Survey finds majority support tax on sugary drinks

suicide_circus · 23-06-2014 11:11AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There's already a tax break for cycling to work.

Exercise opportunities are also freely available to anyone willing and able to avail of them -- eg walking, running, swimming, calisthenics, -- so why would the State want to subsidise a lifestyle choice such as gym membership?

There are very good public health reasons to use tax policy as a means of curbing the consumption of sugary drinks, just as there are with other products such as alcohol and tobacco.

"Nanny State" accusations are just the usual reactionary huffing and puffing.

Yeah, sure the sky high alcohol duty in this country works wonders...
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0623/625828-alcohol/

_Kaiser_ · 23-06-2014 11:11AM

alleystar wrote: »

I'm not, it's an opinion and no, I'm not apart of the do-gooder, PC brigade. :rolleyes:

I couldn't give two sh!tes what adults stuff into their gob with their money, it's children..with pocket money loading themselves with sugary crap. If they up the cost of junk food then they might not be able to afford as much of it as before.

Again that's down to education and adults taking responsibility for their children.

Nothing to do with tax.

suicide_circus · 23-06-2014 11:13AM

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Again that's down to education and adults taking responsibility for their children.

Nothing to do with tax.

More tax is the solution to pretty much every problem in this country. Personal responsibility? No thanks.

Iwannahurl · 23-06-2014 11:16AM

alleystar wrote: »

I'm not, it's an opinion and no, I'm not apart of the do-gooder, PC brigade. :rolleyes:

I couldn't give two sh!tes what adults stuff into their gob with their money, it's children..with pocket money loading themselves with sugary crap. If they up the cost of junk food then they might not be able to afford as much of it as before.

A tax of this kind works by primarily affecting those who consume most of the 'target' product.

I have no idea how much a fizzy drink costs, but let's say a 'sugar tax' adds €1 to the price of a standard can or bottle. If I regularly buy one or two sugary drinks in a week then the extra burden is only €2. On the other hand, if I'm having two of them every day then I have to fork out an extra €14 every week or €60 per month.

suicide_circus wrote: »

Yeah, sure the sky high alcohol duty in this country works wonders...
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0623/625828-alcohol/

Ireland's boozing culture might be a lot worse if the tax was lower. In any case, the Irish government's approach to alcohol tax (for political and fiscal reasons) has always been to tax it enough to keep the revenue coming in but not so much as to kill the golden goose.

.

gctest50 · 23-06-2014 11:20AM

yawhat! wrote: »

Cigarettes is basically all tax so 7 euro a day for a week is 56 euro which is 3,000 euro a year and if your a smoker for 40 years thats 120,000 and around 90,000 in tax. I think you've covered your hospital bills!

nope

Gannicus · 23-06-2014 11:23AM

yawhat! wrote: »

Why should I pay more for people who like to over indulge? Next thing it will be fast food. Fizzy drinks do not cause people to get fat!

Its people who are constantly eating or over eating is the reason. Just eat less and exercise FFS.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0623/625800-sugar-tax/

I would wholeheartedly support it once they are willing to cut the tax on fruit and veg to promote healthy eating.

Iwannahurl · 23-06-2014 11:23AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

More tax is the solution to pretty much every problem in this country. Personal responsibility? No thanks.

Can you give a few example of situations in different sectors where public policy is not needed because "personal responsibility" is doing a fine job on its own?

Myrddin · 23-06-2014 11:29AM

I won't even call this a nanny-state thing, because 'nannying' to me implies over protection though ultimately with care being the focus. This is just plain 'how can we generate more revenue & dress it up as a positive measure' type thing. Given the health system likely won't see much of the revenue this will generate, I'm surprised anyone supports it. When it comes to childhood obesity, it's basically a bad/lazy parenting tax being forced on everyone.

kylith · 23-06-2014 11:30AM

gctest50 wrote: »

nope

Got one of those not from the USA?

Backstreet Moyes · 23-06-2014 11:36AM

Sexual Education classes and cooking classes explaining what foods are good and bad would be far more helpful than Religion and Irish. Courses for adults on nutrition and diet would be far more helpful than most of those FAS courses.

The fact is most parents have no idea about nutrition or portion sizes and then tell their kids the family are big boned or have a slow metabolism. The majority of overweight kids i see have overweight parents and the cycle just keeps continuing.

Iwannahurl · 23-06-2014 11:41AM

Myrddin wrote: »

When it comes to childhood obesity, it's basically a bad/lazy parenting tax being forced on everyone.

Why does Boards have moderators?

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo · 23-06-2014 11:44AM

gctest50 wrote: »

nope

Smokers definitely save the tax payer money over all. Do we want people dying off in their 60's from lung cancer or do we want people living into their 90's collecting a pension, medical card benefits and needing home help?

Purely from an accounting perspective, the states coffers are without question better served by smokers.

jackofalltrades · 23-06-2014 11:47AM

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If people want to spend their money on gallons of Coke and boxes of Mars bars that's their choice - stupid yes, but it's their life.

If they get sick as a result they'll have to deal with the results of that and seeing as we all already pay for a public health service ...

And this is the problem, they have the right to make bad choices and ruin their health, but ultimately it's everyone else who has to pay for it.

Our health care system is overstretched and overbudget.
The money that's being spent on dealing with obesity/poor diet related health issues could be better spent elsewhere.

Arthur Beesley · 23-06-2014 11:53AM

Another bloody fitness / health related thread in After Hours.

rawn · 23-06-2014 11:57AM

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

could we not somehow develop some sort of national exercise system free to everybody to try tackle obesity, sounds crazy , but governments provide healthcare, education, so what about gym classes or something ?

National exercise system?! What's wrong with going for a jog in the park and doing some sit ups? Don't need a gym for that

Hande hoche! · 23-06-2014 12:02PM

catallus wrote: »

Will this apply to coke zero?

Presumably not but you can never be too sure.

_Kaiser_ · 23-06-2014 12:14PM

jackofalltrades wrote: »

And this is the problem, they have the right to make bad choices and ruin their health, but ultimately it's everyone else who has to pay for it.

Our health care system is overstretched and overbudget.
The money that's being spent on dealing with obesity/poor diet related health issues could be better spent elsewhere.

Our health service is overstretched and overbudget because the model is:

unproductive overpaid staff who can't be fired > front-line staff and services

Those who are choosing (as is their right!) to eat unhealthy sugary crap to excess are already paying into the health service they'll likely later need to avail of and may have private health insurance on top of that - ergo they've already paid!

As for the "think of the children" argument that was mentioned.. who's giving these kids that money to buy crap with? Who has probably been stuffing them with chocolate and sweets since they could crawl? Who hasn't taken the time to teach them about better choices and maybe y'know lead by example themselves? That's right... the parents!

I'm sick of having my personal freedoms restricted or taxed because we need to hand-hold a load of lazy, responsibility-shirking "adults" who insist that "someone else" do it all for them.

darkpagandeath · 23-06-2014 12:15PM

Hmmm Can't but wonder, This is being thought about by the Uk. Cant we come up with ideas of our own ?

Seaneh · 23-06-2014 12:16PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Maybe we should have mandatory health insurance with premiums based on a comprehensive annual health assessment...

So punish sick people for being sick?

ffs.

Hande hoche! · 23-06-2014 12:16PM

Wonder will it effect orange juice?

darkpagandeath · 23-06-2014 01:04PM

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Wonder will it effect orange juice?

Plums
Oranges
Kiwifruit
Pears
Pineapple
Tangerines
Cherries
Grapes
Pomegranates
Mangos
Figs
Bananas

Will we be sticking them on the list to they are high in sugar... :pac:

Zamboni · 23-06-2014 01:05PM

Considering I would have a complete ban on them I think it is a reasonable idea.
Liquid filth.

This is one of few ideas that I could see having a positive effect on the level of obesity.
As for nanny-state? When over half the Irish population are overweight or obese - we clearly need to be nannied.

M5 · 23-06-2014 01:10PM

Lets abolish VAT on healthy foods too!*

*never going to happen

howamidifferent · 23-06-2014 01:11PM

Zamboni wrote: »

Considering I would have a complete ban on them I think it is a reasonable idea.
Liquid filth.

This is one of few ideas that I could see having a positive effect on the level of obesity.
As for nanny-state? When over half the Irish population are overweight or obese - we clearly need to be nannied.

Have you watched any of those nanny shows on TV? Most of the nannies could do with a course in healthy eating...All fat as Fcuk...

23-06-2014 01:13PM

Zamboni wrote: »

Considering I would have a complete ban on them I think it is a reasonable idea.
Liquid filth.

This is one of few ideas that I could see having a positive effect on the level of obesity.
As for nanny-state? When over half the Irish population are overweight or obese - we clearly need to be nannied.

Half the irish population have been told to eat cereal don't eat eggs don't eat fat do eat low fat high sugar, do eat bread
Guess where all that came from

Tefral · 23-06-2014 01:15PM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Exercise opportunities are also freely available to anyone willing and able to avail of them -- eg walking, running, swimming, calisthenics, -- so why would the State want to subsidise a lifestyle choice such as gym membership?

You've just proven my point! Why should I have to pay more to have a bottle of coke now and again just because someone else cant keep control of themselves!

Zamboni · 23-06-2014 01:15PM

bluewolf wrote: »

Half the irish population have been told to eat cereal don't eat eggs don't eat fat do eat low fat high sugar, do eat bread
Guess where all that came from

Completely agree. But at least this idea actually has some merit.
We are hardly going to get a withdrawal of the food pyramid from the FSAI so every little helps

Mr. CooL ICE · 23-06-2014 01:25PM

People should drink less fizzy drinks and eat more Special K

Triangla · 23-06-2014 01:27PM

Should be a new campaign:

"Are your kids fat? Then stop feeding them sh*te! "

whatdoicare · 23-06-2014 01:36PM

If they really wanted to reduce obesity in kids they wouldn't have closed down the two public swimming pools in Limerick...its a bull**** tax, nothing to do with obesity.

Survey finds majority support tax on sugary drinks

Comments