Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-02-2015, 10:06 AM
 
45,226 posts, read 26,443,162 times
Reputation: 24980

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P View Post
So no measures should be in place to preserve the long term production of food. OK, sounds good.

If a subsidy is truly a subsidy, it will lower the price of that product and increase quantity.
Let the marketplace and farmers decide the "long term production of food". Do you think a handful of disconnected "experts", politicians and bureaucrats can determine the necessary agricultural needs to feed 320,000,000 people?
Read up on the results Maos famine when China collectivized farming.

End all subsidies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2015, 11:23 AM
 
36,529 posts, read 30,863,516 times
Reputation: 32796
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Not really. Are you disputing that we can't get an idea of how much we spend on obesity related diseases?

Are you disputing an obese person has a higher risk of heart disease and diabetes than a non- obese person?

Of course any healthy, thin person can get any disease or have any number of accidents, but what is the cost? Again, we spend $100-200 billion dollars on preventable healthcare.
Ok, but how is obesity the direct product of meat consumption? Having steaks, a pot roast or baked chicken is the root of the evil?

Or perhaps its processed animal products fried in a vat of grease topped with processed cheese like substance with a side of potatoes fried in a vat a grease on a big ol' bun slathered in butter washed down with a liter of soda while we sit pecking on our devices or watching TV.
Or all the sodium and sugars added in the processing of our processed food we snatch at the drive thru window on our 2 hour commute to work. Or that extra greasy cheese pizza we pick up on the way to driving little Suzzie to her play date where they sit around inside playing video games because Lord forbid they go outside and play, they might get fall down and get hurt or kidnapped or shot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 02:50 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,118,333 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Yes, really.
Nope.

Quote:
We can but we can't assume these costs all go away if no one was fat.
Lol. What is so confusing about differentiating the costs of heart disease related to obesity verses a non obese person with disease?

Heart disease wouldn't completely go away if no one was fat but can you at least see how heart disease wold be dramatically reduced?

Quote:
I have no idea what proportion but a proportion of which we would spend anyway. All the same, this argument is nothing more than a distraction. Taxing food is immoral.
Because you are arguing over spilt milk and I'm arguing over the entire diary industry. I'm not sure if you're being intentionally dense or you just aren't getting it.

Obesity is immoral.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 02:54 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,118,333 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Ok, but how is obesity the direct product of meat consumption? Having steaks, a pot roast or baked chicken is the root of the evil?
Root of evil? No you're jumping into a discussion about unhealthy foods and obesity.

The thread is about the environmental impact of meat production, which is pretty high.

Quote:
Or perhaps its processed animal products fried in a vat of grease topped with processed cheese like substance with a side of potatoes fried in a vat a grease on a big ol' bun slathered in butter washed down with a liter of soda while we sit pecking on our devices or watching TV.
Or all the sodium and sugars added in the processing of our processed food we snatch at the drive thru window on our 2 hour commute to work. Or that extra greasy cheese pizza we pick up on the way to driving little Suzzie to her play date where they sit around inside playing video games because Lord forbid they go outside and play, they might get fall down and get hurt or kidnapped or shot.
Seems harder to mandate physical activity over a population so I'd rather just charge a little extra for unhealthy food. This would help with preventing obesity to some degree and making people more financially responsible for their health.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 03:46 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Obesity is immoral.
I've addressed that more than once.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 03:49 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,118,333 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
I've addressed that more than once.
And you are wrong more than once. Maybe this issue effects you so you aren't open to seeing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 04:12 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
And you are wrong more than once. Maybe this issue effects you so you aren't open to seeing it.
A tax on food would affect me....along with everyone....it would also be immoral.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 04:24 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,118,333 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
A tax on food would affect me....along with everyone....it would also be immoral.
Good, it is meant to affect everyone. Those who eat more unhealthy will be affected the most.

We already tax prepared food, why not just tax salty, sugary, and fatty foods instead?

Obesity is immoral and is a seven deadly sin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 04:27 PM
 
45,226 posts, read 26,443,162 times
Reputation: 24980
Paleo folks will be suprised to hear the diet that has improved their quality of life, is unhealthy and they must be penalized financially for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2015, 04:27 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Good, it is meant to affect everyone. Those who eat more unhealthy will be affected the most.

We already tax prepared food, why not just tax salty, sugary, and fatty foods instead?

Obesity is immoral and is a seven deadly sin.
Murder is immoral also......maybe a little prison for you is the answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top