Fat Taxes Should Be Imposed On Unhealthy Foods

In America’s present economic state, citizens are looking for one thing: convenience. The American lifestyle has evolved into a quick pace, overwhelming schedule with Americans looking to fulfill their needs through affordable and easily reachable means. There has been an increased approval in fast food and convenience store establishments that provide swift and stimulating products. It is the inexpensive and easy way to purchase these “goods” that is slowly deterring the well-being of our country. The reason behind the low prices of such unhealthy choices provided by fast food restaurants and convenience stores is attributed to the subsidizing of producers of companies making the junk food. These companies such as McDonald’s, Coke, Pepsi, and Burger King contribute to the amplified rates of diabetes and obesity. Therefore a sensible solution is to tax the companies’ goods to make them less attractive to consumers who sequentially will lead improved life in buying less expensive, healthier foods.

The United States of America, a nation that is known for it’s power, independence, and obesity. In the past few decades, this country has been suffering from an epidemic of obesity and diabetes. The government should increase the sales tax on fatty and high-sugar junk food to encourage healthy eating and help the American people. The revenue raised could be used to support greater causes and pay for health care reform. This might be the solution this country needs.

But, public law is not an all-inclusive category, and it does not include personal health. A favorable government tries to protect the well-being of its citizens, and their constitutional rights. So, a government should be concerned with a matter as alarming as obesity, but be mindful of the free choice of people. Obesity is not an urgency for the government to limit the choices that people have to lead an active or inactive life. As a matter of fact, the American design was “founded on the idea that individuals have basic freedoms. Among these, certainly, is the right to choose what we put on our plates” (Manson). If requirements were to be embedded on eating choices to lower the risk of obesity, where would the government start or end? About 30 cities and states have considered taxes on all sugary drinks, but these “fat taxes are surely aimed at raising more revenue than at helping people live healthier lives” (Herrera). A price increase for fattening foods is not supported by a drop in the cost of decent foods. But the fat tax, backed by by those who taunt the healthy habits this law supposedly encourages, creates worthwhile earnings for the government. This fat tax is only intended for foods, but the major cause of obesity is not mainly the unhealthy diet, but people overeating, and under exercising is an underlying cause (Manson) Realizing the cost of trying to switch this input output

Congress hereby finds and declares that the United States of America has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of obese people and the number of deaths caused by the symptoms of obesity. Obesity is the leading cause of preventable deaths and accounts for 18% of all deaths in America (Fox 2013); thus, a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugary beverages will decrease consumer rates and lower the obesity level. The rise in sweetened beverage consumption is parallel to the increase in obesity rates. Soda and other sugary substances are the largest contributors to sugar and calorie intake; soft drinks, energy drinks, sweet teas, and sports drinks are considered the top most consumed beverages in America (Kickthecan 2014). The annual medical costs due to obesity and overweight Americans is also staggering. The proposed solution will not hinder the necessary diet and nutritional value of one 's meal, but rather improve it by reducing the amount of sugar American 's consume, especially since sugary beverages are a large factor of obesity that can be costly and life threatening.

Obesity has been a problem in the United States for far too long, and it is time for the government to take action and protect the health of its citizens. This could be accomplished by taxing junk food and subsidizing healthy food, such as fruits, vegetables, and meats. The easiest foods to find and the cheapest foods to buy are foods that contain large amounts of calories and few nutrients (“What’s Behind the Obesity Epidemic”). This means that obesity disproportionately affects poor families (Mitchell, Catenacci, Wyatt, & Hill). In order to redress this issue, the government should put extra taxes on foods with high amounts of calories with few nutrients to act as a deterrent and keep people from buying them. The money gained from the taxes

Being obese or overweight can cause an abundance of problems throughout a persons daily life. For example, getting out of bed or even out of a chair could be a struggle for people that are overweight. Obesity doesn’t always start when you’re a child. In America, more than 2 in 3 adults were considered to be overweight or have obesity (Meyer). Obesity is something that can control your life. If you’re overweight or are obese you have a higher chance at risking your health. For example, you could obtain type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, kidney disease, and more. A medical study found that obesity is associated with 162,000 deaths each year (Meyer). Being overweight can give you a higher risk of undergoing a stroke and a heart attack. The body mass index (BMI) is another way to tell if you’re at normal weight, are overweight, or have obesity. Normal weight is a BMI of 18.5 to 24.9, overweight is a BMI of 25 to 25.9, and obesity is a BMI of 30 or higher (Meyer). They measure this by how much you weigh and your height. Obesity shortens life by six to seven years. This disease is more than likely to exceed smoking as one of the nations deadliest health

Obesity is on the rise in American adults and children. Over 78.6 million Americans are considered obese (CDC, 2014). Health experts believe the obesity crisis has become an epidemic that needs to be controlled. Today many efforts are being made by Federal and state governments and some major companies to combat obesity in adults and children. For example, some major companies are rewarding employees with cash incentives for exercising regularly and maintaining a healthy weight. The federal government has even considered imposing a “fat tax” on unhealthy food and beverages to help in the fight against obesity. In this paper I will discuss if the argument that obesity is an epidemic is sound, if a person’s weight should be a topic of public discussion, and my own personal view of how obesity should be addressed.

Two-thirds of Americans are overweight. This fact is known that we need to do something about our health and obesity rate. An option that has been brought up time and time again is the Fat Tax. This would be a small tax applied to fatty and unhealthy food. Ideally, this tax would decrease consumption of things like fast food. Despite the well intentioned idea, things like this don’t always work. The Fat Tax would cause impoverish people to fall deeper into financial trouble and cost the government more on welfare as well as well as barely decreasing the actual obesity rate.

Roehr’s article speaks about the how the average expenditure on obesity doubled in recent years due to significant increase in obesity rates across the United States. Between 1998 and 2006, obesity prevalence rose by 37% and the cost of expenditure related to obesity during this time period rose from $74 billion to $147 billion. This is because soda and sugary drinks have become relatively cheap over the years. Money is something that is on everyone’s mind, especially in this tough economy. Cheap drinks lead to an increase in sales and subsequently an increase rate of obesity in a matter of several years. Dr. Frieden, the director the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention, says, “[p]rice is an important factor in shaping people’s diet.” He recommends having a substantial tax on soda drinks, 1 cent per liquid ounce, would be the only and most effective method of combating the obesity epidemic. Also this type of tax will help generate $100 to $200 billion over the course of the next ten

The obesity epidemic is rapidly advancing in the U.S., leading to physical and mental health problems as well as having financial impacts. Although there are existing federal programs and policies that address the obesity problem, these policies do not seem to account for the urgency of the current situation. It is essential to examine new policy strategies to combat the growing threat of obesity. Policy strategies explored in this paper include implementation of federal subsidization of healthy meals and taxation on fast food.

One problem an obese person may face is health issues. Maurizio Fava explains deeper some health problems associated with obesity. He explains, “The findings may reflect the effects on cognition of health issues that are associated with obesity--for example, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and sleep apnea” (Fava). Being obese is not normal for a healthy human. Therefore, it not only affects your appearance, but it also affects many parts of your health.

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.

This may not seem like a huge problem; however, being overweight increases the risk of developing other diseases, including life-threatening diseases.

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.