
malasadas had a
great post recently about making good food choices, especially when consumers have informed choices. In the spirit of that post, I was amused when I saw this today (via the "The Consumerist")
KFC's "Double Down": it's bacon and cheese sandwiched between two pieces of fried chicken. The "Original Recipe" sandwich will set you back about 540 calories, 32g of fat and 1380mg of sodium. The not-as-bad-for-you Grilled Double Down totals 460 calories, 23g of fat and 1430mg of sodium. This doesn't even look appealing to me. Luckily here in New York City, restaurants are required to post nutritional information like this to give us some informed choices. But what if consumers insist on making the wrong choice even with all the information? New York City is considering a "bad food tax," and when you see fare like this, you have to wonder if heavy taxation would have an impact. Such taxation reduced cigarette consumption (a carton of cigarettes by law can not be lower than 72.00 here in New York). True, the case can be made taxation like this is rather ineffective because people order cigarettes online, or just buy them in other states, but with a lot of hungry tourists and citizens, it's unlikely everyone is just going to leave, and eat in New Jersey.
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 18:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 18:57 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:26 (UTC)It's terrible, we have to send them into the jail to force them make a healthy food choice.
Tax is really not enough...
BTW hunger is another decision. North Korea is much advanced compared to USA it this way.
Seriously:
It will end-up as badly as dry law.
You want to criminalize smokers? You will do it.
It became even worse since you will have all medicine nationalized:
then healthy choice is not more just your choice, you have to be healthy, otherwise government will refuse to pay medical bills for you.
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:36 (UTC)governmentthe insurance companies will refuse to pay medical bills for youHere, fixed it for you.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:37 (UTC)Look, if someone insists on eating shit like that a tax isn't going to stop them. Neither is requiring disclosure of nutritional information. Surely our government has far more important things to worry about than the fact that some people are idiots about what they eat.
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:43 (UTC)Considering the harm, financially and otherwise, the increasing proportion of idiots are causing, no, no our government does not have more important things to worry about. (Or rather, it isn't an "all or nothing" thing.)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 01:56 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 19:50 (UTC)Yeah typically ad content photographs of food *always* looks better than what you get in restaurants. I bet when they slap on of these babies in a bag at KFC, it's going to really look shitty. They're dumps anyway. Remember that KFC /Taco Bell at West 4th and 6th Avenue that had the rats all over the tables and people videotaped it, and made national news a few years ago?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 20:07 (UTC)As far as the double-down. MMM BACON!
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 20:26 (UTC)If they bought those ciggies online, they have been sent bills for the taxes they owe. And while ciggies are cheaper in New Jersey or Connecticut they aren't exactly North Carolina cheap. Last time I looked, a carton was about $27.00 in Raleigh at Christmas. At a local bodega here in Brooklyn, I've seen them sell indidivual cigarettes to buyers, that was a first in my life ;)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 21:04 (UTC)Then again I quite like kitfo tire, so maybe I shouldn't be too quick to criticize others' definitions of "food"...
I have no principled objection to bad food taxes. If we're going to socialize the costs of providing and insuring health care (and I think we should) then for better or worse the taxpayers do have a right to decide what care we're willing to pay for and what risks we're willing to pay to cover.
Where my anarchist streak manifests is that I do take a hard line that taxation according to "lifestyle" choice is justifiable on that basis but no further. If people have genuine choice and full information and really want to have Cardiopathy in a Bucket three times a day, then, as long as they're willing to pay their own way, it is their right. I don't understand but I don't have to.
(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 19:22 (UTC)Likewise, we need to do something to criminalize poor sexual practices. STDs cause hundreds of millions of dollars a year in healthcare costs, if we're going to socialize healthcare we need to limit deviant sexual behavior which tends to increase the transmission on sexual diseases. This should include outlawing, homosexuality and sodomy as well as featuring high taxes on out-of-wedlock promiscuity.
People have to understand that they don't have the freedom to make bad choices when I have to pay for them.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 21:12 (UTC)The Chaser
Date: 3/4/10 22:15 (UTC)They did a greasy beef patty burger just like the one featured as one of their pseudo-commercials (although I think the "bun" patties were raw).
Once again life imitates art.
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 22:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 23:40 (UTC)But then, as Meri said, that's why I'm fat...
But I do support a type of "sin tax" on food like that just as I support sin taxes on alcohol even though I drink. Otherwise, you're pushing the cost of the healthcare you require, when you have a heart attack eating that thing, off on other people.
(no subject)
Date: 3/4/10 23:48 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:LOL
From:Re: LOL
From:Re: LOL
From:Sadly...
Date: 3/4/10 23:45 (UTC)How about those high fructose corn sweetener products? One impoverished, obese victim of sweet drinks said he didn't want to drink water because "it doesn't taste good."
(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 00:14 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 04:56 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:The real key question here:
From:Re: The real key question here:
From:Re: The real key question here:
From:(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 00:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 00:27 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 01:58 (UTC)On the other hand a punitive bad food tax is like some Demolition Man parody of insane rightwing nanny-state paranoia so I'm not really sure which possibility is more horrible at the moment.
(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 05:29 (UTC)I am all for menu labeling and making sure people have information about what they are eating, but lets not pretend that somehow more refined restaurants are any more healthy.
(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 07:11 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 06:48 (UTC)I don't think that the government wants us to stop eating soda and fast foods, or even to stop smoking or drinking. I think they want us to keep doing it, so they can collect the taxes. Otherwise, where would they be able to push all of their corn syrup and soy products?
(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 18:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 10:55 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 09:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 13:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 15:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 17:14 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/4/10 19:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/4/10 11:01 (UTC)...who cares :p
(no subject)
Date: 5/4/10 15:12 (UTC)