Mother Nature Network recently wrote a piece about how the newly implemented junk food tax has affected consumer’s overall calorie intake. Maastricht University in the Netherlands performed a study on 200 U.S. college students which concluded that “students generally ‘bought' fewer lunchtime calories when sugary, high-fat fare came with a tax of 25 percent or more.” The gist being that the higher tax on processed foods led students to choose “healthier” lower calorie options. However, if calorie information is given, the tax becomes an irrelevant factor and calorie count becomes the only decision maker.
This brings up an interesting point. Does the junk food tax really do what it intends? Which is, in theory, to force consumers to pick healthier options because of the higher cost of “junk food”?
Some think that the junk food tax is a very effective way to combat obesity because at its core, the obesity problem is a matter of income disparity, not lack of nutritional information. People buy junk food because they can’t afford anything else, and health food subsidies still remain less effective than taxing these products.
“The junk food taxes caused a real shift in nutritional quality because the money saved on junk food was spent on healthy food, which has more nutrients per calories. However, when the researchers subsidized healthy food in their test, many participants spent the savings on -- wait for it -- junk food.”—Tom Laskawy (click here to see full article)
Those in opposition to the Junk Food Tax think it is the consumer’s right to choose which products they buy. Taxing items like junk food or soda is a smack in the face for low-income populations already suffering in this recession.
“Munford’s proposal would impose an additional 5% tax on top of the current sales tax for items that would be defined as “junk food.” As bad ideas go, this is one of the worst. It would impose higher taxes on the citizens of Nevada who are already suffering the ravages of the recession and it’s another in the seemingly never-ending attempts by government to control what people do.”—Mike Chamberlain, Nevada News and Views
When you weigh the pros and cons, the issue becomes a bit more complicated. What's your verdict? Is it right to limit the consumer's choice? Or is nationwide obesity a more important issue?
Here's a quick, cheap, and tasty Indian chickpea stew in support of eating well AND affordably:
Photos by Flickr user mynameisharsha and JenTheMeister
