Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Proposed sugar tax: Nanny state to the rescue

13

Comments

  • #62
    OneArt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭OneArt


    Whilst it may be a good idea, Ireland seems to have this obsession with punishing everything that is fun. Seriously, nightclubs closing at 3am, no drink after 10, sky high prices on alcohol and smokes, and now this. I guess it should just stick to good old bread 'n water and have a mineral once a week as a treat.


  • #63
    revell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 221 ✭✭revell


    I do not smoke and I drink very sensibly. But when it comes to sugar and sweets, I draw a line here!:mad:


  • #64
    phasers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,159 ✭✭✭✭phasers


    syklops wrote: »
    Still lemonade still has sugar in it. Its not a tax on fizziness. Do you know how much sugar it takes to make lemons taste sweet?

    As for the "government taxing stuff that comes out of the ground argument, all I can do is :rolleyes:

    It costs money to get it out of the ground and bring it to your tap, and to make sure it is clean. My parents in Galway have been buying water for years because what comes from the tap cannot be trusted not to make them very sick.

    if what you're saying is true then diet coke and other diet drinks won't be affected, since it doesn't have any sugar, right? Reminds me of the jaffa cake/biscuit tax debacle.

    Btw, lidl sell 6 packs of water for 1.50. Look into it and stop trying to act clever, it doesn't work for you.


  • #65
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,242 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    ItsAWindUp wrote: »
    Yes it does http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/obesity.aspx

    apparantly being a vegetarian makes you stupid


  • #66
    plein de force
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭plein de force


    i'm glad i prefer diet coke so


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,791 ✭✭✭up for anything


    I thought I'd got out from under the control of my mother and father 30 years ago but it looks like the government is trying to put me back there. :mad: I'd run away from home if I had the money to buy a ticket but I spent it all on Coca-Cola.


  • #68
    Trevor451
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭Trevor451


    I bet this will make the soft drink manufactures just switch to cheaper sweeteners (high fructose corn syrup for example) which is not good at all.


  • #69
    k.p.h
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭k.p.h


    Lets put Aspartame in everything stick it to the man ,,!,


  • #70
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    Dionysus wrote: »
    Raw celery doesn't:

    'While celery does not have negative calories, the amount of effort required to chew celery consumes more calories then the number of calories in celery.' :)
    QI did something awhile ago about how eating rabbit meat only (very lean, high in protein) would kill you quicker than not eating at all. You body burns more calories trying to digest the meat than is actually ingested.

    Hard to know how the government could appropiately tax something which is actually essential for human health. In small quantities, but essential nonetheless.


  • #71
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,665 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Tayla wrote: »
    So do you think the tax on cigarettes should be reduced too?
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/officials-stamp-out-sweet-cigarettes-995307.html
    'sweet cigarettes' will no longer appear on Irish shop shelves. They have been banned under a directive by the Government's Office of Tobacco Control, which warns there is a dark side of to the supposedly innocent treats.

    The OTC says sweet cigarettes - or "candy sticks" as they have been subtly rebranded in recent years - encourage kids to smoke.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    Very kind of our government to think of the children. Very kind indeed.

    Any chance of providing a functioning childrens hospital?
    Any chance of providing SNAs for the children that need them?

    Any chance of seprating the church and schools? You know keep some pedo priests away from children.

    Ah sure but they'll tax sugar to prevent some children of getting fat.

    This tax is Just to keep their own pockets fat no doubt.


  • #73
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    Ahhh I used to love those sweet cigarrette things as a kid - never took up smoking though!

    I guess the kids these days have fake heroin needles that inject a sugary syrup straight into your bloodstream:pac:


  • #74
    thetonynator
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭thetonynator


    We already have this is place, look at your receipt (esp the lidl ones), essential foods - 0% vat, semi essential stuff (e.g. biscuits) - 12.5% tax, non essential (e.g. chocolate) 21% vat.


  • #75
    McChubbin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,080 ✭✭✭McChubbin


    Dey terk our Vanilla Coke!


  • #76
    noxqs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 412 ✭✭noxqs


    Taxes are never introduced due to public health or environment issues. That's just a handy excuse.

    In reality, it is just another revenue stream for the government because they need that money and it's a harder sell to increase taxes or VAT in general.


  • #77
    Fallschirmjager
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,341 ✭✭✭Fallschirmjager


    its exactly why a government in healthcare is nothing to do with healthcare...its about control. once a government has control of healthcare they control every aspect of your life....all under the guise of 'whats best for you' and saving taxpayers which they never do as they tax you more and more

    so here is a question :

    if smoking is so bad for you...why dont they ban it? it would be BEST for you would it not?, why not ban DRINK as well for that matter. they wont. its nothing to do with your health...its about money...namely getting yours...and depriving you of your liberty. its about control...

    what business is it of yours if some parent has a fat child...mind your own fuking business.

    of course it is NOW your business because you are paying for it...and thats their plan... you now have a financial reason to interfere in your neighbours choices....the government all under the guise of 'caring' decides for you so they can save money or some other BS idea. so any ideas they have they can promote via taxes. so since they introduced the taxes on smoking...has your healthcare cost gone down or up? surely we should be seeing the saving by now with less cancer should we not? of course not...now there is another crisis...sugar...and after that....enter next crisis...

    remember the 5 vegetables and fruit a day? oh yes, now totally discredited but how much stress did they put families under to obey that all on the pretense of stopping cancer. it is total BS. its control.

    it is time to realise what this is about. its about power and control of you and your decisions. suppose someone decides in their life to eat burgers, smoke , drink, do drugs, whore around....what business is it of yours? maybe they have decided they want 10-20 years of a blowout rather than 70. that should be your choice as a human being. you choose...and you pay...not me.

    get government out of your life...and watch people take control of their future. if you have you pay for yourself and your decisions, you will make the right decisions. and spare me you sanctimonious bs about the poor, if you are concerned, give to charity...but dont make me pay for your belief system...i will give to charity for what i believe in.

    its time people in ireland stopped looking to government. you trust your health to a system that gave you the banking crisis, the building crisis? wow, how that working out for you? a govt who spends 15 billion for 4 odd million people and cant make it work and here the kicker :: it is not interested in making it work, its not meant to work, its meant to keep you focused on the wrong thing, the bed crisis, the cancer hospital crisis, the closing ward crisis, the nurses crisis, the doctor crisis etc etc...accept it healthcare in ireland is not about health its about votes, power and control...and people who believe they know more about how you should live then you do. let me guess, you dont agree, and you have a plan to 'fix it' if only you had the power for a while....or your party or your guy you vote for....thats an illusion

    people who support this type of intrusive government (its not a left or right thing by the way) has 2 groups....those who believe it and those who understand it...

    the believers are the emotional types you see shouting in the streets. they shout about fairness, .. they believe honestly it can be solved....if only for one time their guy got control.

    those who understand it...well they are different...they are the people who could not give a flying fuk...for them its power to force you to do their bidding.

    and no there is no middle ground...look at every politician you see...they are all the same character types, everywhere...they are the people that understand....the guys holding the politician up when he or she is elected shouting and hollering...they are the believers... this is exactly why politicians should be limited to 2 terms maximum, no payouts, no retirement funds..nothing, nada...

    now which are you...a believer...or one who 'understands'.


  • #78
    Fukuyama
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    Fallschirmjager wrote: »
    its exactly why a government in healthcare is nothing to do with healthcare...its about control. once a government has control of healthcare they control every aspect of your life....all under the guise of 'whats best for you' and saving taxpayers which they never do as they tax you more and more

    so here is a question :

    if smoking is so bad for you...why dont they ban it? it would be BEST for you would it not?, why not ban DRINK as well for that matter. they wont. its nothing to do with your health...its about money...namely getting yours...and depriving you of your liberty. its about control...

    what business is it of yours if some parent has a fat child...mind your own fuking business.

    of course it is NOW your business because you are paying for it...and thats their plan... you now have a financial reason to interfere in your neighbours choices....the government all under the guise of 'caring' decides for you so they can save money or some other BS idea. so any ideas they have they can promote via taxes. so since they introduced the taxes on smoking...has your healthcare cost gone down or up? surely we should be seeing the saving by now with less cancer should we not? of course not...now there is another crisis...sugar...and after that....enter next crisis...

    remember the 5 vegetables and fruit a day? oh yes, now totally discredited but how much stress did they put families under to obey that all on the pretense of stopping cancer. it is total BS. its control.

    it is time to realise what this is about. its about power and control of you and your decisions. suppose someone decides in their life to eat burgers, smoke , drink, do drugs, whore around....what business is it of yours? maybe they have decided they want 10-20 years of a blowout rather than 70. that should be your choice as a human being. you choose...and you pay...not me.

    get government out of your life...and watch people take control of their future. if you have you pay for yourself and your decisions, you will make the right decisions. and spare me you sanctimonious bs about the poor, if you are concerned, give to charity...but dont make me pay for your belief system...i will give to charity for what i believe in.

    its time people in ireland stopped looking to government. you trust your health to a system that gave you the banking crisis, the building crisis? wow, how that working out for you? a govt who spends 15 billion for 4 odd million people and cant make it work and here the kicker :: it is not interested in making it work, its not meant to work, its meant to keep you focused on the wrong thing, the bed crisis, the cancer hospital crisis, the closing ward crisis, the nurses crisis, the doctor crisis etc etc...accept it healthcare in ireland is not about health its about votes, power and control...and people who believe they know more about how you should live then you do. let me guess, you dont agree, and you have a plan to 'fix it' if only you had the power for a while....or your party or your guy you vote for....thats an illusion

    people who support this type of intrusive government (its not a left or right thing by the way) has 2 groups....those who believe it and those who understand it...

    the believers are the emotional types you see shouting in the streets. they shout about fairness, .. they believe honestly it can be solved....if only for one time their guy got control.

    those who understand it...well they are different...they are the people who could not give a flying fuk...for them its power to force you to do their bidding.

    and no there is no middle ground...look at every politician you see...they are all the same character types, everywhere...they are the people that understand....the guys holding the politician up when he or she is elected shouting and hollering...they are the believers... this is exactly why politicians should be limited to 2 terms maximum, no payouts, no retirement funds..nothing, nada...

    now which are you...a believer...or one who 'understands'.

    I'm a believer, I'm a believer if I tried! :pac:

    ..wait, what?


  • #79
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    The simple truth of it is the government haven't a ****ing clue. Look at how their plans for a health eating initiative were ****ing MAULED by people on boards.

    Too many people with vested interested controlling things.


  • #80
    westendgirlie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,125 ✭✭✭westendgirlie


    Fallschirmjager wrote: »
    its exactly why a government in healthcare is nothing to do with healthcare...its about control. once a government has control of healthcare they control every aspect of your life....all under the guise of 'whats best for you' and saving taxpayers which they never do as they tax you more and more

    so here is a question :

    if smoking is so bad for you...why dont they ban it? it would be BEST for you would it not?, why not ban DRINK as well for that matter. they wont. its nothing to do with your health...its about money...namely getting yours...and depriving you of your liberty. its about control...

    what business is it of yours if some parent has a fat child...mind your own fuking business.

    of course it is NOW your business because you are paying for it...and thats their plan... you now have a financial reason to interfere in your neighbours choices....the government all under the guise of 'caring' decides for you so they can save money or some other BS idea. so any ideas they have they can promote via taxes. so since they introduced the taxes on smoking...has your healthcare cost gone down or up? surely we should be seeing the saving by now with less cancer should we not? of course not...now there is another crisis...sugar...and after that....enter next crisis...

    remember the 5 vegetables and fruit a day? oh yes, now totally discredited but how much stress did they put families under to obey that all on the pretense of stopping cancer. it is total BS. its control.

    it is time to realise what this is about. its about power and control of you and your decisions. suppose someone decides in their life to eat burgers, smoke , drink, do drugs, whore around....what business is it of yours? maybe they have decided they want 10-20 years of a blowout rather than 70. that should be your choice as a human being. you choose...and you pay...not me.

    get government out of your life...and watch people take control of their future. if you have you pay for yourself and your decisions, you will make the right decisions. and spare me you sanctimonious bs about the poor, if you are concerned, give to charity...but dont make me pay for your belief system...i will give to charity for what i believe in.

    its time people in ireland stopped looking to government. you trust your health to a system that gave you the banking crisis, the building crisis? wow, how that working out for you? a govt who spends 15 billion for 4 odd million people and cant make it work and here the kicker :: it is not interested in making it work, its not meant to work, its meant to keep you focused on the wrong thing, the bed crisis, the cancer hospital crisis, the closing ward crisis, the nurses crisis, the doctor crisis etc etc...accept it healthcare in ireland is not about health its about votes, power and control...and people who believe they know more about how you should live then you do. let me guess, you dont agree, and you have a plan to 'fix it' if only you had the power for a while....or your party or your guy you vote for....thats an illusion

    people who support this type of intrusive government (its not a left or right thing by the way) has 2 groups....those who believe it and those who understand it...

    the believers are the emotional types you see shouting in the streets. they shout about fairness, .. they believe honestly it can be solved....if only for one time their guy got control.

    those who understand it...well they are different...they are the people who could not give a flying fuk...for them its power to force you to do their bidding.

    and no there is no middle ground...look at every politician you see...they are all the same character types, everywhere...they are the people that understand....the guys holding the politician up when he or she is elected shouting and hollering...they are the believers... this is exactly why politicians should be limited to 2 terms maximum, no payouts, no retirement funds..nothing, nada...

    now which are you...a believer...or one who 'understands'.

    Sorry the doorbell rang. What were you saying again?


  • #81
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    The simple truth of it is the government haven't a ****ing clue. Look at how their plans for a health eating initiative were ****ing MAULED by people on boards.

    Too many people with vested interested controlling things.

    *COUGH* Food pyramid *COUGH*


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Amzie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 547 ✭✭✭Amzie


    Why do the fatties have to ruin it for all of us!??:p Ever hear of everything in moderation! I like my chocolate so why should I have to pay extra because others have no control! this country is such a ***t hole, there will be tax on air next!! Cigarettes are bad for you and people continue to smoke regardless of cost so I doubt this will stop people from eating junk:rolleyes:


  • #83
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,189 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    I'm diabetic (don't even attempt to tell me I got it from eating sugar), barring the odd hypo this tax won't affect me. I still think it's a BS justification to claw even more money out of the masses.
    Hopefully this goes the way of the Green party's fat tax.

    Government should limit their involvement in people's lives as much as possible, particularly important given their tendency to turn everything they touch to ****.


  • #84
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,966 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    phasers wrote: »
    if what you're saying is true then diet coke and other diet drinks won't be affected, since it doesn't have any sugar, right? Reminds me of the jaffa cake/biscuit tax debacle.

    I dont get what your saying. Its a sugar tax. Its a tax on sugar. If Diet Coke has no sugar then surely it wont be taxed. If it is taxed then it is not a sugar tax its a fizzy drink tax.
    phasers wrote: »
    Btw, lidl sell 6 packs of water for 1.50.

    I also dont get what you are saying here. In my original post I pointed out that water was being sold for the same price as coke. I never said that I bought it, I just pointed out the priice.
    Look into it and stop trying to act clever, it doesn't work for you.

    I also dont understand the point of this comment. I find it offensive, please explain.


  • #85
    Haelium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 412 ✭✭Haelium


    Why don't we put a tax on importing sugar and encourage a resurrection of our sugar industry?

    Any reasons people can think of for why it wouldn't work?


  • #86
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Ok here's what I don't get about this proposal in my experience the people who drink too much over sugared drinks don't go for supermarket own brands which are very cheap they go for "premium products" which are much more expensive in terms of volume thus i can't see a 20% rise in cost deterring them .

    Also many vegetables are very cheap to buy (check out the super six deals etc in the german retailers), a solution that i feel would be valid would be to install public water fountains (but wouldn't gain govt any money and costs) or legislate that shops must stock a bottled water product of a certain % price per volume of sugared drinks (probably big hastle to retailers)

    ps aspartine and saccherine taste like shoite!


  • #87
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,351 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    This reminds me. Tesco value cola is cheaper than Tesco value water. Makes you wonder what's in that cola that makes it cheaper than something that falls from the sky.


  • #88
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,822 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    cowzerp wrote: »
    Obesity causes the state serious money and I'd rather see lower taxes for health food and higher for unhealthy foods-then those who are not costing the state will benefit and naturally poorer people can eat healthier than they can now, let's look after those who choose to look after themselves

    Comparing the cost of just 2 examples, a 55 year old who dies with a heart attack must cost the state less versus an 80 year old in good physical shape who has been given a state pension for over a decade and will probably end up in a hospital bed for weeks before they kick the bucket.
    Is there actual research done into a comparison on who costs the country more in the long run? I know there's research that shows what unhealthy people cost the state but never seem to have a comparison with say someone who ate well and lived longer.


  • #89
    Brinley Lemon Plan
    Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Brinley Lemon Plan


    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    This reminds me. Tesco value cola is cheaper than Tesco value water. Makes you wonder what's in that cola that makes it cheaper than something that falls from the sky.

    Same at the airport. coke cheaper than water
    bizarre


  • #90
    Angron
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 24,167 Mod ✭✭✭✭Angron


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAIkPx9dRaA


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    g'em
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,819 ✭✭✭✭g'em


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    The simple truth of it is the government haven't a ****ing clue. Look at how their plans for a health eating initiative were ****ing MAULED by people on boards.

    Too many people with vested interested controlling things.
    Amen. It was a complete and utter shambles of an exercise, I've never seen so much finger-in-ear ludicrousness when the many fundamental flaws in the background information to the campaign that a government body is using to educate the masses was pointed out. Talk about an exercise in how not to engage the public (the original Safefood competition thread and the offshoot thread). The public needs simple, basic nutritional education, not another reason to demonise food.
    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Comparing the cost of just 2 examples, a 55 year old who dies with a heart attack must cost the state less versus an 80 year old in good physical shape who has been given a state pension for over a decade and will probably end up in a hospital bed for weeks before they kick the bucket.
    Is there actual research done into a comparison on who costs the country more in the long run? I know there's research that shows what unhealthy people cost the state but never seem to have a comparison with say someone who ate well and lived longer.

    There was a study carried out by Safefood last year apparently to estimate this but I haven't seen it. In 2010 the DoH claimed that the indirect cost of obesity in Ireland is estimated at €0.4 billion per annum.

    The thing about obesity is that it's not an isolated disorder, you've got direct and indirect ailments to consider - the cost of dietetic services, hypertension, stroke, musculoskeletal disorders, lower back pain, knee arthrosis, obesity-associated cancers and gallbladder disease. It's ongoing treatment that a healthy individual wouldn't have the need for.


Advertisement
Advertisement