How do you feel about taxing unhealthy foods like Europe?

33 comments

1. We already have that in some areas. I also live in Europe and didn’t know they tax unhealthy foods, and I wouldn’t know by the price of them.

   Sin taxes don’t work anyways.

2. some cities do do that.

   generally, I’d be in favor of subsidizing healthy foods rather than taxing unhealthy ones — I prefer to incentivize the things we want to encourage rather than punishing people for things that we don’t like. sweeten the deal on the good side rather than going out of our way to cause harm on the other side, y’know?

3. It is government overreach.

4. Taxing unhealthy? First, certain things that are healthy now won’t be in 15 years and vice versa. Second, at the federal level it’s not the government’s place to do that. State level, eh, sure, New York tried it and it didn’t work but if another state wants to try, let them.

   Subsidizing healthy – we *already* subsidize the absolute crap out of food, and you want to add *more*?

5. Taxing unhealthy just taxes the poor people.

6. Seems like another tax on the poor.

7. “Healthy” and “unhealthy” for who? An average 30yo woman? A 25yo bodybuilder? A 20yo struggling with anorexia? An 80yo cancer patient? An obese 40yo diabetic? A person doing a keto diet? A person who’s had gastric bypass surgery? I could go on, but you get the point, these people all have very different nutritional needs. That’s just one of the reasons this is a terrible idea, but probably the most scientific and least political one.

8. People eat unhealthy foods because they’re cheap and most people have access to them. All you’re gonna do is hurt the people you’re trying to help.

9. Let’s see how it goes for them. If it actually helps them get obesity under control, it might be worth copying. If it doesn’t, it definitely isn’t.

   As far as subsidizing healthy goes, let’s be a bit more specific. I don’t like subsidies is general because once they’re in place, people tend to see them as an expensive right and start to depend on them. And there’s billions of dollars, so lots of incentive for companies to get their food under the subsidy umbrella.

   There would be a ton of money riding on the government defining “healthy” as any given junk food company’s product. So when some definition that calls veggie chips and ketchup healthy and subsidizes Kraft and Nestlé for them? I’d be heavily opposed.

   If it somehow resisted industry and defined healthy as unprocessed plants and meat that has had no more processing than butchering? I wouldn’t be thrilled, but I wouldn’t be angry either.

10. We should be taxing the rich not punishing the poor.

11. In many cities the poorest neighborhoods do not have supermarkets and people lack access to healthy foods.

    Until we address that inequality I am very much against it.

12. Like what for example? In Florida for example there is no tax on most grocery items, however there are taxes on things like soda and sweets. A bag of candy would be taxed, but it’s a regular sales tax. Anything pre made or single serving would also have tax. Under the pre made foods is any food from a restaurant, including fast food. In a way, some states have already been doing this

13. On an individual level, like with higher sales taxes for certain foods, I don’t agree with it.

    Agriculture subsidies and such should take it into account, though.

14. I love that we would even consider having government bureaucrats decide what is good or bad for us.

    Remember when the government pushed huge amounts of carbs as the basis of the food pyramid?

15. With the cost of groceries out of control, last thing the government should be doing is making any sort of food more expensive, lol.

16. Not a good a idea. Defining “healthy” is not simple and is not going to be done without misinformation, bias, or outright lies.

    Water can kill you. Too much of it, that is. Same cold be said for just about anything. Trying to control what we eat or drink is not good. You want to do something about the amount we can purchase, that is more logical and equitable.

    Also, the same argument could be used about anything someone defines as “bad.” I don’t think we should tax watching movies or reading books because they are not as “healthy” as walking or riding a bike.

17. Everyone has different dietary needs – for example, I have a young nephew who is deathly allergic to many foods (to the point that he has a legitimate fear of trying new foods) and gets the bulk of his protein from frozen chicken nuggets, which would likely get lumped into the processed/unhealthy/taxable category. How is that fair to him and his family?

    I don’t like the idea one bit.

18. Oregon doesn’t have sales tax. How would that work? The US has different tax rates depending of state, county and even city. That’s why tax is not included in the price. How about Hersheys, Kraft, Coke, Pepsi, Lays, Nabisco and General Mills pay taxes in the first place.

19. And make the cheapest foods, which poor people rely on, more expensive?

    Wanting to encourage healthier eating is a noble goal, but increasing cost of living is already a huge problem here, and increasing taxes on basic necessities will make it worse.

20. More politicians pretending to help us by taking our money.

    Hey, if anyone reading this wants to eat more healthy, just send me a dollar on cashapp every time you eat something unhealthy. You are welcome.

    Did that sound like I wanted to help you, or I was desperate for your money?

21. The government should not be in the business of using taxes to try and get people to make healthier decisions. Sin taxes are immoral.

22. I can see subsidizing some healthy options, but I’m hesitant to tax unhealthy foods. A big problem for some people trying to eat healthy is food deserts. These are areas where there basically aren’t any healthy options and they tend to be very poor areas. Taxing unhealthy foods is just a flat tax on living for these poorer areas and won’t make the people eat any healthier. However, if we subsidize healthy food, it might make it easier to find healthy food in some of these areas and can bring down some of the costs in other areas. I think that has the potential to actually change some people’s eating habits and won’t unreasonably focus taxes on poorer groups.

23. Sounds like some big hat telling me how to live my life.

24. The common argument is that poor people have unhealthy diets because unhealthy food is cheap.

    Why do you feel a tax that affects poor people is something we should strive for?

25. I have no issue taxing Europe

26. There’s no government agency in the *world* that could keep track of whether eggs are healthy or not, for taxation purposes.

27. > How do you feel about taxing

    Let me stop you right there

28. The Government already taxes more than enough

29. Adults should be allowed to make their own decisions, they shouldn’t be treated like children by the government. I also don’t want to have to pay a premium when I want to go out on occasion and eat fast food. I’m able to manage my own diet responsibly, why should I be paying a premium because of the poor decisions of others? That doesn’t seem very fair to me.

30. We did that here in Philadelphia. They added a few percentage on to sugary drinks like soda.

    It’s about popular as Obamacare in Alabama.

31. It makes me want to throw the unhealthy foods into the sea and pay more to buy tax free unhealthy foods from black market smugglers.

32. Bloody Communists

33. I like it. We don’t tax a lot and it’s win all around if people are healthier for it.

    Taxing cigarettes had similar detractors, now smoking is rare.

    We should allocate more farm subsidies to healthy / sustainable foods as well.