2006-07-18 08:13:40 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Food & Drink ➔ Other - Food & Drink
If the purpose of a luxury tax is to raise money for healthcare costs, then why NOT create a luxury tax for junk food. I saw on CSPAN the other day that the obesity epidemic was costing American tax payers $700 BILLION dollars a year!
2006-07-18 08:33:27 · update #1
they tax the hell out of cigarettes, so why not ? i'm sure if there were a study done it would show alot more obese people than smokers!
2006-07-18 08:21:20 · answer #1 · answered by jencat 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. Because then to be fair, we would have to tax all of the other things that nobody really needs. Where do you draw the line?
I earn my money and no one should be able to moralize about how I spend it.
Now a better question would be - should people on welfare be allowed to buy non-essential items? Like when you hear about a guy on welfare winning the lottery. What the hell is someone on welfare doing gambling on the lottery???
I would be more concerned with regulating how people spend the money given to them by the government that they don't earn rather than tax the people who earn their money and give it to the former without restriction.
2006-07-18 15:19:04 · answer #2 · answered by g-man 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and in some jurisdictions (Quebec and California are two) most or all foods commonly called junk food do have a tax.
2006-07-18 15:28:02 · answer #3 · answered by Hank 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Here is why in one simple sentence
WHO gets to define JUNK food
2006-07-18 15:20:13 · answer #4 · answered by billyandgaby 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If only to pick up the damned trash from streets
2006-07-18 15:17:18 · answer #5 · answered by ed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋