6 ms·
Isn't that the desired outcome? Ideally it seems like coke and pepsi would be extremely expensive and a rare treat. Meanwhile the non-sugary beverages would be
by ctrl-j 7y ago
Isn't that the desired outcome? Ideally it seems like coke and pepsi would be extremely expensive and a rare treat. Meanwhile the non-sugary beverages would be the ones most people drink.
- timthorn 7y agoDesired by whom, and for whose benefit? Drinks I used to like no longer exist, but have just been substituted by coke so there is zero reduction in sugar consumption, but my quality of life has been reduced.
- jdietrich 7y agoThe drinks are all still available, but have been reformulated to avoid the sugar tax. Fanta, Sprite, Dr Pepper, Irn Bru - they're all still on the shelves, but they have little or no sugar. Aside from a brief outcry about the reformulation of Irn Bru, nobody really noticed or cared. The sugary drinks tax follows on from a highly successful salt reduction programme. https://publichealthengland.exposure.co/salt-reduction-programme https://publichealthengland.exposure.co/salt-reduction-progr...
- ctrl-j 7y ago> Desired by whom, and for whose benefit? Desired by the lawmakers who passed the tax. And for the benefit of the larger group. A public health crisis is taking place - and if the sugar tax lowers the amount of resources spent on treating the widespread occurrence of diabetes, it will be a net benefit for society. Yes, at the cost of your personal freedom to have readily available sugary drinks.
- homonculus1 7y ago>Isn't that the desired outcome? Not for me, and the way you've framed this is creepy. I don't have diabetes and I very much do not desire to have some of my favorite drinks eliminated by a nanny state trying to solve someone else's self-inflicted health issues. The top-down, metric-based, technocratic ideology doesn't even take my freedom of choice or personal stake in the matter as input.
- wincy 7y agoOnce medicine for all becomes a thing, technocrats believe it is their right and duty to tell you what to eat and drink.
- ctrl-j 7y agoWhen you have a public health crisis, extreme measures need to be taken. We can't drive on the wrong side of the street. We can't sell tainted food. We can't lie in order to drum up sales. Society has restrictions on freedom.
- homonculus1 7y agoAIDS is a public health crisis. Are we to limit homosexual intercourse too? If a can of soda invites government meddling into people's lifestyles then literally nothing is safe. There will always be some aggregate cost that can justify intrusion until every private decision is optimized and regulated according to some central rubric.
- notJim 7y agoThe thing is, it's not some pure freedom of choice to consume soda. Soda is massively subsidized by government policy, and marketed aggressively by corporations that make huge profits because of its addictive properties, which they carefully enhance. They spend part of those profits on lobbying to ensure that there are no countervailing forces in society, and that the subsidies remain in place. And the negative externalities of it on our health and on the environment are born by society as a whole. If anything, forces that counter-act their marketing and lobbying enhance your freedom by making it so that you are making a more-informed choice if you consume their product.