Wednesday, March 2

One argument for the "fat" tax on food is that it is cheaper for people to eat unhealthy junk than it is for them to eat well. So how much would it cost to reach the 2,000 calorie goal and follow the official USA's dietary guidlines? About five bucks a day. (more from me in the comments section)


  1. I will admit that I don't really agree with the dietary guidelines that the government has right now, so I can't endorse this eating plan unconditionally. However, as a poor gread student, I know from experience that there are many cheaper alternatives to fast food or junk food, which is the point of this article. So can we drop the idea of taxing everyone's food because of some people's bad behavior?

  2. Anonymous10:39 PM

    Perhaps I don't read the same journals as you john, but for all you harp on the "fat tax", I haven't seen anyone seriously discussing this as an option in the US. The Federal Government and the food industry are way to cozy for anything like this to get through committee, much less a full house/senate vote.

    The whole issue just seems like so much raw meat to throw at libertarians and watch them go nuts.

  3. Maybe the talk of fat ta has died, and that's good. But there was some talk of it, and notably, the lawyer involved in a lot of the tobacco suits has gotten behind the cause. The logic that says adults who start smoking packs of cigs with dire health warnings on them deserve legal compensation for their injuries isn't that far from saying people who eat fast fod and don't notice their expanding waistlines deserve some cash, too.