5670735

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 11th, 2012 04:16 PM

Here? Not directly, some insurance companies have programs where you can get money back for certain activities, but those programs differ and they are usually designed so that you compensate for the costs of courses. Not sure how it is handled in the US.

5670752

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 11th, 2012 05:56 PM

I feel bad for the people who are waiting in the ER with sports related injuries. I don't feel bad for the fatties who get carted in having a heart attack. I would love to see this, but it would cause a storm of legal troubles for hospitals.

In the US there is not a discount for being a normal weight. We offer discounts for not smoking, and those with pre-existing conditions have to pay more for their medical insurance if they can get coverage. As far as I know when more of the new health care law is implemented companies will not be able to deny people coverage for any reason, but I do not know about costs for those with pre-existing conditions.

I know some companies offer fitness centers for employees and require them to be tobacco free via a drug test for tobacco. Those companies are the exception rather than the rule.

Currently, my state imposes a sales tax on all prepared foods, but no tax on un-prepared foods. Buying a hamburger meal from McDonalds or the sit down deli in a grocery store will hit you with a 6% sales tax. Frozen hamburgers and fries don't get hit with the same sales tax.

5670771

Re: Food taxes and rules

Asheekay

November 11th, 2012 08:09 PM

Related to the topic, but not directly about it, its funny how the smokers pay twice for their smoke. First, they pay a sales tax on their cigs and then pay higher insurance costs than non-smokers.

Back to topic. In most countries, there is a government insurance policy available for civilians in the fields of life/death [they pay your descendants when you die] and health [they pay your hospitals visits and drug costs]. In a country where the government does not have any such public-friendly insurance policy available, it would indeed be the public's own matter to eat what they choose. But in a state where the government offers you cheaper insurance policies, they have two options available:

1= Get greater insurance fees from overweight people.

2= Push a tax on fatty foods. This would in turn increase the prices of those foods, with the end result that the overweight people would pay you the tax for their hazardous activities. The government spends that surplus tax money on the more frequent health expenses of overweight people.

The downside of the latter option is that those people who aren't overweight and use fatty foods and those who are overweight and do not take the insurance policy will have to pay the extra tax without burdening the government money. These two groups would suffer the side effects, but the minorities always suffer in a democratic government.

5670803

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 06:41 AM

Well, I have to disagree. Aren't many sports-related injuries sort of your fault anyway? Like boxers get brain damage, football players mess up their knees, ice-hockey is very injury prone game, skateboarders end up with broken balls and so on.

This would also apply to insurancies. Sports players are more prone to injuries. So I wouldn't blame them, getting fat is dumb but for children it's often the parents that allow that.

5670805

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 07:56 AM

It was cancelled because it led to higher prices on everything. Unfortunately, our government is run by dullards who have no idea how to think beyond their own nose. Placing taxes on fat and sugar is going to hit foods that aren't harmful, but not healthy either. Neutral foods. Placing taxes on the food itself would be the best way to go. 20-30% taxes on white bread, processed meat, cream, biscuits, etc would go much further, especially if they use the taxes to subsidise vegetables and unprocessed red meat. But will that happen? No, because we gotta keep the market unchanged.

5670808

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 08:37 AM

Sad that we need the govt to convince us what we can and can't eat.

5670809

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 08:50 AM

Not really. If you give people the choice between a fast road or a slow road, they'll take the fast road, even if the slow road is more scenic. People eat to prevent themselves from starving, and it wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many foods with problems. Not to mention our brain isn't exactly a friend to us in this matter, since it'll point us in the wrong directions sometimes.

5670834

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 11:58 AM

I don't see why the government needs to though?

5670850

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 02:22 PM

The tax got scrapped because it didn't make people buy healthier foods. People just travelled to the German border shops to buy the same unhealthy crap - only cheaper and thus endangering the Danish retail market and food industry without the added benefit of improved public health.

5670853

Re: Food taxes and rules

November 12th, 2012 02:25 PM

I'm honestly amazed that people were that organised. In a total gob-smacked sense.