Slashdot Mirror


NY Bill Proposes Fat Tax On Games, DVDs, Junk Food

eldavojohn writes "GamePolitics is writing about a proposal to tax things that make your kids fat. The logic from its author: 'Almost all experts agree that the primary reasons [for the obesity epidemic] are increased consumption of larger quantities of high calorie foods, snacks and sugar sweetened beverages... and lack of physical activity as vigorous play is replaced by sedentary activities such as watching more television, movies and videos and playing video games. This bill would raise revenues from modest surcharges on the very food products and sedentary activities that are linked to the lifestyle changes involved in the explosion of childhood obesity in the last 20-30 years.' Not as explicit as Japan's fat tax but we're getting there."

113 of 793 comments (clear)

  1. Money Grab by FredFredrickson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I applaud the effort- it's a worthy cause..

    But it's not going to make anybody skinny. Just make hordes of cash under a cause that everyone would support. This is a money grab.

    --
    Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
    1. Re:Money Grab by diskofish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't a worthy cause. They are just looking for another way to squeeze even more out of us. NY already has some of the highest taxes in the country. I think by calling it a fat tax they hope to make it seem less egregious. What they need to do is make serious budget cuts. Cut back on the state government. Unfortunately, the special interests groups are going to keep fighting for their piece of the budget when someone wants to cut it.

    2. Re:Money Grab by sys.stdout.write · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't about making people skinny, it's about paying for the additional medical costs incurred by obesity.

      I for one think this is a non-terrible idea.

    3. Re:Money Grab by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And I say, let them eat cake.

    4. Re:Money Grab by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't applaud the effort.

      Let's tax loan officers instead because their industry causes great financial harm to the country.

      Don't agree? Maybe that's because neither of these makes a lot of sense.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    5. Re:Money Grab by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Minnesotans still pays more per person and I'd bet we get a lot more from our money than you do.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    6. Re:Money Grab by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well they can tax the luxury goods, or they can raise the state sales tax, it's really up to you.

      What it comes down to, is they need the money to make their budget. If this is what they choose to tax, it's a lot better than what they could tax.

      Lowering spending is another option, but that's never all that popular in New York, or at least it wasn't when I lived there.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    7. Re:Money Grab by qbzzt · · Score: 2, Informative

      It isn't about making people skinny, it's about paying for the additional medical costs incurred by obesity.

      How is giving the state government money relevant? Does New York have socialized medicine?

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    8. Re:Money Grab by someone1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I play instead of eating so i'm skinny.
      So why would they tax me.
      They should tax only fat people, damnit.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    9. Re:Money Grab by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ditto.

      It would probably meet much less resistance if some or all of the proceeds went towards offsetting the costs of healthy foods such as fresh produce and lifestyle assistance such as gym memberships.

    10. Re:Money Grab by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Those "additional costs" are an article of faith, and not the proven thing most people seem to assume.

      When studies have been done, it's turned out that people who live unhealthy lifestyles generally cost a society less overall because they tend to actually die of their health problems. The tofu-eaters, on the other hand, live longer, and accrue more costs.

      Paying lung cancer care for a smoker who lives 12 months after his diagnosis is cheap compared to paying medicare, social security, and eventual hospital costs for someone who lives much longer.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    11. Re:Money Grab by alen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      states pay for medicaid and in NY State it's run like an HMO and open to a lot of people like small business owners to buy health insurance. the premiums are based on income, which means poorer people are paid for by others

    12. Re:Money Grab by addsalt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but even worse, I would suspect these types of foods are consumed in higher quantities by lower income levels (shopping for fresh foods - not to mention at Whole Foods - isn't cheap). Not only is it trying to squeeze more tax revenue, it would be hitting the lower income bracket the worse.

    13. Re:Money Grab by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey, what kind of bandwidth do you get in your militia bunker? Mine sucks, but it's probably because I shot the cable guy because he looked like CIA.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    14. Re:Money Grab by clam666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I appreciate using taxes, which should be used to fund government operations that the people want, to punishment methods to create general "funds" that can be used in any way the politicians want.

      Anyone supporting taxation for the purpose of punishment, "social manipulation" or whatever the reason, is ideologically aligned with fascism. No matter "what about the children".

      --
      I'm a satanic clam.
    15. Re:Money Grab by Woldry · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention the fact that when "Almost all experts agree" on a wide range of things, they are almost certainly going to be wrong about at least a few of them. The notions of experts about what sorts of foods make people fat have changed drastically in my several decades of adulthood. They're bound to change again. Will the taxes go away on foods that the latest scientific version of the truth decides are no longer fattening? Of course not. They'll stay, and also be added to the new alleged culprits, as more and more foods fall under the tax.

      And then, aside from the food question, there's the question of whether it's in the best interest of government to discourage mental activity and learning (in the form of games) on the dubious assumption that the alternative that people will choose will be healthier.

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
    16. Re:Money Grab by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cheap food is made with cheap crap, therefore is consumed by the poor (the worlds most populous group). They all buy it because it is cheaper than eating healthy. When you're struggling to make ends meet the last thing you're thinking is "is this healthy?", you're probably thinking more along the lines of "will this feed my kids for the next week?"

    17. Re:Money Grab by Captain+Centropyge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, this is NOT a worthy cause. Who are they to say who's fat? And if I'm not fat, who are they to say I have to pay because other people are fat, lazy, and unmotivated to help themselves? Some people don't give a shit that they're fat. If it's genetic or something, insurance will cover it. But don't make me pay more taxes. This isn't going to do jack crap to make people thinner. And if they're going to make anyone pay, they should make fat people pay the fat tax, since they are the ones that need the motivation to lose weight.

      Once again, the government thinking they know what's best for us... morons.

      And one more thing... a very important thing. This has NOTHING to do with getting people off their lazy asses and losing weight. It's just another way for the government to tax us. More money for them to piss away on stupid programs that do nothing and political agendas. You want more money..? Cut programs that are failing. There are plenty of them.

      --
      Bite my shiny metal ass!
    18. Re:Money Grab by cromar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think this is a fallacy, but maybe the prices where I live are quite different. Here, a bag of whole carrots is about $1.20, while a bag of Doritos or other chips is 99 cents. By both weight and density of nutrition, the carrots are hugely cheaper than Doritos. Or say, chicken here is often around $3 or $4 a pound, again both by weight and nutrition density a far better deal than what you would get for 3 or 4 bags of chips. Are veges really super expensive where you live compared to say chips and soda, or is it that people are forgetting how to cook and not stepping up to the plate (har) when it comes to their children's health?

    19. Re:Money Grab by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      /antismokinglobby
      Lung cancer? Ever smoked? You did?! Once when you were fifteen. Smoking caused your lung cancer. Never mind you lived next to a highway for forty years. That one fag gave you the cancer. /antismokinglobby

    20. Re:Money Grab by Captain+Centropyge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not a money grab - I would totally support this.

      I'm tired of my taxes paying the health care bills of these fat bastards. They eat crap, get overweight, next thing they are in for knee surgeries and lifelong diabetes management.

      Well, how about this then. Make FAT PEOPLE pay the fat tax. Why should I pay for someone else's laziness and bad eating habits?

      --
      Bite my shiny metal ass!
    21. Re:Money Grab by Tickety-boo · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about using the proceeds to make healthy foods taste better?

      --
      Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman. Believing what he read made him mad.
    22. Re:Money Grab by nedlohs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Surely that's not the comparison.

      The lean meat cuts are significantly more expensive than the 30% fat mince. Pasta is cheaper than vegetables. Soda is cheaper than juice.

    23. Re:Money Grab by pluther · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not entirely true.

      While it's true that it's easier to get good quality ingredients and healthier pre-packaged foods if you have the money for it, what causes obesity isn't so much the lower quality of food available for the money, but the choices people make on what to spend their money on.

      For instance, yes, a hamburger in a real restaurant is better, healthier, and more expensive than a hamburger at McDonald's. But you can buy raw hamburger and cook it at home, and make it tastier, healthier, and far cheaper than you can get at McDonald's.

      The boxed Macaroni and Cheese you get at Whole Foods is indeed better for you than Kraft, but costs three times as much. Less than half the price of Kraft, though, is buying the ingredients and making it yourself. Better tasting, cheaper, and less fattening.

      Vegetables at your average farmers market cost about half of what they do in a grocery store, and are fresher and better tasting.

      I could go on. Yes, the rich will always have more options than the poor. But with a little bit of research, effort, and practice, people can eat far healthier for even less money than the average American is doing now.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    24. Re:Money Grab by tmosley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Think about how many calories are in a bag of carrots versus a bag of doritos. Measured per calorie, vegetables are MUCH more expensive.

      Of course, most of the food I eat is cooked from scratch, and we grow our own vegetables, so eating healthy is fairly cheap, but it takes a LOT of time, time that most 2-worker households don't have.

    25. Re:Money Grab by aarroneous · · Score: 2, Funny

      This madness must stop and stop now! I will not pay one red cent in new taxes anywhere!

      The people with the guns and jails think otherwise...

    26. Re:Money Grab by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      For those of you in the northeast, I recommend shopping at "Wegman's" if Whole Foods is too high for you. I've lived all over the country and I've never seen a place with such a great selection of unprocess, raw, whole foods for such a reasonable cost.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    27. Re:Money Grab by Chabo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention that not too many people can just sit down and eat a whole bag of carrots; to make the carrots palatable, most people eat them with a dip, which is usually high in fat. One of my friends from college even went so far as to use cake frosting as her carrot dip!

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    28. Re:Money Grab by Vancorps · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While I generally agree with you, what home grown mac n cheese recipe do you have that is healthier? All of the recipes we have are very high in fat.

      Let us also not forget that many families are either single parent or have two working parents and thus there is a lack of time to prepare all of this delicious nutritious food. At my house we've been trying 20 minute recipes but in general they do end up costing more than just going out to eat.

      One thing you are forgetting is that people that are cheap and would buy prepackaged food or eat at McDonalds will buy cheap ingredients for making food from scratch and you'll be back at square one when it comes to health concerns.

      My house isn't struggling for money thankfully so we'll shop farmers markets mostly. Whole Foods is considered a special treat when we want to have a BBQ with family I don't get to see often or when we want a turkey for Thanksgiving.

      Ultimately I'm not sure the food people are eating is the problem, it's more the lack of exercise in addition to the lack of proper sleep. Those contribute a lot to metabolism although obviously what you eat is still important.

    29. Re:Money Grab by Venik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is a well-established medical fact that cardiovascular deceases are more common in blacks than in whites. I propose a "black tax" on barbecue grills, chicken wings, and Hennessy cognac. This would make at least as much sense and will be just as constitutional as the proposed "fat tax".

    30. Re:Money Grab by maztuhblastah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Think about how many calories are in a bag of carrots versus a bag of doritos. Measured per calorie, vegetables are MUCH more expensive.

      Well using that logic, there's no possible way you can lose this one, is there?

      Of course that's exactly the point -- fatty foods *do* contain more calories by volume, thus eating 99c worth of chips will "make you fatter" than 99c worth of carrots.

      You can't have it both ways: either it's that the cheapest food available is horrendously awful for you (not true, as pointed out above), or the food that's got the best calorie/cost ratio is bad for you when consumed without regard for calorie density (see above: duh).

    31. Re:Money Grab by mydn · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least I have 2 Senators.

    32. Re:Money Grab by supernova_hq · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have seen some studies where they found that how good a certain food tastes is completely subjective. My father is diabetic (genetic, not weight induced), so our family tends to eat very little sugar and related foods. This means that when I was little, we NEVER had sodas in the house. In fact, it wasn't until I was playing at a friends that I first tried it, and I couldn't stand the taste of it. I thought it was absolutely revolting.

      You can see the same trends if you look at different cultures. People who grow up with certain foods acquire a taste for that type of food. French people acquire tastes for wine, bread and cheese while Greek people acquire tastes for seafood, olive oil and pastas. Unfortunately North America (US/Canada) has adopted junk food as their national food.

      The big problem is that junk food tends to be a little more "seductive" and the taste of it is acquire quite a bit easier and quicker than some of the healthier foods out there. Now a days if you travel back east where the good food is, you can still get the traditional meals, but you will also see America's prime exports such as McDonald's everywhere.

      The problem with junk food is not a taste problem, it is a cultural problem.

    33. Re:Money Grab by Dyinobal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Neither of those are exclusive to the government, or have you never been to Texas?

    34. Re:Money Grab by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Hmm...no one seems to bitch that much when they raise the taxes on smokes and booze. They justifiy the 'sin' taxes, especially on cigarettes...because of the health risks, and hope it is an incentive to quit.

      This tax, especially on foods and drinks that can kill you if not used in extreme moderation (apparently they aren't) is for the same reasons, no?

      So, look, if you're gonna bitch about these (and I'm sure new creative behavior modification taxes in the future), then complain in general about using any tax to try to modify behavior. They should not use the threat of tax to promote good or curb 'bad' behaviors if you are an adult.

      What do you bet that in a future in the US, if you have a national medical system, with computerized national records, that can easily be tied to other systems out there that collect info on you (like with grocery store purchases? Drug stores? Liquor stores?) that you are charged and taxed based on your health risk behaviors? Don't think they'll do it?

      Did you think they'd ever even consider taxing you a 'sin' tax for buying a soda pop??? Me neither...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    35. Re:Money Grab by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I generally agree with you, what home grown mac n cheese recipe do you have that is healthier? All of the recipes we have are very high in fat.

      I've never understood this aversion to fat. Humans are evolved to digest fat. If you want to make your mac'n'cheese healthier, don't eat all the reprocessed crap that's in Kraft.

      Let us also not forget that many families are either single parent or have two working parents and thus there is a lack of time to prepare all of this delicious nutritious food. At my house we've been trying 20 minute recipes but in general they do end up costing more than just going out to eat.

      My household is dual-income, and we have plenty of time to prepare delicious, nutritious food. It's all about time management. Chop veggies the night before. Get a crock pot. It's not that hard.

      I'm not sure how your home-cooked food costs more than going out to eat. You must be eating strictly off the dollar menu, or you must buy some seriously expensive ingredients.

      One thing you are forgetting is that people that are cheap and would buy prepackaged food or eat at McDonalds will buy cheap ingredients for making food from scratch and you'll be back at square one when it comes to health concerns.

      There are plenty of cheap, healthy ingredients. Lentils, chick peas, carrots, peanuts, etc. on the veggie side. And with a crock pot, you can buy cheaper cuts of meat--you cook it all day, so it comes out great.

      I think the bigger problem is they don't teach home economics in school anymore. The byproduct of all this political correctness is that nobody knows how to run a household and put healthy food on the table.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    36. Re:Money Grab by QuantumRiff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not tax books? Do they not lead to the same health problems as sitting still playing video games?

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    37. Re:Money Grab by Repossessed · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um, ground beef's 3.50 a pound here. Thats for the cheapest (and fattiest) stuff.

      That means if i want to match that one dollar fast food quarter pounder, I've spent 88 cents of it on meat, and haven't even payed for the bun. Sometimes I can make cheap burgers, when all the right things are on sale, but not often.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    38. Re:Money Grab by BaronHethorSamedi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm a bit skeptical of the "healthy foods are more expensive" argument. The notion that you need a certain economic status in order to maintain a decent diet seems to be a uniquely American problem.

      Beans, lentils, eggs, rice, basic grains--the stuff most of the world's poor live on--are all highly consumed because they're (relatively) easy to cultivate, nourishing, and cheap. Cheaper by far (even at your local U.S. supermarket) than Hamburger Helper, Spam, Hot Pockets, etc. But the Hot Pockets are much more heavily advertised, and take less time to prepare. I think putting together a halfway healthy meal is much more a question of time than money.

    39. Re:Money Grab by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Clean air, hundreds of miles of bike trails, clean parks, trees actually IN the city (and not just in one park), clean lakes (13,000 in our state alone), clean rivers, hunting and fishing galore, etc.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    40. Re:Money Grab by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      Umm. Those things are more or less available in every state. Well, minus the 13,000 lakes part (and I'm pretty sure your tax dollars didn't buy you those 13,000 lakes).

      Anything else?

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    41. Re:Money Grab by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see that you are very short sighted, and intolerant of others freedoms.

      I'm not intolerant of other peoples freedoms - I would forcefully oppose a ban on anything. However peoples choices have consequences and they should be held responsible for them.

      If I have to pay $1.60 instead of $1.40 for a plate of greasy fries if I want one, I really couldn't care, and I should be able to enjoy that in peace. However someone who regularly make a meal out of fries and pop is going to have health problems and the money collected should go to offset those health costs. I should npt be on the hook for someone elses crappy diet decisions, and doing so is restricting *my* freedoms.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    42. Re:Money Grab by crmarvin42 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I totally agree with you.

      They justifiy the 'sin' taxes, especially on cigarettes...because of the health risks, and hope it is an incentive to quit.

      Am I the only one that notices that 'sin' taxes designed, ostensibly, as a deterent are counter productive. For example:

      1. Tax Cigaretts to pay for Medicare/Medcaid
      2. People cut back on cigarette purchases
      3. Revinue goes down from 'sin' taxes
      4. Budget shortfalls lead to further increases in 'sin' taxes
      5. Rinse and repeat until consuption rate drops to the point where 'sin' taxes are incapable of generating sufficent revenue to feed the Governments need for more spending.
      6. Find new 'sin' (in this case obesity).
      7. Rinse and repeat all over again.

      The problem with the 'sin' taxes, or the 'fat' tax is that it's used more to generate money and prevent spending cuts, than to actually improve anyones health. If the government does end up decreasing the undesirable consumption (tobacco, alcohol, gasoline, sweets, video games, movies, etc.), they end up running out of money to fund their pet projects. If these kinds of taxes were actually designed to do what they claim, then there would be mechanisms included to decrease funding of the relevant programs as consumption goes down.

      It's all Nanny State BS, wrapped up in the guise of the Public Good. I'm going to become a parent in August, and I'll do what my parents did. Once our children get to the age where this kind of sedentary activity is a concern, I'll kick them outside when it's nice, and not let them back into the house until meal time. I'll keep high calorie foods as a treat of last resort, and limit TV, video games, etc. to an hour or two a night.

      If you feel like you need the government to make sweets and video games more expensive to prevent you from giving them to your kids in excessive ammounts, please do the rest of us a favor. DON'T BREED. If you already have, please drop your kids off at the nearest adoption agency and go get yourself a tubal ligation/vasectomy. YOU are the parent. Act like it. Tell you child "NO", and then stick to your guns. Let them throw temper tantrums, they'll cry themselves out eventually. I know that I always did. If you dont' have the patience, then take them home and whip their ass. That worked just as well in my experience.

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    43. Re:Money Grab by StopKoolaidPoliticsT · · Score: 2, Informative

      Has nothing to do with convincing 50.1% of the population and everything to do with NY's budgeting system of "Three men in a room." The Governor (Democrat from NYC), Assembly Leader (Democrat from NYC) and State Senate Leader (Democrat from NYC) lock themselves in a room and emerge with the budget that will be passed by the state. Despite the Governor proposing a number of cuts in face of a $24 billion projected shortfall prior to entering the room, Assembly Leader Sheldon Silver demanded a budget 9.2% higher than last year's and got his way. It doesn't matter what the rest of the state wants, traditionally, regardless of whether there is a Republican Governor and Senate Leader or a Democrat one, Silver drives the budget. He's Assembly leader for life, rules his caucus with an iron fist, represents a district that will never elect anyone else and will not let his body vote on a budget that he doesn't approve of. Time and time again, Silver has shown he will put his own interests ahead of the rest of the state, often forcing budgets to become severely overdue unless the entire state caves and gives him the powers and programs he wants. Disagree with Silver on any issue, whether you're a D or R, and you will have your pet projects stripped from his budget.

      NY's population remains powerless. We've got no citizen initiated referrendum or recall powers and due to the Assembly's power base in NYC, the opinion of the roughly 50% of the population in the rest of the state doesn't even matter. We're dictated to, not listened to. It's nothing short of a tyranny and is one of the driving causes in the hatred of NYC by the rest of the state.

      --
      Stop Koolaid Politics
    44. Re:Money Grab by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, except the last time a Democrat was President of the U.S. didn't they burn done some compound in Texas because they wouldn't let the ATF in on a "child abuse" warrant? (hint: the ATF doesn't have jurisdiction in child abuse cases)

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    45. Re:Money Grab by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Most of those things are not provided by taxes, but by the fact that relatively few people want to live there.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    46. Re:Money Grab by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Funny

      At least I have 2 Senators.

      One of whom consumes as much TV time as 50 other US Senators ;)

      The most dangerous place to be in Washington is between Charles Schumer and a TV camera......

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    47. Re:Money Grab by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. If certain fast food is that bad for the kids, make it illegal to market or sell it to minors.

      Fast food isn't bad or good for the kids. Fast food consumed without moderation is the problem. A quarter pounder with cheese (500 calories), large fries (500 calories) and large soda (300 calories) adds up to 1,300 calories.

      That's quite a lot for a single meal but not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things, provided that you adjust your caloric intake accordingly. There's no reason to charge me more for fast food simply because the rest of the country doesn't know what moderation means or how to exercise it.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    48. Re:Money Grab by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, except the last time a Democrat was President of the U.S. didn't they burn done some compound in Texas because they wouldn't let the ATF in on a "child abuse" warrant? (hint: the ATF doesn't have jurisdiction in child abuse cases)

      Yeah, and how many ATF agents were killed & wounded?

      I'm not sure the ATF really wants to play that type of scenario out in Texas on a large scale. They'd run out of agents long before Texas ran out of Texans or ammo. I don't think even the Democrats are nutty enough to start dropping MOABs or tactical nukes in the continental US on our own citizens.

      Then again, I could be wrong. I didn't think they'd send in tanks and use incendiaries in Waco or shoot an unarmed woman with a baby in her arms at Ruby Ridge, either.

      Funny how that works. Don't want to make radical Muslims that have attacked and killed Americans many many times and want to kill everyone that aren't them uncomfortable by yelling at them, but inconvenient citizens are open-season with a bulls-eye on their backs.

      Interesting times, indeed.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    49. Re:Money Grab by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Funny

      Act like it. Tell you child "NO", and then stick to your guns

      Unfortunately, the last time I tried to use firearms to obtain compliance from the kids I had to spend a few hours at the police station filling out paperwork ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    50. Re:Money Grab by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Look, if this fixes the behavior of millions of people but happens to minorly inconvenience one person with an abnormal routine, I think it's worth going for.

      Do you honestly think that it's a proper role for Government to "fix" the behavior of it's citizenry, when said behavior harms nobody whom doesn't engage in it?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  2. ass-backwards by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    as much as yes, these things can make people fat, how are they trying to put video games into this? People actually SWEAT from video games. This is like saying a racecar driver gets fat because he's sitting the whole time, which many know is not true at all.

    Got to love the idea too, pay extra even if you are, say, someone in shape who merely wants to cheat on their diet once in a blue moon, now should be taxed extra too. Sheesh.

    So yeah, nothing but moneygrab.

    1. Re:ass-backwards by KiltedKnight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That, and what about games designed around doing a lot of work, motion, etc, such as Wii Fit and Dance Dance Revolution (DDR)? People have been able to use these games as a way to make working out fun. Does that mean you'll get a tax rebate on these games and the controllers necessary for them?

      --
      OCO is Loco
    2. Re:ass-backwards by lostmongoose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      so what about movie tickets? Books? Music? Are they going to add additional taxes on homeowners who's homes have decks/patios where they can go outside and just sit and relax all day? All of these things are sedentary entertainment. What makes them different from games and dvds?

    3. Re:ass-backwards by metamechanical · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We're talking about New York here. This isn't a sin tax - this is a thinly-veiled money grab. In short, no, there will be no rebate.

      --
      If I had a nickel for every time I had a nickel, I'd be richcursive!
    4. Re:ass-backwards by supernova_hq · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't forget exercise DVD's that people buy for the same reason. If this tax goes through, those will be taxed as well.

  3. Totally bogus... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People with office jobs should have to pay this tax. They sit on their ass all day. Why should a construction worker, a whorehouse picker, or any other manual labour have to support office workers' sedentary lifestyle?

    1. Re:Totally bogus... by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      a whorehouse picker

      They prefer the term "Concierge".

  4. tax break for celery by stine2469 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do i get a tax break for buying celery? 

    1. Re:tax break for celery by zmollusc · · Score: 4, Funny

      No. Because celery is pretty neutral. Tax breaks will be available for products that actively help make you thinner, such as crystal meth etc

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    2. Re:tax break for celery by pwfffff · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's why you smother it in peanut butter, which comes from the ground.

      DOUBLE HEALTHY!

  5. Will the money be spent fighting fat? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's next, Wii subsidies?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. How about by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone who is morbidly obese and doesn't have a diagnosed thyroid problem gets no Medicare or Medicaid? How right wing of me! I should be kind and compassionate by paying taxes to support the health care of people who know their habits are destroying them.

    1. Re:How about by Manchot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Believe it or not, the British NHS recently did an analysis and determined that smokers and the obese cost the system less money than healthy people. The reason being that these people tended to die early, before the complications and cost associated with old age set in.

    2. Re:How about by jhfry · · Score: 2, Interesting

      so in that vein, I say, lets remove end of live coverage from medicare or medicaid.

      Essentially, lets refuse to cover the cost of treatment to individuals who have ZERO realistic expectation of recovery (beyond pain management and keeping them clean and comfortable). I realize that there are limitations already in place, but it is still very common for the tax payers to fund a very expensive procedure that merely keeps someone alive for a week or two longer.

      I don't know about you, but if I am dieing I wouldn't feel right taking $20,000 dollars from families that need it so that I can live another week!

      --
      Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
  7. since obesity will be claimable as a disability... by goffster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is simply reclaiming what they are going to pay out

  8. Also a tax on Health care premiums by eht · · Score: 5, Informative

    Got a letter from my company's health insurance yesterday.

    "Health care premiums will increase as a direct result of the State Legislature approving the Governor's proposed increases in taxes, fees and assessments on your health benefits on February 4, as part of his Deficit Reduction Plan."

    So they're taxing both ends.

    1. Re:Also a tax on Health care premiums by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, but the increase in health care premiums is an indirect result of the insurance companies protecting their margins at all costs. They pass on their increased tax expense, and you pay higher premiums, so that their profits are not damaged -- only yours are. And you know what? You (or your employer) are willing to pay the extra cost.

      The answer is to jump ship for another insurer with lower premiums. Oh, they're all raising rates? That's the joy of oligopoly.

      Note: at a previous employer, I was able to negotiate a higher salary in exchange for not receiving medical benefits. I self-insured, and made out pretty well (my total cost was around 60% of the company's premium, but they paid me 75% of their premiums over base pay -- so we both saved money, even after employment taxes on the salary difference). My current employer offers nothing of the sort, so they're stuck paying high rates.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  9. While we are at it... by kheti · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's tax magazines and books.

  10. Nice idea, wrong approach by Minwee · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem isn't that there aren't enough taxes on junk food, the problem is that there's too much crap in it.

    While it would be nice to think that putting taxes on garbage disguised as food would promote the availability of real food, I'm inclined to doubt that things work that way.

  11. How short sighted by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I ride my stationary bike while I watch DVDs. Should I get a tax credit because I bought exercise equipment to offset a tax that assumes too much?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  12. Nonsense! by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Almost all experts agree that the primary reasons [for the obesity epidemic] are increased consumption of larger quantities of high calorie foods, snacks and sugar sweetened beverages... and lack of physical activity"

    So wait...you're trying to tell me that the first law of thermodynamics is true? Lies!

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    1. Re:Nonsense! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Almost all experts agree that the primary reasons [for the obesity epidemic] are increased consumption of larger quantities of high calorie foods, snacks and sugar sweetened beverages... and lack of physical activity"

      So wait...you're trying to tell me that the first law of thermodynamics is true? Lies!

      This is why Congress really needs to repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics. Sadly, it seems that most members of both parties are in the pocket of Big Thermo.

  13. backwards by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about lowing (or even removing) taxesd on things that are likely to help keep you fit. Sporting equip, health foods, etc.

    Oh thats right the greedy fucks don't get any money from that.

    1. Re:backwards by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      tax people in proportion to the weight they gain year by year. see how popular -that- tax will be!

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:backwards by MarkGriz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about lowering taxes period.

      It's the government that needs to be on a f*cking diet.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
  14. I still say they should get rid of HFC Syrup by SirGeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I mean, there HAVE been studies that show the obesity levels began rising at the same time that High Fructose Corn Syrup started to infiltrate all of our foods.

    I mean do they REALLY need to add HFCS to Tomato Sauces, Soups, etc. ?

    The best thing lately has been the return to sugar as a sweetener. Pepsi Throwback is one great example (its much less sweet than regular pepsi - and I'm a Coke drinker primarily).

    1. Re:I still say they should get rid of HFC Syrup by rcuhljr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is there no '-1 Correlation is not Causation'?

    2. Re:I still say they should get rid of HFC Syrup by Zordak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's like saying "the crumbs on the floor are not ants." It's a factually true statement, but it's hardly a useful one. It would be more useful to say that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. But correlation very often does mean something. The fact that correlation does not necessarily imply causation does not mean that correlation somehow implies non-causation. At the very least, correlation implies "maybe there's something here we should look into a little more closely."

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:I still say they should get rid of HFC Syrup by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You got that right. Corn production in the US is massively subsidized, so much so that Mexico can no longer afford to produce its own corn.

      This glut of corn has resulted in a number of rather poor changes to the US diet. HFCS as a substitute for sugar is one. Massive amounts of corn for feeding beef cattle is another - corn is not a natural diet for cows and is so bad many farmers are on record stating the cows would have died in 6 months anyway from organ failure if they were not slaughtered first. Is this really what you want to eat?

      Corn is basically a product for making money, and has no real nutritional value at all.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
  15. Better Idea by lobiusmoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tax your gasoline to a similar degree as in Europe. That would encourage less car journeys, more walking/cycling and act as a buffer for when the oil prices start increasing again so your gas prices won't double practically overnight again.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    1. Re:Better Idea by castironpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only thing that would discourage the use of cars in the US is populating the country as densely as Europe and slapping down some mass transit lines all over it.

      --
      mmmm...forbidden donut
  16. I fully support this Fat tax by JumperCable · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government has gone so far out to control our lives with taxes on things people disapprove of it isn't funny.

    It will only get better once the government has gone so far out of whack that it micromanages every aspect of our lives. Only then will there be enough pushback

  17. The time will come... by yogibaer · · Score: 4, Funny

    when you will have to go underground to get a decent rat-burger (with fries) and a cold beer...

  18. Welcome to a tax on everything by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People want free health care, people want free this, that, and the other thing.

    and they will find enough people who will feel it is OK to tax X because said people don't like X. The problem is that group will get whacked by people who don't like Y.

    A VAT by any other name.

    The stuff has to be paid for. The fastest way to keep people dependent on the government and keep people poor is to make it easy to be dependent and poor.

    I know people who would cheer those gamers being taxed, I have vegan friends who would have a parade for fatties to pay more tax...

    it never ends... too many people take enjoyment by having others punished. Most get bent when it occurs because of "religious" reasons but honestly does it matter when it comes down to it?

    Democracies always have problems when people finally figure out they can vote themselves other peoples money, its worse when elected officials realize it works to keep them in office. Its even worse when a sitting President uses the bully pulpit to stomp on contract law and intimidate lawful holders of guaranteed debt to give it up.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Welcome to a tax on everything by bmajik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A republic is the rule of law, specifically, written law. A constitutional republic writes down what the limited extent of government powers is. While it is true that a few elite men designed our constitutional republic, they designed it explicitly to limit the power of any governors -- themselves and any subsequent politicians.

      In in oligarchy there may be written laws, but in effect, you have the rule of a few men, because there may not be sufficient boundaries in the existing written law, or the few may circumvent written law as often as they like. Or, it may be that the written law really only applies to subjects, not to oligarchs themselves.

      The cheif difference between written laws and limited government power, vs. any arrangement where there the boundaries of government power are not clearly defined, is that in the former, people can PLAN their lives and behaviors, and make long term plans and execute on them. In the latter situation, the actions and dreams of man are perpetually subject to the boundless whims of the oligarchs and their appointees.

      One defect of the modern US government is that much of our law is unwritten -- we have review and regulation boards, committees, and agencies that decide on matters according to the whims of the men serving on those boards. The rules are not written down. So while we technically have a constitutional republic, we have many de-facto oligarchies in specific sectors of governance.

      A specific example of this might be the FDA. Is it legal to to sell a certain drug in the US? That depends on what the FDA says. The law says "the FDA decides". The FDA provides information and guidance about its decision making process, but ultimatley, its still a decision making process. I have no specific experience with the FDA drug approval process, so it might be an especially vague or especially well defined process, and so might be a great or poor illustration of the point.

      Another aspect to consider regarding the founding elite that drafted the constitution was that it was _imposed_ on nobody in particular - the "Federal" government is federated in the sense that there is a clear deliniation of powers delegated to the "national" government, and powers not otherwise specified remain with the states, localities, or individuals. States had to buy-in to the constitution, and it was on a voluntary basis, state by state, that this was done.

      It wasn't until the Civil war that the US national government egregiously asserted its superiority to the states by raising an army to prevent certain states from "opting out" of the Union. The civil war, despite how it is frequently taught, was fought politically over the "legality" of state secession from the United States national government. Abraham Lincoln himself said that the issue of slavery was second to the issue of secession. While slavery was the pivotal issue that motivated the southern states to secede, Lincoln prosecuted the war on the grounds that the south had no right to secede, and there is a quote from him on the matter that says, in essence, his slavery policy would be whatever forced the union to remain a whole.

      It wasn't until some time into the war that he wrapped up the moral aspects of combating slavery as a post-facto justification for war. The Civil War, as originally executed, was a political boondoggle. Only with the hindsight of what it accomplished in terms of human rights and freedoms can it be said to be a net positive. But critics of Lincoln suggest that any time prior to beginning the Civil War, the federal government and the northern states could have simply overturned or refused to enforce fugitive slave laws. Had that happened, the moral slavery issue would have sorted itself out via the mass exodous of escaping slaves to northern states. Northern states were legally bound to return escaped slaves to their southern masters; overtuning the laws that required this may have prevented the war and ended slavery just the same.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
  19. How about taxing corn instead of sugar? by kyz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem that's unique to the US is that government corn subsidies makes corn cheaper than anything else. So manufacturers use high fructose corn syrup instead of sugar as sweetener.

    HFCS is not only a sugar substitute, it also gets put into things that wouldn't otherwise be sweetened if you had to pay the full cost of sugar to sweeten it.

    How about the US government stop subsidising corn?

    --
    Does my bum look big in this?
    1. Re:How about taxing corn instead of sugar? by vertinox · · Score: 2, Informative

      But high-fructose corn syrup is about half glucose and about half fructose, just like regular table sugar. The fact that it is derived from corn doesn't magically make it evil somehow.

      But why do the lab tests show that mice fed HFCS more obese than the ones fed normal sugar?

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  20. Total BS by molex333 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    None of these things make people fat! Parents let their kids get fat. When I was young, I had a Nintendo and Gameboy and plenty of videos and TV to watch, but my Mother wouldn't let me sit on my ass and watch them all day. She made all of her children go outside. If we were bored, she gave us yard work and/or other chores to do! The children today aren't going to get less fat if they tax this stuff because people will keep buying it (look at cigarettes, we know that they will give you cancer and they tax the hell out of it, almost $8.00 a pack in NY, but millions of people buy them every day). If you want to stop kids from being fat do something to get the parents involved. Start making your kids play outside!!!!

    --
    Somewhere in a dark place you will find:
    www.m1
  21. Funny this should come out... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Funny

    when I just read this article linked from the main page.

    Judging by a large portion of the people I work with, and the cruft found between their keyboards when they whine their keys aren't working correctly, I'd say the study is spot on.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  22. doesn't seem very principled by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're against sedentary activities in general, the list is surely much longer than videogames and DVDs. How about, say, books? Or televisions? Or board games?

  23. I can't spend all of my time working out by aePrime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm a marathoner who spends quite a bit of time playing video games.

    Do I get a tax deduction for the hours I spend running?

  24. Why tax the source? by EvilToiletPaper · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why the 'ef is the city taxing these things that *fit* folks also enjoy.

    I enjoy Video games, watching DVD's and the occasional 2^32 calorie baconator sandwich. I also work out with weights 4 days a week and try to squeeze in some cardio on the weekends. I work hard to keep myself in shape, why the heck should I be paying these dumb taxes just because the city decided to play nanny to some obviously retarded morons..

    This reeks of the typical lawyer 'shift the blame' mentality. Tax the fat fucking folks not the source of their fat, charge them double on Airplanes and subways, the assholes take up 2.5 seats each, tax them for treating walkways like amusement park rides, tax them for holding up pedestrian traffic, No more disabled parking stickers for fat retards, let them walk and burn it off.

    Make an exception in case of folks that can't help it e.g. thyroid disorders but all the other morons stuffing themselves with Big Mac's all day long, teach them a lesson. the Japanese way sounds pretty good..

  25. Absurd - Every Bit Of It. by blcamp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not a nutritionist, nor play one on TV, but I can make the argument that one can of Coke every day does *not* make a person overweight, while eating too much broccoli *will*.

    The point: this is not about nutrition or health, but rather, about the government finding *any excuse it can* to extract more and more money from the pockets of it's citizenry... while at the same time imposing more and more of it's will on them.

    A day will come... sooner than the busybody pointy-head academics, power hungry Congressional thugs, and greedy special-interest lobbyists think... when those of us peasants who continuously get ravaged by out of control lawmakers, have finally had enough... and we begin reaching for our pitchforks.

    --
    The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
    1. Re:Absurd - Every Bit Of It. by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I'm not a nutritionist, nor play one on TV, but I can make the argument that one can of Coke every day does *not* make a person overweight, while eating too much broccoli *will*."

      and yet you don't.
      Go on, make your case, I can't wait to see it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Absurd - Every Bit Of It. by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't kid yourself. Which scenario is more likely?

      1. Many people stop smoking. The reduction in healthcare costs caused by fewer people smoking balances out the reduction in tobacco tax revenues.
      2. Many people stop smoking. As a result, the government has to find a different way to pull in tax dollars because of the reduction in tobacco tax revenues.

      So, is the tax really about health?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  26. Re:How about a Crap Tax? by edraven · · Score: 2, Funny

    In practice, it would penalize those who don't sneak out in the middle of the night and crap on their neighbors' lawns.

  27. No need for tax by aaandre · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just stop subsidizing corn and corn syrup, and establish something like the FDA, but functioning.

  28. I bet a lot of us are/were pretty damn fat. by KefabiMe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Growing up, and trying to deal with my diet, I realized at some point that all these drive-throughs kill people. You can't live off of McDonalds. If you ate Burger King for every meal you would die. Yet this food is marketed more, cheaper than, and more convenient than going to the grocery store. Going to the grocery store to pick up some fruit takes longer and costs more than stopping by Del Taco. Something is wrong here.

    (To you people who can't live without your fast food, I just say this as someone who struggled with obesity, you diet is a huge part of your health. It's not easy. Going to drive throughs too often KILLS YOU.)

    I've thought about this and similar subjects a lot (such as smoking cigarettes) and I think society has the following options.

    1. Let fat people (or smokers or whatever) just have a worse quality of life than everyone else. Bad habits will most likely be passed on down to their children. Here we blame the fat kid with fat parents for being fat. Hopefully the fat kid learns some will power when he grows up, because he sure won't learn it from his parents.
    2. Ban cigarettes and food not passing "nutritional requirements" completely. This is the fascist option. This removes the requirement for thought from the population.
    3. We take steps to encourage citizens to be healthier. I prefer ongoing education over generations in the hope that eating fatty fast food becomes a rarity in culture. If options 1 and 2 are the extreme responses to an unhealthy population, this option is the middle ground. We already sin tax cigarettes. Heart Disease is America's top killer right now, and it is natural for the government to try to think of ways to combat that.

    Re: Fat Tax. It doesn't sit well with me. However, I admit that this tax will affect some people who might get something from the grocery store instead of ordering Pizza. It will make fat food cost more than healthy food. (I almost like this tax for this reason alone.)

    After thinking about it, I realized I wasn't so against a fat tax as I thought I was. But damn, if you're gonna make a fat tax then lower some other goddamn taxes! Make my fucking carrots and apples and oranges tax free! (Oh god... who gets to decide what food is "healthy" and what food is "unhealthy"?)

  29. Have you noticed? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Kids don't play outside anymore. When I was a kid, my friends and I would go ride our bikes, go build a tree fort, play hide and seek, or play a million and one other games we made up on the spot. Sometimes we fell down, sometimes we got hurt, and once in a while we even learned something.

    These days everyone is so worried. "Won't somebody think of the children!"
    The Children are growing up with out learning that when you fall sometimes you get hurt.
    Here is a connection these so called experts never seem to figure out. Kids that go out side to play, get exercise, and (Imagine this.) they don't get fat.

    I weep for the future!

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    1. Re:Have you noticed? by srussia · · Score: 3, Funny

      Kids don't play outside anymore. When I was a kid, my friends and I would go ride our bikes, go build a tree fort, play hide and seek, or play a million and one other games we made up on the spot. Sometimes we fell down, sometimes we got hurt, and once in a while we even learned something.

      When I was a kid, me and my friends would work on the family farm or in a coal mine. Sometimes we fell down, sometimes we got hurt, and once in a while we even learned something.

      Now get off my lawn!

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
  30. Tax marijuana instead by Xelios · · Score: 4, Funny

    1) Legalize marijuana
    2) Regulate and tax it
    3) PROFIT!!!

    There's not even a ??? step to worry about with this one.

    --
    Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
  31. Don't know by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I travel by public transport and pass by Utrecht Central Station. It has various eateries, from healthy to McD/Burger King. Price for a McD basic hamburger, 1euro. Price of a natural bagle with cream chease. 2,95. Both satisfy my hunger, but what about my thirst? 1 euro for a soft drink, 3 euro for a fruit shake. If I am buy a meal it is 2 bagles and 1 fruit juice , nearly 10 euro's or 2 hamburder and a soda for 3 euro.

    I am making a decent salary but also got expenses.

    Now imagine a tax which made the hamburger cost 3 euro and lowered the sales tax on healthy foor dropping its price to 2,50. A LOT easier to remain healthy.

    Doubt it will work this way, but still, if you got to tax something, then tax something I want to cut down on buying anyway.

    So go for it I say. It means the end of the month won't see me stuffing myself with more fat then is good for me.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  32. What happened... by BlowHole666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What happened to free will and free choice? If sitting on your ass watching TV, drinking cokes makes you fat who cares. Why should the government have the right to tell someone they need to not do/consume certain things via a tax.

    Someone could argue that fat people cost more in medical expenses and because of this they cause the cost of medical procedures to rise. This may be true. However, if someone is over weight they have a higher chance of death via heart attack, or diabetes. Healthy people end up living longer, and costing more money. So what is the problem with someone being fat? In the long run they cost less.

    On the other hand could fit people also cause medical expenses to rise? Running is bad for your knees you could twist a knee or ankle in basketball or baseball. You could get a concussion in football or loose tooth in hockey.

    So being both health or fat increase the cost of insurance and medical expenses on a whole, so why just target fat people? Is this just a political/social vendetta against over weight people?

    --
    I smoked pot once. But I DID NOT inhale. Will you hire me?
  33. Bit late for that now by jimicus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Have you ever even visited the US? Many areas are so thoroughly designed with the car in mind that attempting to walk, cycle or use public transport is downright impossible.

  34. When Fat is Outlawed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When fat is outlawed, only Outlaws will be fat.

    1. Re:When Fat is Outlawed... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well on the plus side at least they'll be easy to recognize...

      And catch...

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  35. Sedentary Jobs? by jbezorg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What about other sedentary activities like lawmakers who sit around thinking up this crap?

    On a more serious note, what about sedentary jobs? What about stress? If you apply the same logic to all activities then people would have to pay to be air traffic controllers.

    --
    I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
  36. While I agree HFCS is over used by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are out of your gourd if you think corn has no nutritional value. It was the staple grain in the diet of many Native American tribes for centuries. That doesn't mean we should turn it in to a sugar substitute and put it in everything, but trying to pretend that it isn't an important grain is silly.

  37. I exercise 6 times a week and play video games by Piata · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I ran a half marathon last year and I hope to run a full marathon this year. There is almost no fat on my body. I go to the gym and then come home and relax by playing video gams.

    If I lived in NY, I'd be pissed. Playing video games and exercise are not mutually exclusive. Maybe if these kids had parents that didn't sit around watching TV every night while eating their take out dinner there wouldn't be a problem?

  38. First the came for the smokers by bussdriver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First they went after alcohol. I didn't notice because it was before my time.

    Then they went after the smokers with taxes. I said "good they shouldn't smoke anyhow."

    Now they are going after fat people. I said "wait a second, I'm not fat..."

  39. Well why stop there? by Strych9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why not fat tax recliners and comfy couches along with any channel that shows the NFL all day on Sunday (and Beer too)?

    I'm sure that will help the slightly older generation also get out there and be fit.

  40. Oh look, another New York Tax! Lets just be honest by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lets just be honest... New York needs money. This is the 5th or 6th ridiculous new New York Tax featured on slashdot in the past year and a half. None of this has to do with anything they claim it does.

    This is about poor management within NY state. Our government is out of f'n control here. We're litterally leading the state BLIND... and fucking hookers with state paychecks.

    Tax soda, junk food, plastic bags, AMAZON.com.... etc... These are the brilliant ideas of our elected morons.

    Lots of people pass through those toll booths every day. Supposedly they rake in 18+million a week on them... Where does all of that go? Oh wait... to BUILD 2 COMPLETELY NEW BASEBALL STADIUMS for 2 of the richest teams in baseball!

    What the fuck are we doing? The Yankees should have paid for their stadium on their on. The Mets should pay for their own stadium. Let me ask you this.... Since all of our tax dollars went to building these 2 USELESS stadiums to replace 2 functioning (and 1 of which historic) stadiums... I can now assume that i can go to the games any time i want for free right? Nope. Not only did they take our tax dollars to build these redundant stadiums, they have the nerve to charge us ridiculous fees to get in. Talk about a fucking con job.

    THAT is our political system at its "best"

    So pay for your soda tax.... pay your GTA4 tax... :) Lets really talk about WHERE THE FUCKING MONEY GOES.... and who sells us out on a daily fucking basis. ... and I'm for National Health care folks :)