Tax on "Unhealthy Food" ?
- Thread starter Beagler
- Start date
LIBERTYCHICKEN
Well-Known Member
Bloombego , Has said thats one of his goals
For most food to be on the shelf, the government had to deem it safe in the first place. What would change?
The FDA, or other government agency are not going to classify food on the shelf right now as "UN healthy" that would be a contradiction to themselves, which would be disastrous. They MIGHT classify some foods as "Extra Healthy" though, to get around such dilemma.
The FDA, or other government agency are not going to classify food on the shelf right now as "UN healthy" that would be a contradiction to themselves, which would be disastrous. They MIGHT classify some foods as "Extra Healthy" though, to get around such dilemma.
MidwesternGro
Well-Known Member
Multiply the value of food stamps by 1.3 if purchasing whole grains, fruits, milk, juice, vegetables and lean meats. Multiply the value of food stamps by 0.7 if purchasing prepared foods, sugary snacks, sugary drinks, etc. This would go a long way to improving people's diets. Maybe even let them have a one time purchase of a rice cooker or crock pot. Maybe we can have less long term health costs for the poor this way.
But what about the food rights of the fast food addict, what about people who are allergic to rice or healthy food? What about eating yourself to happiness? Don't we have the right to pursue happiness on our own terms??
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Therein lies the rub (which is attributable to idiotic Government meddling to begin with)
It is a very dangerous and slippery slope my friends.
Mary Poppins was a fictitious character.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
What will happen is that food will become more political and there will be lobbiests from both sides with studies showing that a certain food is good or bad and depending on the amount of the contributions the American people will be paying higher taxes not based on health but on politics. God bless Amerika...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
good to know who the racists are, thanks for making it easy and not at all abstract.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Implying all Republicans are racist and pro-choice makes you a Republican in denial, you're no better than those you attack. On most issues I'm more liberal than you are.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i'm not saying all republicans are racist, although racists are most often republican/conservative/libertarian/other right wing ideology.
i merely said that dangerlow was racist, as you can clearly see in the post he made.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
With your complete lack of understanding of history it follows that you would be a global warming freak...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
forest fires.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Look at the track record of the government on foods. First eggs were good then they were bad and now they are good again. Alcohol is alternatively bad for you and good for you in moderation. They said salt was bad for you for a long time regardless of common sense and then recently came out and said up to a couple teaspoons a day is perfectly fine.
We want to let these people change the taxes on food arbitrarily depending upon the new research report of the week? Seriously?? We want to make the manipulation of the tax code for our food another thing the government can micro-manage?? We want to attempt social experimentation through another extension of the tax code?? Seriously?? I mean... Seriously??
When does this all end?
We want to let these people change the taxes on food arbitrarily depending upon the new research report of the week? Seriously?? We want to make the manipulation of the tax code for our food another thing the government can micro-manage?? We want to attempt social experimentation through another extension of the tax code?? Seriously?? I mean... Seriously??
When does this all end?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
a better question would be, when did it even begin?
i was just in a liberal bastion and saw no taxes on "unhealthy food". ditto up here in oregon.