3 ms·
> In practice, it's a failure every time. The study literally came to the opposite conclusion: > Three types of taxation on sugary drinks lower healthcare cos
by Cenk 6y ago
> In practice, it's a failure every time.
The study literally came to the opposite conclusion:
> Three types of taxation on sugary drinks lower healthcare costs, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes, but some – such as taxing sugar content – perform even better than taxing based on the volume of the beverage.
- jfengel 6y agoBut the study itself is a model, so it's theory rather than practice. I had hoped that the article would be about real world results, but it's really about comparing different results theoretically. Which is also helpful, but not nearly so helpful as data. Actually gathering data is hard. The effects of sugar in the diet take decades to show up, and there are millions of variables and compounding factors. So it's not really a surprise that the article is theoretical rather than practical, but it is disappointing that the headline doesn't make that more prominent. The real-world experiments will be policy, and those policies will have to be driven by these models ahead of there being experimental results. So we have to do it. But we won't know how good they were for a long time.