dangerous (and untaxed) problems). I also see the possible necessity of a tax to recoup the costs of a certain thing to a National Health service. Though an aspartame/high fructose corn syrup etc tax would make more sense.

 

I'm sure the way it would be applied nutritionally would likely be more nuanced than just 'high fat' foods. There are many causes to the obesity epidemic, and I believe sugar (sucrose) is more common then high fructose corn syrup in France.

Of course it's a tax plan. It's designed to make money, which France is short of. And since the money is going into healthcare I'm sure it will save lives.

The French are free to determine what they want to tax and how they want to spend it.

 

But chocolate has been found to be good for you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/20/earlyshow/saturday/main2710675.shtml

Attitudes and science about what is and isn't good for you change all the time. Remember when eggs were seen as evil, coffee caused cancer. Who do we use as the ultimate authority to make these classifications.

As to fats, some fat is necessary for human growth and development. Children require more fat than adults. Will we be given vouchers for our daily requirements?

http://www.humec.k-state.edu/news/2...food-pro-offers-commonsense-approach-10-tips/

 

They said eggs were good, then bad, then the whites were good but the rest was...

You know why? Because good and bad is not a logical way of looking at nutrition. Of course fat's essential. Eating a healthy diet is about balance. Too much of a good thing is bad in diets, such as red meats or fish.

In the mean time, the French have the prerogative to tax foods that yes, are a luxury, to pay for the the priorities such as healthcare they've set.

Vouchers? People would still free to eat as they choose if this passed. They just might be taxed .60 higher for certain pre packaged foods the health board deems unhealthy.