Vanilla Frosting Isn't Diet Food

[GREENBACK]

Joan, you are so right with your comments. What many of us consider extremely basic information, common knowledge that anyone with half a brain ought to know, just isn't as widely known and understood as you might think.

Over the years, I've heard so many comments from people that I truly wonder what is going on in homes and schools across the country. And we all know that lots of folks have no basic understanding of money and personal finance. I'm not just talking about uneducated folks either, but even people with good jobs and college degrees. "Common" sense is far from common.

These comments remind me of the Jay Leno show where they interview random people on the street about very basic things like finding America on the globe. I forget the percentages but most are unable to do it. It's shocking how dense many people are about things that basic. Ask them who the last American Idol winner was and it's no problem...lol.

[disneysteve]

These comments remind me of the Jay Leno show where they interview random people on the street about very basic things like finding America on the globe. I forget the percentages but most are unable to do it. It's shocking how dense many people are about things that basic. Ask them who the last American Idol winner was and it's no problem...lol.

Jay-Walking. I loved that segment. If you go to youtube, you can find lots of clips of that segment. It is truly disturbing but hilarious.

One time he asked a guy where the Panama Canal was. The guy didn't have a clue. Then he asked where the Great Wall of China was. The guy said China. So he asked again - where is the PANAMA canal, emphasizing the word Panama. Still, the guy didn't have a clue.

[Goldy1]

We can make fun, but not all people who know little about nutrition are lazy, but just never learned it. I have taken classes on nutrition and read about it for years. My husband has stellar math, computer, and finance skills. I can tell him a piece of food the size of a deck of cards had 40 grams of fat and he will ask me honestly "Is that a lot?" lol
When we met he was eating fried chocolate packaged pies and soda for breakfast. I changed that to white (he initially refused wheat)and then wheat toast and then to Cherios. I let him have a lot of treats, but he has to eat some veggies etc too.
Last time we went grocery shopping, he wanted chips, dip, chocolate e clairs, donut holes,nutty butty icecream bars, and probably more of that stuff.
The whole fact about married men living longer...there ya go folks.

[boosami]

That would be an improvement over what many people tell me. It includes OJ, not coffee, diet soda instead of regular soda and frozen yogurt instead of ice cream. I'd consider it progress if I could get people to take those steps.

Don't forget light beer instead of regular beer!

[Scanner]

Yes, I support consumption tax on that stuff. . .vanilla frosting, chocolate frosting, ho-ho's, etc.. . .to fund healthcare and to decrease my risk pool and yes, as a way of replacing income tax.

Don't get me wrong. . .I like my 70% Cacoa Dark Chocolate as much as anyone but I'd pay the extra $.50 on it vs. another 2-5% in income/wage tax. I also like a couple slices of meat lover's pizza once in awhile too. . .but I'd pay a $1.00 per whole pizza tax.

[disneysteve]

I've got no problem with "sin" taxes - alcohol, tobacco, junk food, etc. People don't change their behavior until it impacts their wallet. Look at gas consumption. When the price of gas topped $4.00/gallon, people suddenly started conserving, cutting back on driving needlessly. The same goes for cigarettes. Rhode Island has one of the lowest smoking rates in the country and has the highest tax on cigarettes in the country. South Carolina has one of the highest smoking rates and has the lowest cigarette tax. I don't think that is a coincidence. The same would happen with a junk food tax. People would cut back on consumption in order to spend less money. Result would be less obesity and lower health care costs.

[feh]

I've got no problem with "sin" taxes - alcohol, tobacco, junk food, etc. People don't change their behavior until it impacts their wallet.

Yup. Unfortunately, this is very true.

[Joan.of.the.Arch]

I will admit that a hefty tax on junk foods would help me decide not to buy them. If that mint-chocolate chip ice cream in the freezer cost $15, I think I could easily pass it up. Or maybe someone would package little two-ounce cups of ice cream and I could buy it for $5, but avoid the rest of that half gallon. (Geeze I'm making myself want some ice cream. I am so suggestible about food. Please, let's talk about zucchini and spinach now.)

[GREENBACK]

I've got no problem with "sin" taxes - alcohol, tobacco, junk food, etc. People don't change their behavior until it impacts their wallet.

I don't neccesarily disagree with the concept but do think this would disproportionately affect poor people. I'm not trying to make a case for the poor buying this stuff but I enjoy a cold beer or a drink and if they threw a little extra tax on it, it wouldn't stop me one way or the other, or most other middle class people. A poor person under these circumstances would likely continue buying their alcohol/ cigarettes/junk food/lottery tickets and would limit what they spend in other areas. It has to do with mentality. Many of the poor see themselves in a desperate and inescapable situation and won't prioritize their spending habits. We would only succeed in making them that much more desperate.

We have enough(too much) taxed already. Controlling behavior through taxation seems contrary to the way we should be doing things in America.

[swanson719]

Sin taxes have their place, but within reason. People still have a right to live their lives how they see fit. Alcohol, tobacco, yes, because they are addictive. But on junk food? Let a kid have a candy bar. If people can't be repsonsible with their weight, that's their own problem, and it doesn't effect other people like a DUI and second hand smoke do. It's passed on in health care costs, but if we really want to have a cost efficient nation, lets put a sin tax on airfare, theme parks, professional sporting events, etc.

[disneysteve]

Sin taxes have their place, but within reason. People still have a right to live their lives how they see fit. Alcohol, tobacco, yes, because they are addictive. But on junk food? Let a kid have a candy bar. If people can't be repsonsible with their weight, that's their own problem, and it doesn't effect other people like a DUI and second hand smoke do. It's passed on in health care costs, but if we really want to have a cost efficient nation, lets put a sin tax on airfare, theme parks, professional sporting events, etc.

What about farm subsidies? Our government spends billions encouraging certain crops and effectively discouraging others. Why do you think high fructose corn syrup is so common? Junk food is cheap in part because of government subsidies. I say get rid of the subsidies and, instead, tax the product itself.

To GREENBACK's point, it is true that the poor tend to spend more on these things, but that is partly due to them being artificially cheaper than healthy stuff due to government subsidies. If fresh fruit and vegetables weren't more costly than corn chips and Twinkies, I think more poor people would buy them.

[GREENBACK]

Sin taxes have their place, but within reason. People still have a right to live their lives how they see fit. Alcohol, tobacco, yes, because they are addictive. But on junk food? Let a kid have a candy bar. If people can't be repsonsible with their weight, that's their own problem, and it doesn't effect other people like a DUI and second hand smoke do. It's passed on in health care costs, but if we really want to have a cost efficient nation, lets put a sin tax on airfare, theme parks, professional sporting events, etc.

This is the problem with a "sin tax". Who defines "sin". Is vanilla frosting as bad as cigarettes? Is a chocolate bar equivalent to a beer? Where do we stop defining sin? You may think I'm sinful for drinking beer; I might think you're sinful for watching R- rated movies. Where is this line srawn?

I personally hate gov't intrusion on these things. The main reason is that they see no stop sign when the cash starts rolling in and they're considering their next pork filled pet project.

[disneysteve]

This is the problem with a "sin tax". Who defines "sin". Is vanilla frosting as bad as cigarettes? Is a chocolate bar equivalent to a beer? Where do we stop defining sin? You may think I'm sinful for drinking beer; I might think you're sinful for watching R- rated movies. Where is this line srawn?

I personally hate gov't intrusion on these things. The main reason is that they see no stop sign when the cash starts rolling in and they're considering their next pork filled pet project.

You certainly make a valid point about who gets to pick what the sins are. This is already occurring many places, though, as sales tax often applies only to certain foods. For government aid programs, like food stamps, there are foods that you can and cannot buy with them. So some system already exists to designate some foods as necessary and others as not.

[tzsgti]

I don't neccesarily disagree with the concept but do think this would disproportionately affect poor people. I'm not trying to make a case for the poor buying this stuff but I enjoy a cold beer or a drink and if they threw a little extra tax on it, it wouldn't stop me one way or the other, or most other middle class people. A poor person under these circumstances would likely continue buying their alcohol/ cigarettes/junk food/lottery tickets and would limit what they spend in other areas. It has to do with mentality. Many of the poor see themselves in a desperate and inescapable situation and won't prioritize their spending habits. We would only succeed in making them that much more desperate.

We have enough(too much) taxed already. Controlling behavior through taxation seems contrary to the way we should be doing things in America.

I agree. I don't think the goverment should be involved in what you eat, drink or smoke. I don't personally drink alcohol or smoke but my guess is the people that are for this tax are the people who don't do those things regualry. Why not the government control what profession you go into? What ever they see fit for you?

People don't realize that a society with government intervention is not good weather its health or something like this.

[Scanner]

I think you can measure sins quite effectively really - that's what economists actually can do with all their fancy equations and calculations.

Take alcohol for instance. . .I would say, oh, i don't know. . .30-40% of ER visits with me working CAT scan are alcohol related on a Saturday overnight, many from immigrant workers with no insurance. Every drunk who comes in seems to get a Foley catheter and a head CT at $3500 a pop, I guess to make sure there is no cranial bleed from falling off their barstool or an alcohol related assault.

Let's not forget the police that haul them in.

That's a costly sin.

A Hershey Bar. . .lots of them lead to Type II diabetes. . .but that's a little sin (and like I said, I would pay for my occasional dark chocolate).

Again, no one is saying, "Don't drink this. Don't shoot this gun. Don't eat this." You just measure it's cost to society and apply a tax based on it. Yes, oil is very costly to society - environment, not to mention the armed forces we have to maintain to keep it flowing.

(not that the Iraq war was about oil )