America’s newest way on cutting down obesity: taxing sugary soft drinks. President Obama has said it might be worth considering.
What was failed to mention to the public was that this “one cent per ounce tax” plan not only includes an extra tax on sugary soft drinks, but it would also apply to energy drinks, sports drinks, juices and iced teas, excluding the “sugar-free” drinks.
The reality here is that the government is promoting a plan to cut down obesity, but failing to target the right people!
Athletes who drink sports drinks and energy drinks are the fitter percentile of America. It is simply illogical to tax sports and energy drinks along with juices because athletes drink these to perform better and stay healthy.
Not only this, but does the government actually think that American’s will change their nutrition just by a few more sense for a coke? This will never happen because American’s don’t change anything unless there is a huge impact on their personal lives. For example: Starbucks coffee prices range from 3 to 5 dollars a cup and are continuously rising. Even though the price is getting higher and higher, people still get their morning cup of Starbucks because that’s what keeps them going.
The Pro-tax supporters argue that this tax on sugary drinks will have the same effect as the taxes on cigarettes. The tax on cigarettes however is incomparable to this tax. Cigarettes have been proven to cause cancer and death. This is a direct cause. On the contrary, sugary drinks are not a direct cause to obesity. It is one out of many causes, but there are many other factors such as exercise and food involved in the process of becoming obese.
If soft drinks where taxed so high that it would become unaffordable to the average American family, then maybe Americans would think about buying healthier drinks. Ironically enough, healthy foods and drinks are almost twice the price of unhealthy food and drinks. For the average American family, there is no reason to buy the more expensive healthy food if you can just buy the cheap stuff for 50% less money. This is exactly where the change needs to be made.
In order for this idea of taxing soft drinks to promote a healthier lifestyle to work, the government should put a higher tax on unhealthy drinks and foods, but then to make the whole idea logical, taxes on healthier foods such as fruits and vegetables should be reduced so the average America can afford to purchase them.
The government should also think about preventing obesity before it happens. In every Elementary and Middle school, anti-drug speakers come into schools to teach children about the effects of drugs and tobacco. Through this, children learn what is good and bad for them. If this same concept was applied to nutrition, most children would realize that most of the things their parents pack in their lunches are extremely unhealthy for them.
A child who is in elementary school is not going to know what is “healthy or unhealthy.” All they are going to know is what tastes good and what doesn’t. Most of the time, these children are overweight by the time they are mature enough to know, and even if they do realize it once they are more mature, they are not going to change their eating habits because they have been eating this way since they were small children!
Obesity could be eliminated from the younger generations if they were taught to eat right from the beginning. No soda tax is going to inhibit them from eating and drinking the “wrong” things.
Written by Jacqueline March
What was failed to mention to the public was that this “one cent per ounce tax” plan not only includes an extra tax on sugary soft drinks, but it would also apply to energy drinks, sports drinks, juices and iced teas, excluding the “sugar-free” drinks.
The reality here is that the government is promoting a plan to cut down obesity, but failing to target the right people!
Athletes who drink sports drinks and energy drinks are the fitter percentile of America. It is simply illogical to tax sports and energy drinks along with juices because athletes drink these to perform better and stay healthy.
Not only this, but does the government actually think that American’s will change their nutrition just by a few more sense for a coke? This will never happen because American’s don’t change anything unless there is a huge impact on their personal lives. For example: Starbucks coffee prices range from 3 to 5 dollars a cup and are continuously rising. Even though the price is getting higher and higher, people still get their morning cup of Starbucks because that’s what keeps them going.
The Pro-tax supporters argue that this tax on sugary drinks will have the same effect as the taxes on cigarettes. The tax on cigarettes however is incomparable to this tax. Cigarettes have been proven to cause cancer and death. This is a direct cause. On the contrary, sugary drinks are not a direct cause to obesity. It is one out of many causes, but there are many other factors such as exercise and food involved in the process of becoming obese.
If soft drinks where taxed so high that it would become unaffordable to the average American family, then maybe Americans would think about buying healthier drinks. Ironically enough, healthy foods and drinks are almost twice the price of unhealthy food and drinks. For the average American family, there is no reason to buy the more expensive healthy food if you can just buy the cheap stuff for 50% less money. This is exactly where the change needs to be made.
In order for this idea of taxing soft drinks to promote a healthier lifestyle to work, the government should put a higher tax on unhealthy drinks and foods, but then to make the whole idea logical, taxes on healthier foods such as fruits and vegetables should be reduced so the average America can afford to purchase them.
The government should also think about preventing obesity before it happens. In every Elementary and Middle school, anti-drug speakers come into schools to teach children about the effects of drugs and tobacco. Through this, children learn what is good and bad for them. If this same concept was applied to nutrition, most children would realize that most of the things their parents pack in their lunches are extremely unhealthy for them.
A child who is in elementary school is not going to know what is “healthy or unhealthy.” All they are going to know is what tastes good and what doesn’t. Most of the time, these children are overweight by the time they are mature enough to know, and even if they do realize it once they are more mature, they are not going to change their eating habits because they have been eating this way since they were small children!
Obesity could be eliminated from the younger generations if they were taught to eat right from the beginning. No soda tax is going to inhibit them from eating and drinking the “wrong” things.
Written by Jacqueline March
A higher quality food or any product is usually going to be more costly, because it's more expensive to produce. So, I'm not necessarily agreeing with your solution on unhealthy foods being more expensive than healthy food -in a perfect world-
ReplyDeleteWith that said, I concur about the tax on all sugary drinks isn't the right way of solving the obesity issue.
Jared Justice
As a college student I rely on my diet sodas and coffee to stay awake for classes and keep up with all my classes. I couldn't afford taxes on soda. Instead of pushing additional taxes on the people, it would be easier just to tell kids to go outside and play. Obesity is the individuals problem not the governments.
ReplyDeleteI agree, instead of taxing soda the government should continue to focus on "Go out and Play" PSAs. Maybe the government could also work in accordance with the soda companies like Coca-Cola and help them continue to develop healthier alternatives, like Coke Zero, which with a little more work could taste just as good as the original.
ReplyDelete