Obesity team suggests taxing junk foods more than healthy eats

....and in the "Tax me, I'm Canaidan" category.

I've seen this argument before. The cost to the health system should be covered by those who make life decisions that make them more likely to have to use it. It makes sense, but really, if you want to take that to it's logical conclusion, then you should support just doing away with socialized medeicine, because then individuals fully shoulder their share of the responsibility.

Take all sorts of things to a logical conclusion and you get some very illogical consequences.

Nothing wrong with the idea, the trick is in setting the policy, so you cast a wide enough net but don't punish all sorts of healthy foods. Can't be that hard tho to set limits for added sugar/salt/fat before the tax kicks in.

Or people could just get their heads out of their asses and take responsibility for themselves.
I saw a documentary, I think it was Japan, that imposed a rule where doctor ruled obese patients are ordered onto a diet. If they do not follow it (moniitored by the doctor the entire time) and get to a healthy weight, their health care privileges are terminated. They can be reinstated if the patient gets to a healthy weight later on.
I like it.

certainly a good plan for the funeral business.

I don't think a privatized medical system is illogical. They have one (mostly) in the US. It is incrementally more expensive and less effective than ours, but the outcomes are generally pretty similar and there are advantages and disadvantages to both systems.

Tax breaks would work better than more taxes, in my opinion. The problem with more taxes is that they become insitutionalized by the government, and then they need that cash flow. Whereas if tax breaks are very successful (whihc, if done right, means the policy goal is successful) then there is actually an incentive to renormalize the market.

I don't think junk food should be taxed, I think agriculture shouldn't be subsidized. That'll take care of cheap corn, and junk food at the same time.

I'd agree with that.

That makes too much sense, therefore won't work.

Besides, it's not just "junk food" that can cause obesity. Over-indulgence in food in general combined with inactivity can do it to you too.

I don't mind the idea of sin tax, but I'm a also a huge fan of minimal taxes on healthy foods like fruits and vegetables.

Not all junk food is based on corn syrup. That won't address fat and salt. And, companies would just switch to beet sugar for almost the same price. And that's under the current market, with subsidized corn and limited sugar beet production. http://www.cornnaturally.com/Economics- ... lator.aspx. So that sounds like a fail.

As for tax cuts, tax cuts to what?

The big stink seems to be that the media would be denied scoops. The horror.

Healthy food like fruits and vegetables as well as unprocessed food. Also done through subsidies as Doc suggests.

Healthy food like fruits and vegetables as well as unprocessed food. Also done through subsidies as Doc suggests.

Doc suggests subsidies. As for fruits and vegetables, since when have they been taxed?

Actually subsidies for fruits and vegges sound like a good idea, since many people struggle to buy them. Build local plants to freeze local produce that is subsidized. This would help build up local agriculture, instead of relying on California and Mexico. The produce would be harvested at peak ripeness, instead of when it's green, so even after freezing would have at least the same nutritive value as the "fresh" stuff from down south, if not more.

And pay for it with taxes on the junk food to discourage people buying it - the way tobacco taxes reduced tobacco consumption.

I'm not sure. One that my family uses is the activity credit, or something, for the kids. It doesn't amount to much but it helps.

Allow meats to advertise that they are free range, or humane (currently not allowed under CFIA labelling laws) would be another good one.