Fat Tax on Fast Food in Australia Essay

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.

One of the main groups that would be negatively affected by a fat tax are the diabetics. Those who fight hypoglycemia occasionally need candy or soda to raise their blood sugar levels. Why should diabetics have to pay more for something that could potentially save their lives? They already have to pay extremely high costs for their insulin to keep their glucose levels from reaching too high. At Diabetic Care Services and Pharmacy, a box of five Humalog pen Kwikpens cost $339.29, which is extremely expensive, especially if the buyer does not have health insurance. The cost of living is very high for someone with diabetes and they might have very little money left out of each paycheck, after taxes and medical bills, for groceries. “Calorie for calorie, junk foods not only cost less than fruits and

The rate of junk and fatty food consumption has grown in the United States compared to the past few decades. Lifestyle reports indicate that one of the primary issues that were altered is the type of diet that people consume. Currently, it seems like many people eat junk foods almost daily. Junk food refers to any diet that has insufficient nutritional value and unhealthy ingredients. The U.S. government should add extra taxes to junk foods to promote a healthier society. Authors Leicester and Windmeijer note that “whilst there is no ‘fat tax’ operating in the world at the moment, the idea is under active consideration in Ireland, where around 60% of people are overweight or obese” (8).

In the article ““Why a Fat Tax is Not Enough to Tackle the Obesity Problem,” written by Suzie Ferrie, I was able to process her thoughts, and understand her viewpoint upon the topic. Ferrie begins the article by asking the reader a question, “Is cost really the most powerful determinant of what food

Obesity is a problem in America, as it is in other Western countries. The population of a country is always a reflection of its government, so our government decided that it’s time to dip their hands into this problem and come up with possible solutions to our growing unhealthy population of people. The solution that is discussed in the articles “Bad food? Tax it, and subsidize vegetables” by Mark Bittman and “Meddling in other people’s diet is ‘fun’ and ‘inspiring’” by Jacob Sullum is that we should (or shouldn’t, in Sullum’s case) place a tax on unhealthy, processed foods. Although relatively strong arguments are presented in both articles, they both miss the point entirely and wouldn’t solve the problem of rising health issues in Americans.

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.

There is an epidemic striking the United States. This epidemic, one of obesity, can contribute much of its growth over the last half century to one common link: junk food. Michael Thomas, correspondent for U.S. News and World Report, doubts the effectiveness of imposing a “junk food” tax in an attempt to curb obesity. With support from respected scientists in the nutrition field, like Dr. Oliver Mytton, Mr. Thomas could not be more wrong. While people like Thomas believe there is little hope to solve this problem, in reality a junk food tax is the best approach we can take. If the government intervenes with taxation on unhealthy foods, there will be a less consumer demand for this food group and would mark a significant step in controlling the obesity epidemic.

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.

First of all, punishing overweight or obesity individuals for their self-will eating choices with fat tax is discrimination. The fat tax will spread de idea that when an overweight person sits on a restaurant to eat a meal, their thought will be “I am paying more than others because I am fatty” and at the same time other people will thinking the same thought. Not to mention that the media already discriminate overweight people by advertising what is the beauty model women or men should be. As a result, the media and the society stereotype overweight people as ugly and laze. As well, employers tend to avoid hiring an overweight person because their appearance. To illustrate, the model type of a secretary in an office is a good looking woman and not someone overweight.

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.

Obesity has become an extremely concerning problem seriously needing to be addressed by the United Kingdom government. Some argue that a tax increase on unhealthy food should be implemented by the government in order to increase health levels across the UK, particularly those of children- for whom the current nationwide obesity problem is the most worrying. However, it is not certain whether implementing this tax will be economically viable. By evaluating the repercussions of introducing this tax on welfare and efficiency, this report will assess whether or not this tax is economically justifiable.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 2 in 3 adults are considered to be overweight and 1 in 3 are considered to be obese. That’s approximately 36% of the American population being obese and 74% being overweight. There are many causes to why this can be the case and some medical causes, such as diabetes and high blood pressure. However, the prevalence and widespread acceptance of junk food has made the problem of obesity worse. The government should start regulating junk food as it does with products such as alcohol and cigarettes, which in turn may prevent some people from abusing it or at the very least slow down consumption. Although a tax on junk food realistically won’t cause intake to stop entirely, the revenue gained by the government from this tax could help with health care costs related to the problem, such as treatments for diabetes and obesity, as well as help offer healthy snack alternatives at cheaper prices and make them more readily available.

The first reason that the government should place tax on fast food is because it is seriously dangerous for our health. As we all know, eating a lot of unhealthy food such as fast food can lead to obesity which is a really big problem in the US. That is why placing tax on fast food would really discourage people from eating unhealthy food. However, taxing fast food may not stop people from eating it totally, but it will certainly reduce the consumption of fast food or unhealthy food. As a matter of fact, the main reason behind buying fast food or unhealthy food is because it is not expensive; it won’t cost people a lot of money to get it. As well, nobody buys expensive food every day, what we can see in real life people prefer to buy low

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.

Introduction: In these days, rates of overweight and obesity are growth faster in Australia. Fourteen million Australians are overweight or obese. More than five million Australians are obese. Australian adults (63%) are overweight or obese, almost 2 in 3. And children (25%) are overweight or obese. Obesity has overtaken smoking as the crucial cause of death and illness in Australia. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are 1.9 times as likely as non-indigenous Australians to be obese.More than 900,000 Australians suffer from diabetes.(NHS Choice 2015) If this tendency still continues, by 2025, nearly 80% of all Australian adults and a third of all children will be overweight or obese. It will influence individuals healthy and society development. In this essay, we will discuss the reason of obesity, and the effects and how to solution this question. (Australian Government 2012)