Government regulation, including limiting advertising to increasing "sin taxes" is a hot debate!
On one hand:
Government has long history of increasing taxes on products that are "unhealthy", i.e., alcohol and tobacco. Why would junk food be any different, when health care costs are rising from obesity and related lifestyle diseases, and US deaths from obesity are increasing at a rate higher than that of cigarette smoking?
On the other hand:
Defining "junk food" is almost impossible (as my earlier statement: would kid's cereal be considered junk?!). Higher taxes, or less advertising, don't necessarily equate to behavior change, and we should have more programs in place to help the individual make healthy choices.
Comment Reply
Government regulation, including limiting advertising to increasing "sin taxes" is a hot debate!
On one hand:
Government has long history of increasing taxes on products that are "unhealthy", i.e., alcohol and tobacco. Why would junk food be any different, when health care costs are rising from obesity and related lifestyle diseases, and US deaths from obesity are increasing at a rate higher than that of cigarette smoking?
On the other hand:
Defining "junk food" is almost impossible (as my earlier statement: would kid's cereal be considered junk?!). Higher taxes, or less advertising, don't necessarily equate to behavior change, and we should have more programs in place to help the individual make healthy choices.
Where do you stand on this issue?
February 21, 2008 - 2:53pmThis Comment
Reply