Fat Tax And Its Effects On The Nation 's Health

With obesity rates increasing at an exponential rate, a tax on fat foods and specifically high sugar beverages of 20% or about 1 cent per ounce could reduce obesity rates by 3.5%, bringing the rate down to 30% among adults (Kalaidis). While 3.5% may not sound like a lot, if you take an approximate U.S. population of 350 million people, suddenly that mere 3.5% turns into over 12 million Americans who would no longer be considered obese. Marion Nestle, a well-respected expert in food policy, recently conducted a study investigating the impact of a junk food tax through predictive modeling. Her study revealed that 2,600 deaths, 9,500 heart attacks, and 240,000 new cases of diabetes could be prevented with a simple 1 cent per ounce tax on sugary beverages (Satran). A junk food tax of this kind could greatly increase the health of the American public as a whole by reducing death rates and healthcare

There is what has been referred to as "obesity epidemic" in Australia today. This trend affects everyone it the society; whether it be directly or indirectly. One particular concern within the "at risk" segment is children. The young in our society do not have the capacity, either mentally or the physical resources, to make their own informed decisions about their dietary consumption. Children are generally dependent upon their parents or institutions to provide them with the foods that they consume. Therefore, this group above all others deserves some level of protection against a lifestyle that can potentially have negative consequences for their health that can stay with them for a lifetime.

The United States of America is known for having a high obesity level. According to David Frum from CNN, except for Mexicans, American citizens are more likely to become obese than any other nationality. Some obese countries have enforced an extra high tax on fast foods and other high calorie foods, and many people believe that the U.S. should adopt the fat tax as well. According to Dictionary.com, the fat tax is “a tax imposed on or proposed for high-fat or otherwise unhealthy foodstuffs”. Although a tax on junk food could reduce obesity, the low prices could protect low income families from going broke, and therefore a tax on junk food would not be beneficial to America.

If less people eat junk food, there will be fewer diseases and medical costs will decline. The government will save a lot money by adding taxes on junk food, but also will save many peoples’ lives which is more important and trough this policy the government will interfere in peoples’ food choices in a good way.

For this reason, I believe there is great need to campaign for new legislation and social programming that addresses the following supportive evidence for obesity resolution. According to Frieden, Dietz, and Collins, implementing legislation that heavily taxes unhealthy food will help reduce consumption of these foods. Decreasing the cost of healthy foods, subsidizing farmer’s markets in underprivileged areas, creating zoning legislation that prohibits the building of fast food restaurants in the vicinity of schools and recreation areas, prohibition of unhealthy food advertisements directed at children, requiring restaurants to offer healthy food options for kids with the nutritional information listed on the menu, increase active transportation and recreation, and improve physical activity programs will also reduce childhood obesity (Frieden, Dietz, & Collins, 2010). The difficulty in implementing these solutions is monetary and political. The businesses negatively affected by these changes will fight against them and the cost of subsidizing groceries for the impoverished areas will cost.

In the United States, more than one third of adults are obese. One in five American deaths are now associated with obesity. The prevalence of obesity has increased at an alarming rate in the USA: in 1960 only 13% of Americans were obese. Obesity has become an epidemic and the number of preventable deaths from obesity-related diseases such as hypertension, diabetes and cardiovascular disease continues to rise. Despite the well-documented association between obesity and significant morbidity and mortality the American administration has not taken many steps to combat this problem. There have been attempts by government to try and stem this epidemic, but the food industry is so wealthy and influential that policies against obesity are very

In a society where diseases such as diabetes and obesity are pervasive, action must be taken to combat the diseases. In Canada, Statistic Canada found that almost a third of Canadians aged 5 to 17 is overweight or obese. According to the World Health Organization standards of measurement, 31.5% of 5 to 17 year old Canadians are classified as overweight or obese from 2009 to 2011. With the high rates of obesity in Canadian children, which many affect their quality of life in the future as many diseases will develop as an adult. Canadian doctors attribute to the fact that the food industry has made it easy for Canadians to gain calories. The Canadian government must impose a junk food tax to make sure that accessing junk food and gaining calories will be more difficult. With the junk food tax, the Canadian government will increase tax revenues, Canadians will be able to change their lifestyles and the risk of Canadians having diseases such as obesity and diabetes will be dramatically decreased.

Government intervention has often been loathed in many instances throughout history through tax resistance. Stretching from ancient to recent history, the governed have often resisted unfair and costly taxes enforced by those of authority. This pattern extended from taxes such as the Stamp Act and Sugar Act from the Revolutionary War to post Greco-Persian War Taxes which soon led to the fall of the Persian Empire. The use of a similar tax, a "fat tax", is now being debated between the walls of Congress. This fat tax would be met with much resistance and would have many unintended repercussions. Although a fat tax would aid in deterring many from some unhealthy foods, introducing this tax would result in a heavy societal tax and be maladdressing this sensitive and complex issue.

With a growing epidemic of obesity in America, some states and lawmakers have resorted to taking unconventional measures in order to counter the growing issue. Many legislators are debating the effectiveness of a “fat tax” would be on limiting the consumption of soda, high fat foods, and high sugar foods, and ultimately reducing the rate of morbidity and mortality due to obesity. The idea is that long term consumption of high fat, high sugar foods and drinks lead to many health problems, so making them more expensive and less accessible should decrease the health issues related to their consumption.

A fat tax would plague producers and outlets. Such was the case with the world’s first fat tax introduced in Denmark. This tax on foods high in saturated fat was dismissed after less than a year and left many consequences in its wake. It has been guilty of “increasing prices for consumers, increasing companies' administrative costs and putting Danish jobs at risk," as stated by the Danish tax ministry. As a result, the planned sugar tax has also been abandoned. As well, the tax was a costly procedure and failed to change the eating habits of people in general. A fat tax on fast food would have the same limitations and ultimately lead to failure.

The fat tax is a proposed tax on certain unhealthy foods that lead to the development of certain medical conditions such as obesity. As obesity is a growing concern of many Americans, arguments can be made about how effective a fat tax may be if implemented. The opposing group argues that the implementation of a fat tax would discourage the consumption of unhealthy foods, reduce costs of medical treatment, and obtain government funding. Although our opposition has some strong points, there are still unanswered questions that need to be addressed.

The fat tax would encourage a healthier diet. Due to the rising price of unhealthy food, people would rather choose a healthier diet. This would lead to better health and reduce food related diseases. The fat tax would also encourage people to get food that are lower in sugar and fat. Fast food places would also give more of a wider range of food options.

A “fat tax” is defined by Courtney Baird in her article The Skinny on the Fat Tax as “a tax applied to foods containing a specified level of fat, or a certain kind of fat, in order to reduce health and economic problems produced by the overconsumption of these foods.”(Baird) This “fat tax” would work very similar to the way cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed, reducing the consumption due to the addition cost. If the government were to put a tax on foods deemed to be unhealthy and put them toward funding the healthcare provided to those who make poor lifestyle choices. There are several pros and cons to putting a “fat tax” into place. Some of the pros of introducing a “fat tax” include encouragement in changing lifestyles to accommodate the new tax and having to pay to be unhealthy and cons such as the process of deeming certain foods healthy and unhealthy as well as the other factors that go into obesity and health issues related to poor lifestyle choices. Much like taxing tobacco, a fat tax would not end the poor lifestyle and diet choices made by Americans, but it will most likely reduce them as it will be harder to keep up with. In October of 2011, Denmark attempted to implement a “fat tax” on saturated fats, however saturated fat consumption was expected to decrease by 4%, but, unfortunately, the Danes never reached this goal so the tax

The fat tax as a surcharge is placed on unhealthy foods and drink in trying to overcome increasing obesity rates.For the population of overweight people has expanded rapidly and the increase of the health implications in recent decades, obesity has become a growing global health issue.According to the World Health Organization (WHO) provides the facts on obesity , including that in the year 2005 about 1.6 billion adults were overweight and the amount obese children who were under five years old was at least 2 billion in the world.The consequences of obesity also shown by the WHO, which mainly about the health impacts such as contributing to the risk of the coronary heart disease and musculoskeletal disorders.(Shah,2010) To alleviate this problem , an increasing number

Economic costs of obesity are increasing and will continue to do so if nothing is done. Healthy Communities for A Healthy Future state that the estimated annual health care costs related to obesity are 190 billion dollars. This is 21% of total health care costs. This includes direct costs, such as preventive and treatment services, while indirect costs include income lost to days debilitated or future income lost to death. On an individual level, an obese person will cost 42% more in health care than a person of healthy weight. A tax directly related to products known to cause obesity would offset the cost of health care, and hopefully result in less obesity in the Nation.