• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seasoning Tax: Will marking up sugar and salt make us healthier?

Do you think there should be a tax on salt and sugar?


  • Total voters
    36
If you want to cut down on obesity its simple. Get rid of Hollywood (I wouldn't mind if the rest of California went with it :mrgreen: ). IE bye bye TV. There is nothing useful on it that cannot be shown via newspaper or told via radio.


Note: This was a semi attempt at a joke while being serious to a degree also for those that don't get it.
 
If you want to cut down on obesity its simple. Get rid of Hollywood (I wouldn't mind if the rest of California went with it ). IE bye bye TV. There is nothing useful on it that cannot be shown via newspaper or told via radio.


Note: This was a semi attempt at a joke while being serious to a degree also for those that don't get it.

You could also require that all televisions be removed from the electrical grid and have to be powered by bicycle generators while the audience watches. ;)
 
So.... you figure Congress can do ANYTHING that isn't specifically forbidden in the Constitution?

..... :mrgreen: .....

Oh boy I could have tons of fun with that one.

The Constitution doesn't specifically forbid gov from doing a lot of things that I (or anyone with any sense) wouldn't want it doing.

But that is not how it works. "All powers not reserved to the Congress, nor denied the States, belong to the People, or the States".

The fedgov's powers are supposed to be quite limited. If we went with your idea that anything goes if it isn't specifically forbidden, that could go down some mighty dark pathways.
Of course it could go down dark pathways if the population let it. However, thus far, the population has not let it and education is one of my main political concerns specifically because I want the population to be equipped to prevent our country from going down such roads.

"All powers not reserved to the Congress, nor denied the States, belong to the People, or the States".
And Congress has the power to tax. :shrug:
 
While that does make sense, there's something I can't agree on so readily.

I think there are convenient ways to buy alternatives to junk food in poorer communities. Wal-Mart carries cheap vegetables like carrots, celeray, and cauliflower, as well as apples, oatmeal, rice, etc. There's also canned sardines that, while salty, are relatively cheap; methinks they'd be affected, though, which would suck since I love eating them. Then again a 10% tax increase on a roughly $1 item isn't much.

There are many yards in poorer communities. If I could have it my way people would come to the realization that lawn = potential garden plot. Grow asparagus, lettuce, brussels, tomatoes, etc! There are seed packs in Wal-Mart this very second that cost only .20¢. For $1 you can buy 5 'Danver's Half-Long Carrots' and sow all of them. They can be over-wintered for convenient access. They freeze well. They're healthy, filling, nutritious.

It doesn't take much to buy 7 $3.50 packs of 2-year-old Mary Washington asparagus crowns at x8 per pack from Menard's in Spring, planting them to rake in a massive feast next year.

View attachment 67127087

One Mary Washington crown gives about half a pound of food. 64 crowns is 32 pounds. The plants have around a 20-year lifespan and they're very vigorous and resistant to diseases.
Fair enough although I think big cities would have to make a bigger effort to provide grocery stores and healthy eating establishments in addition to healthy eating education.
 
Do you even use ground beef then?

Seriously, outside of hte occasional 93% lean ground beef the 90/10 stuff is usually the lowest fat content I find. Typically you're seeing 85/15, 80/20, etc.
I didn't realize that was the now standard/low. :( It's been many years since I've actually seen the bulk packages - but if anything that emphasizes the point. Thanks for the update!
 
Last edited:
Do you even use ground beef then?

Seriously, outside of hte occasional 93% lean ground beef the 90/10 stuff is usually the lowest fat content I find. Typically you're seeing 85/15, 80/20, etc.

Must be where you live, maybe? Or just where you grocery shop? Sometimes I cook hamburgers and I have no problem finding 97% or 93% - it's expensive as hell, though: $5.00 / lb . . . cheaper for me to just make my own! LOL meanwhile: ground turkey is still less than $2.00 / lb.
 
Must be where you live, maybe? Or just where you grocery shop? Sometimes I cook hamburgers and I have no problem finding 97% or 93% - it's expensive as hell, though: $5.00 / lb . . . cheaper for me to just make my own! LOL meanwhile: ground turkey is still less than $2.00 / lb.
Here, locally, it is common to find 73/27, 80/20, 85/15, 90/10, and 93/7. The major chain (Hy-Vee) carries all of them all the time. 97/3 is less common, but you can find it at a few places.

Ground turkey here is somewhere around the 90/10 ground beef in price/lb., still expensive.

If I'm cooking hamburgers, or something where the meat is going to be a 'stand alone' aspect of the meal, I want 80/20 or 85/15. They come out with a much better flavor, IMO. Other dishes, i.e. casseroles, chili, etc., I like the 90/10 or 93/7.
 
Back
Top Bottom