Some heart related issues are caused by obesity, and eating a healthy diet and periodically exercising to lose weight will improve the condition of said illness, but some things have no correlation to weight at all.
Re: Should the government tax unhealthy food and subsidize healt Gov. Is supposed to protect us from other countries not from eating lol. Who says they don't just want one cheeseburger as a treat to themselves? Should be taxed more? Nah I myself work out a lot and can't eat junk foods but on cheat days id like to be able to get some without an arm and a leg
That is true an some people do eat good and are fat cuz they don't workout or do anything so should I be made by the government to do work out to
Just to bring the conversation back to the premise of whether the government should regulate foods to promote healthier eating habits (which has been a relatively civil discussion), there is nothing unconstitutional about the regulation of food and foodstuffs. The government already has the authority to regulate food. It may not be able to specifically name McDonalds, but it could find that certain types of food in certain amounts pose a health risk to the population in general. If the government can point to a legitimate interest and show the regulation is rationally related, a Constitutional challenge is likely to fail. So, given that the government could regulate unhealthy foods, should they? Back to your debate
Incorrect. In Australia the tax rate on cigarettes is somewhere around 37% Whereas with food(any sort) it's a standard 10% at most.
obesity per capita nations: 1) Mexico 32.8% 2) USA 31.8% 3) New Zealand 26.5% 4) Chile 25.1% 5) Australia 24.6% 6) Canada 24.2% 7) UK 23% 8) Ireland 23% 9) Luxembourg 22.1% 10) Finland 20.2% if government is needed to help ppl it says not much for those ppl.
Actually there are some foods which really are pretty much always unhealthy. McDonald's sells more than a few of them. A decent diet shouldn't cost that much more than a terrible one, just it may take more time skill and effort to prepare. Ok as for not teaching health and nutrition at school. Why the heck not ? Surely the purpose of school is to educate children for Life not an exam they will take once. Taxes on foods shown to be dangerous isn't a bad idea it would raise billions in revenue for state healthcare maybe even help provide the funds to teach kids why they need to be eating better stuff not just junk.
Re: Should the government tax unhealthy food and subsidize healt Yes because the governments job is to control market prices on items like food...
Unhealthy food doesn't make you obese, its your personal intake that does. You could survive off twinkies and other hostess products, and still be an average weight. Now I am not saying it would allow you to be super healthy, but you wouldn't get obese if you calorie counted. One of the main things with diets are just counting how many calories you are eating per day. I see how taxing unhealthy food would make people try and have better food decisions, but the government wouldn't lower the price of healthy food. I know there is a bunch or randomly put together things, but its still a better argument than OP.
Man, you are just like Michele Obama, "obesity is a disease!!!" No it's not, it's a choice. Food is food and legal adults have their rights to eat whatever they want no questions asked. If people want to be obese, let them, isn't going to hurt my feelings one bit
Sure eat sugar added products n calorie count n ignore vitamins n minerals etc. Fast food your way to the hospital but when u gas up don't forget to grab a bottle of pop n bag of chips n potato wedges right beside the cashier. Maybe thats why Mexico finally knocked off USA from being top dog on most obese nation per capita. Its the government who needs to help ppl eat properly aka everyones nutritionist paid for by tax dollars
Tax dollars that we pay are still going to the nutrionist, doesn't matter anyway, our money still going to them