Would it work?

Would it work?

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Obesity can be caused by more factors than just food
    Oh no, the r is only 0.99!

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not just stop subsidizing production

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You realize meat is subsidized too right

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We're not talking about meat you fricking mongoloid

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Why not just stop subsidizing production

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Sugar production not meat

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You didnt say sugar so

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not the first anon but this whole thread is about sugar, you're moronic to not understand he's talking about subsidising sugar production

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lol this, the government hands out gibs so moronic hicks grow corn so we can make Poptarts and Coca-Cola. It's all manufactured on purpose.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        corn is incredibly calorie dense per m^2 and its useful to have in the event of war because you need high yield farming

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You're suggesting removing the subsidies paid for with tax dollars, for products that are then taxed at the point of sale, with proposed additional sugar tax? Fascism! Why do you hate freedom!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >sugar tax
      is already proven
      worked quite well in the UK

      some EU countries are already looking into implementing something similar

      though these taxes don't help with existing obesity
      they mostly help preventing / slowing children from getting fat

      at this point we should probably just make ozempic / wegovy mandatory for everyone who qualifies as obese based on BF%

      >Pull plug on subsidies fueling corn syrup, basedbean oil, and sunflower oil
      >National BMI average plummets
      It would literally be that easy.

      it's not only subsidies
      even countries with no subsidies get fat

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >is already proven
        >worked quite well in the UK
        how

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Pull plug on subsidies fueling corn syrup, basedbean oil, and sunflower oil
    >National BMI average plummets
    It would literally be that easy.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not enough. tax foods wit mire than 10% of fat calories into oblivion

      You realize meat is subsidized too right

      gud. eat beans. you burgers have iron overload too. hubter gatherers have parasites that lower their iron and ldl but paleotards dont know this.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That’s antisemitic

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Meat prices would skyrocket if the factory farms couldn’t get their cheap animal feed

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No. The food industry is the way it is for a reason. Gubberment is very happy with the status quo.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    just get blacks and hispanics off EBT and the rest will sort itself out

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >blacks and hispanics off EBT
      More like deport them all

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this looks like something you'd submit in highschool economics class

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. We have to stop subsidising grains, find easier ways to convert sugar and alcohol to fuel and subsidise healthy crops. And don't spray them with pesticides.

    This won't happen so focus on your own fitness tbh. The weak suffer what they must.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It wouldn't, because it would be lobbied and gamed into futility.
    Here in Europe they are always trying to do it, but an example that gets thrown around a lot, and that kills any chance of it getting the popular vote, is that
    >PARMESAN
    would be taxed more than
    >DIET COKE
    Because one is full of fats, the other has no fats or sugars.
    Yeah, frick off with that thing, it's useless, we don't need to incentivise the population to drink more diet coke.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >PARMESAN would be taxed more than DIET COKE
      And that's bad because? Let's be honest, no one eats parmesan for the protein

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The UK literally has a sugar tax that applies to soft drinks. There is data to suggest it has been effective but it's dubious imo as it doesn't show a decline in obesity across the board. There's one particular study that is used to argue it's effectiveness but you can make your own mind up about this:
      >Researchers from MRC’s Epidemiology Unit at the University of Cambridge tracked changes in the levels of obesity in children in England in reception year and year 6 between 2014 and 2020.
      >Taking account of previous trends in obesity levels they compared changes in levels of obesity 19 months after the sugar tax came into effect.
      >The team found that the introduction of the sugar tax was associated with an 8% relative reduction in obesity levels in year 6 girls, equivalent to preventing 5,234 cases of obesity per year in this group alone.
      >A relative reduction is the difference between the expected incidence of obesity had the sugar tax not been introduced and the actual incidence.
      >Reductions were greatest in girls whose schools were in deprived areas, where children are known to consume the largest amount of sugary drinks, those living in the most deprived areas saw a 9% reduction.
      >However, the team found no associations between the sugar tax coming into effect and changes in obesity levels in children from reception class. In year 6 boys, there was no overall change in obesity prevalence.

      tl;dr there was a reduction in obesity levels in one particular group of children and they want to attribute that to the sugar tax but haven't been able to show wider change in society.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It alone wouldn't be enough. You would need a bunch of other policies, on top of that, for exactly the reasons you described

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That would basically be an extra tax on all food in the US. What would be exempt besides the produce aisle?

    $20 McDonald’s meals proves npcs will pay anything for their addiction to crap. You can’t tax it away. But you CAN cap profits of corporations shilling this crap, and that would incentivize healthier products. Note that I said “cap profits”, not “tax”. Taxes can be passed on, and always are.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >obesity cause by more factors than just food
    I fricking hate limp wristed homosexuals. Stop giving in to these fat frick. You could do a sugar tax but then companies will just use fake sweeteners and we all get cancer instead. They should just let insurance companies charge higher premiums for overweight and obese people, obesity shouldn't allow for disability and obese people should be disqualified from medicaid.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We have something similar in Hungary. Chips, some snacks and sweets have additional tax on them. We still the unhealthiest and fattest country of Europe.. It only serves government greed, people still buy them.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If it is only for added sugar and fats then probably. Fruits are high in sugar and meat is high in fats and those are the two healthiest things you could be eating so if you started taxing those you would just be making people more unhealthy.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >If it is only for added sugar and fats then probably
      Should we tax jam and juice?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Does juice have added sugar?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Of course you won't answer the question

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Black person, obviously if we tax added sugar then jam would get taxed and juice wouldn't, what's the point of your question? Nta

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >should

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, jam should get taxed. It's hypercaloric and unhealthy, do you disagree?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I disagree that 50 calores is hypercaloric yes

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                KEK yeah, one arbitrary serving (15ml) is 50 calories just like one serving of literal fat has zero calories
                Amerigroids are so easy to scam
                That's why in most countries regulations exist, so companies can't take advantage of morons like you

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think its unreasonable yo shift the goalposts but ok

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If it has added sugar or is from concentrate yes. Jam and juice can be incredibly unhealthy. Most juice is just as bad or worse than soda. Many jams are practically a desert.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I think the wording of "added sugar" can be a little too vague to implement. This implies that things like jam would be taxed but pure sugar and things like sugar syrup or honey wouldn't be.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >but pure sugar and things like sugar syrup or honey wouldn't be
            I don't see the problem. The main problem is premade shit. Fat people aren't baking homemade cookies and cakes in most cases. They are just shoving convenient addictive slop in their faces, because they are too lazy to cook.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah fair enough that's a good point

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No, this is on the same level as fricking marijuana tax or something

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why shouldn't we tax drugs

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >obesity caused by more factors than just food
    Name them.

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They did it and it didn't. It's just a DNC flavored version of justifying a VAT which only affect low-income people. In red states they love increasing VAT like on used-car sales but not luxury cars purely because they're evil, but left-wing liberals try to bullshit some "health" reason, like when they went after vapes.

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Can lead to lower taxes
    It won't, the government will just spend more at their friends companies, personal travel or government pay rises

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We should tax people who propose this shit at a 100% rate.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Dumb.

    Get universal healthcare, make it mandatory to see a doctor every year for a physical to qualify. Failure to do so removes your government healthcare. At the physical your bf% is recorded and that will adjust your income tax. The fatter you are the more the gov't takes to subsidize your fat ass. With this new revenue and forced treatment, prescribe Ozemic to the piggies to slim them. If you schedule an extra appointment and lost a lot of weight your taxation will change as if it was on a graph (you'd still be taxed higher for the months you were fatter, so if you gained or lost weight it would change shit.)

    Then simply change food stamps to only qualify for chicken, Lean beef, rice, beans, potatoes or other veggies.

    If you want a food tax, tax it based off of caloric density. Anything with a lot of calories per volume, such as chocolate, would have a high markup while celery would be subsidized.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Doctor Shekelstein is almost ready to see you, Anon? Are you all caught up on your boosters? Make sure to finish that intake form, including the part about if you have guns in the house. Remember, it's perjury to lie on it! Don't you know that we have a health crisis with all these guns around?!

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Once again statist econolets cannot into fiscal policy.

    What would be more effective would be 1) remove subsidies from corn
    2) if fats refuse to lose weight then they no longer qualify for medicare/medicaid as they are willingly refusing treatment

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >as they are willingly refusing treatment
      Have you ever seen that show my 600lb life

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Aside from screenshots, no. Based on those, however, it would seem to only prove my point. Much like that Bing kid who was buying chips from the trolley despite being on a strict calorically controller diet at the tax payer's expenses

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah that's kinda my point. They can claim they are doing treatment and then just eat pizzas at home, which they would do anyway

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    have a nice day commie

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    probably not
    the only thing that would work is shaming fats as a society like we did in the past

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tax would have to apply to all sugar, not like other taxes that only targeted sugary drinks.
    SNAP would also have to be reined in and limited to what could be bought.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I dont think taxing fruit is a good idea

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even if you can get it through against the junk food lobby, it still ignores sneed oils.
    I saw something with transfats in it the other day. It was fricking ground beef with added hydrogenated sneed oil. They took lean ground beef, which should be a costlier product, and then reconstituted it into less healthy 8X% lean ground beef. This was at Whole Foods. I found it in the dumpster with all the "beyond" bullshit they threw out. This poisoning isn't negligent, it's malevolent. I don't see what other explanation there could be, yet so much makes more sense from this paradigm.

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    amerilard lolbert... pls... be quiet...

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >in europe

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nothing wrong with sugar or the type of fat they want to tax, saturated. Just do a processed food tax. We can work out what qualifies as processed with time. Or a PUFA tax

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *