In New Jersey there are some lawmakers that are suggesting a tax on fast food. I really dig this quote from a Jersey resident:
“I think this country has gone too much in the direction of fast and
unhealthy food, and if people are taxed they may terminate that and turn toward
more healthy foods.”
That’s true. I absolutely agree, Americans are going in this direction, but do we really think that it is the government’s job to manipulate the market through taxation to make sure we eat our vegetables?
This law is ludacris. I’m not particularly fond of most fast foods, but I’m not going to prevent other rational beings from eating it.
What do you guys think of this?
Legislating morality through a compulsory tax.. sounds solid to me! The only thing we need left is universal medicinal services to provide to all Americans. Once established, if one chooses to partake in so-called “unhealthy” habits, the penalty would be much more than a tax.. it could mean a denial of all health services.
America! Hell yea!
Hey man, that sounds great!
I think that this tax is fine. It is a perfectly acceptable way to influence behavior. When we needed a good, large-scale transportation industry to fuel the economy, we gave incentives to railroad companies. When we wanted individuals to give more, we gave them tax incentives to donate money and goods.
For people who support recycling because the trash won’t go away naturally. They claim that it is too cheap to throw away trash because it doesn’t deal with the permanent externalities of having to store that trash. To these people, I suggest that raising taxes on trash storage would be the most effective way to promote recycling or at least less waste.
Incentivising and disincentivising behaviors is the only acceptable way to influence public behavior. I support sin taxes, I support
“Incentivising and disincentivising behaviors is the only acceptable way to influence public behavior.”
But is it the government’s position to legislate morality in the first place? Should this not be left to parents and friends? “Sin” taxes create a moral quandary for state governments: They are put in the position of condemning certain behaviors of their choosing while also expecting people to continue those behaviors because the state needs tax money. California is considering taxing ammunition because it causes gun injuries. Is this right? When will it stop? Lawmakers are only responsible for protecting public life and liberty.. but giving them the position and ability to regulate personal choices is wrong… Would you pull the cheeseburger out of a fat persons hand simply because its bad for him? No. So why essentially support someone else to do it to him on your behalf?
There are harmful externalities associated with items that are not intrinsically included in the cost. For example, people that are drunk are more often involved in crime, their inhibitions are impaired. While I don’t think it should be made illegal on this basis, it seems that having an alcohol tax to address this harmful consequence to society is completely acceptable.
With more and more money going to health care (which of course we are against), it makes sense to tax unhealthy behaviors. For the same reason, it causes public money to be used so more money should come from unhealthy products. While I don’t agree with health related taxes (since an individual’s body is private property not public), I can understand the argument for it. I do agree that government does have a responsibility to incentivise behaviors that are in public interest.