And the next mad idea, right in here please.........
30 January 2013, 11:12 AM
#1
And the next mad idea, right in here please.........
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21228122
So the people asking for this think that you can tax something out of existence, then?
Like smoking, drinking and driving cars?
Not if you spend the taxes generated in the general pot, you can't.
And the kicker on this is that it "might" raise £2 billion a year, which "could" be spent on improving school meals.........aye, right, as our Scottish friends would say.
So the people asking for this think that you can tax something out of existence, then?
Like smoking, drinking and driving cars?
Not if you spend the taxes generated in the general pot, you can't.
And the kicker on this is that it "might" raise £2 billion a year, which "could" be spent on improving school meals.........aye, right, as our Scottish friends would say.
Last edited by alcazar; 30 January 2013 at 01:40 PM.
30 January 2013, 11:38 AM
#2
I don't actually have a problem with this provided the revenue raised is channeled into making healthier alternatives cheaper.
Like you say though, the chances of that happening are zero.
Like you say though, the chances of that happening are zero.
30 January 2013, 11:41 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all the fault of soft drinks 
Over the past 10 years, the consumption of soft drinks containing added sugar has fallen by 9% while the incidence of obesity has increased by 15%.
.
Yes, even better.. tax breaks for being a drinker rather than the other way round Trending Topics
31 January 2013, 04:08 PM
#12
To be fair, it's not the Government that are asking for this, though I'm guessing that they're kicking themselves for not coming up with this stupid idea themselves.
31 January 2013, 09:53 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick and tired of being punished for the irresponsible or just plain stupid behaviour of thick, mindless inbreds.
Tell me why I should pay a 'health' tax on fizzy drinks,alcohol, chocolate, KFC or anything else because these idiots can't help themselves?
Because Government will not punish them directly for fear of being accused of persecuting the less fortunate who have it so tough already.
People in general need to take more personal responsibility for where they find themselves in life.
If the State wasn't liable for the healthcare (and often upkeep) of all these useless barsterds then maybe said State would have more time to deal with more pressing issues, and natural selection would deal with this problem.
Tell me why I should pay a 'health' tax on fizzy drinks,alcohol, chocolate, KFC or anything else because these idiots can't help themselves?
Because Government will not punish them directly for fear of being accused of persecuting the less fortunate who have it so tough already.
People in general need to take more personal responsibility for where they find themselves in life.
If the State wasn't liable for the healthcare (and often upkeep) of all these useless barsterds then maybe said State would have more time to deal with more pressing issues, and natural selection would deal with this problem.
31 January 2013, 10:09 PM
#15
Ah....but there you have it.
After eleven years of the Lying Labour nanny state, NO-ONE seems able to take a decision or responsibility for anything.
Never seen anyone walk up to a PELICON crossing, press the button and wait for a green light.....and there's NOTHING coming?
After eleven years of the Lying Labour nanny state, NO-ONE seems able to take a decision or responsibility for anything.
Never seen anyone walk up to a PELICON crossing, press the button and wait for a green light.....and there's NOTHING coming?
02 February 2013, 01:44 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If children like to buy those drinks regardless of the fact that the sugar content is doing them serious harm, then surely if the sugar content is reduced it will go some way to protect them from themselves.
The manufacturers do not not appear to have the sense of responsibility to make sure that their products are completely safe. They doubtless act on the fact that the extra sugar means that the children will buy more drinks thus increasing their profits.
What do you suggest incidentally?
Les
The manufacturers do not not appear to have the sense of responsibility to make sure that their products are completely safe. They doubtless act on the fact that the extra sugar means that the children will buy more drinks thus increasing their profits.
What do you suggest incidentally?
Les
02 February 2013, 03:59 PM
#17
If children like to buy those drinks regardless of the fact that the sugar content is doing them serious harm, then surely if the sugar content is reduced it will go some way to protect them from themselves.
The manufacturers do not not appear to have the sense of responsibility to make sure that their products are completely safe. They doubtless act on the fact that the extra sugar means that the children will buy more drinks thus increasing their profits.
What do you suggest incidentally?
Les
The manufacturers do not not appear to have the sense of responsibility to make sure that their products are completely safe. They doubtless act on the fact that the extra sugar means that the children will buy more drinks thus increasing their profits.
What do you suggest incidentally?
Les
Sugary soft drinks is only a small part of the problem. I understand they want to encourage healthy eating but it doesn't help with the ever increasing cost of fresh produce such as fruit and veg whilst pre-packed ready meals etc are constantly on BOGOF offers. Tackle the issue at source, ie the food manufacturers and supermarkets, not with the already heavily burdened consumer. Also responsibility lies with the parents by ensuring their children have a proper balanced diet.
Last edited by jonc; 02 February 2013 at 04:02 PM.
03 February 2013, 06:16 PM
#21
No......of course not.
What IS worrying is the idea, imported from the USA, that you need to drink stuff in large3 or supersize
You only have to look at the stupid sized drinks Americans consume on their TV programmes, from Coffee to fizzy cola.
I knew of a local school that had a drinks machine, drinks were sold in 500ml, 750 ml and 1000ml.
Bear in mind that 500ml is just short of a pint.....
THEN they had problems with more kids than usual NEEDING the toilet in lessons, plus evidence that kids were consuming HUGE amounts of fizzy drink to fill their stomachs, to save money....
What IS worrying is the idea, imported from the USA, that you need to drink stuff in large3 or supersize
You only have to look at the stupid sized drinks Americans consume on their TV programmes, from Coffee to fizzy cola.
I knew of a local school that had a drinks machine, drinks were sold in 500ml, 750 ml and 1000ml.
Bear in mind that 500ml is just short of a pint.....
THEN they had problems with more kids than usual NEEDING the toilet in lessons, plus evidence that kids were consuming HUGE amounts of fizzy drink to fill their stomachs, to save money....
03 February 2013, 06:51 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Its just the Nanny state wanting to take control again,might as well start inserting mind controlling micro chips in kids heads at birth,because that's the way its going.
03 February 2013, 07:54 PM
#23
Perhaps if the populous,
Behaved themselves
Didnt Smash stuff up
Didnt beat each other up
Didnt impregate each other with impunity
Didnt avoid paying any tax
Didnt steal
Didnt eat too much
Died promptly at 80
Didnt get **** faced ever night
Didnt smoke ****
Paid bills instead of buying shiny things
Took responsibility for themselves
Didnt become Junkies
Paid attention at school
Worked hard and didnt throw sickies
Learn how to take driving responsibly
Didnt infect each other with various diseases
Then perhaps, we wouldnt be in such a mess and the "Nanny State" may not be neccessary, the goverment is a reflection on society and how well it performs, it can only function with what it has got, watching tv these days makes me think, in a lot of cases, it has been dealt a poor hand, a lot of it down to the previous incumbent trying to buy votes.
Behaved themselves
Didnt Smash stuff up
Didnt beat each other up
Didnt impregate each other with impunity
Didnt avoid paying any tax
Didnt steal
Didnt eat too much
Died promptly at 80
Didnt get **** faced ever night
Didnt smoke ****
Paid bills instead of buying shiny things
Took responsibility for themselves
Didnt become Junkies
Paid attention at school
Worked hard and didnt throw sickies
Learn how to take driving responsibly
Didnt infect each other with various diseases
Then perhaps, we wouldnt be in such a mess and the "Nanny State" may not be neccessary, the goverment is a reflection on society and how well it performs, it can only function with what it has got, watching tv these days makes me think, in a lot of cases, it has been dealt a poor hand, a lot of it down to the previous incumbent trying to buy votes.
04 February 2013, 03:13 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Children will buy the drinks because they like them, if there was less sugar content then they would be better protected from the adverse effects.
How would you stop your child from getting injurious drinks?... "FFS" as you so rudely put it!
Les
04 February 2013, 03:17 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue here is that rather than encourage manufacturers to reduce the sugar content of their products, the "do gooders" would rather put a 20p levy on said drinks. Why 20p I have no idea. The fact is sugary soft drinks has been around for generations and it's only now the so called think-tanks say it's becoming an issue.
Sugary soft drinks is only a small part of the problem. I understand they want to encourage healthy eating but it doesn't help with the ever increasing cost of fresh produce such as fruit and veg whilst pre-packed ready meals etc are constantly on BOGOF offers. Tackle the issue at source, ie the food manufacturers and supermarkets, not with the already heavily burdened consumer. Also responsibility lies with the parents by ensuring their children have a proper balanced diet.
Sugary soft drinks is only a small part of the problem. I understand they want to encourage healthy eating but it doesn't help with the ever increasing cost of fresh produce such as fruit and veg whilst pre-packed ready meals etc are constantly on BOGOF offers. Tackle the issue at source, ie the food manufacturers and supermarkets, not with the already heavily burdened consumer. Also responsibility lies with the parents by ensuring their children have a proper balanced diet.
Les
04 February 2013, 03:19 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps if the populous,
Behaved themselves
Didnt Smash stuff up
Didnt beat each other up
Didnt impregate each other with impunity
Didnt avoid paying any tax
Didnt steal
Didnt eat too much
Died promptly at 80
Didnt get **** faced ever night
Didnt smoke ****
Paid bills instead of buying shiny things
Took responsibility for themselves
Didnt become Junkies
Paid attention at school
Worked hard and didnt throw sickies
Learn how to take driving responsibly
Didnt infect each other with various diseases
Then perhaps, we wouldnt be in such a mess and the "Nanny State" may not be neccessary, the goverment is a reflection on society and how well it performs, it can only function with what it has got, watching tv these days makes me think, in a lot of cases, it has been dealt a poor hand, a lot of it down to the previous incumbent trying to buy votes.
Behaved themselves
Didnt Smash stuff up
Didnt beat each other up
Didnt impregate each other with impunity
Didnt avoid paying any tax
Didnt steal
Didnt eat too much
Died promptly at 80
Didnt get **** faced ever night
Didnt smoke ****
Paid bills instead of buying shiny things
Took responsibility for themselves
Didnt become Junkies
Paid attention at school
Worked hard and didnt throw sickies
Learn how to take driving responsibly
Didnt infect each other with various diseases
Then perhaps, we wouldnt be in such a mess and the "Nanny State" may not be neccessary, the goverment is a reflection on society and how well it performs, it can only function with what it has got, watching tv these days makes me think, in a lot of cases, it has been dealt a poor hand, a lot of it down to the previous incumbent trying to buy votes.
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM
MightyArsenal
Wheels, Tyres & Brakes
6
25 September 2015 08:31 PM