
But, it's another one of those gray areas--much like the debate about socialism vs. capitalism. How far do you take it? At what point in trying to act in people's best interests do you begin to deprive them of freedoms which are their birthright? Now we come full circle, back to the argument that it is unfortunately NOT people's birthright to eat themselves to death, myself included. We're like bad little toddlers that have to be disciplined, nutritionally. There's not nearly enough nutritional education in this country's schools, and we put McDonald's in school cafeterias and wonder why kids are fat. Portion sizes across the board are out of control as well. When going to your average restaurant, you can almost always guarantee cutting your serving size in half and taking it home. But if you're anything like me, you'll forget the other half is in the fridge and find it covered with something interesting but definitely not edible weeks later in the back of the fridge. What a waste! There are people starving all over the world, and Americans have to make mental notes while at restaurants to halve their serving sizes so they can fit in their jeans. What an astronomical and almost unfathomable difference. Makes you think.
I don't think a fat tax is very practical - there are several things wrong with Pigouvian taxes in general. They are hard to calculate because it is impossible to determine the exact amount of externality caused, in this case by obesity, and they affect different people in different ways! Here is an article about why a fat tax wouldn't work:http://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/Global-Economics/Fat-Tax/sl35291137bp387cpp10pn1.html
ReplyDelete