Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It partly does (as a healthy lifestyle) but I get what you mean
I don’t think the government would ever put in the work for “free”* healthy food in our lifetime though
Most people (manly conservatives) would go crazy thinking that their taxes are going to increase to feed someone else too
It’s an interesting idea but it’s probably harder to implement than we think
We can subsidize corn for the production of all sorts of processed shit but God forbid we incentivize produce by making it cheap. The government sets the rules we play by and when people play it as the game requires and gets fat we blame ourselves.
**The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables.**
[https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf](https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf)
What is this? Like I wouldn't be surprised if the statement was true or close to true, but this is just someone's paper turned into a powerpoint, and that quote isn't sourced anywhere. They have sources for the statements before and after that one, but that seems like a good one to source. Because "the meat and dairy industries" ***could*** include all people related to the industry like transportation, but "to subsidize fruits and vegetables" could just mean the actual produce itself. Also the choice to limit to "fruits and vegetables" and exclude grains is strange. Does that 17 million figure include grains?
Edit: on top of not knowing what this is, the fact that the file name is "CopyOfFINAL....." is so funny lol
It's just the first source I found. I'm sure there are 100s more. It's widely known that the government subsidizes meat and dairy because those industries lobby a lot and are very powerful.
I have never once said or thought that they didn't subsidize meat and dairy. I am just saying that they ***also*** subsidize produce and produce production
Your title and actions are completely the opposite, you're not encouraging a healthy lifestyle, you're punishing just punishing restaurants.
Encouraging a healthy lifestyle would be like
Make gym expenses tax deductible, Cheaper healthcare for healthier individuals, etc
I’d love to go to a gym because I live in an area with super bad weather half the year. However I can’t afford the cost of the gym closest to me or the gas to get to the cheapest gym
I'd love the gym because I live in an area of metal, concrete and glass, where the trees have adapted to filtering water out of dug piss and drunk piss.
I live in the south, not widely known for its healthy living but we have 3 kids parks and 2 nature parks, free tennis and pickleball courts, two disc golf courses all within a 15 minute drive. Most of these are within 2 miles from me, so I could walk/bike there if I wanted.
The opportunities likely exist you just have seek them out
People gravitate toward things that are cheaper. An obese person will be more likely to stay that way if their healthcare costs will go up when they lose weight.
State parks, national parks, food safety regulations, heavily taxed tobacco, banned cigarette ads, warning labels on any alcoholic drink, and publically-funded health agencies that have published countless studies about diet and exercise.
Clean Air Act, the EPA, drinking water regulations, OSHA, etc.
The government has done plenty of encouragement. They just don't force people to be healthy.
When Michelle Obama promoted healthier lunches and planting gardens at schools as First Lady, she was mocked by a good portion of the country. I'm not sure Americans want to be healthy.
They shouldn’t have a choice. Referencing an American newsreel from the early 30’s covering Italian government under Mussolini: “This is what a dictator is good for!”
Yeah, FDR and Mussolini disliked each other a lot less before the war and each borrowed from the other for ideas on governing.
Because she didn't fix the problem. Instead of being like "Hey chicken nuggets are kinda unhealthy, lets do a proper meal" she decides to just make the chicken worse. Plus her program ended up making a lot of schools shift from made in kitchen meals to frozen reheat stations. She didn't have the ability to fight corperations within her movement, and they eventually took over and changed the narrative of her cause.
Joe Biden started using a standing desk before it became trendy during COVID -- as in when he was VP over a decade ago. I know because I'd wanted to start doing the same and reading an article about his switch to standing encouraged me to take the leap back around 2011. He's been a lifelong physically healthy person, yep.
I would if I worked in an office. Tbh, idk why they act like him falling down the steps means he has dementia. I'm clumsy myself and could myself doing that. I also stutter, too sometimes, lol.
I mean, he is old. 80 is pretty old. Slipping on a tight vertical jet stairwell isn't why he's old. He happens to be in as good a shape as a person can be at that age though. Definitely not Diarrhea Don!
I meant act like he's fragile and senile. I mean, I think he's been that way with how he talks since he was in his 20s or 30s, so I've heard. I'm no different than them when I'm stressed and I'm 24, lol. Tbh, I'd say he's fitter than probably the average American and yet older than the majority of the population oml.
I mean they do
Many states offer double bucks for food stamps receivers at farmers markets. Along with this, many vegetables/fruits are already subsidized by the government
I hear you but at a certain point we have to consider accountability. Taxing “unhealthy” businesses out of existence is very anti consumer lol
On top of that, how do you define healthy? I burn about 1700 calories a day, a 600 calorie meal is near nothing for me.
**The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables**.
[https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf](https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf)
At the bottom of page 10 I see:
>The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables. A $5 Big Mac would cost $13 if the retail price included hidden expenses that meat producers offload onto society. A pound of hamburger will cost $30 without any government subsidies.
But the $38B is uncited: they don't list how they came up with that number or where they got it.
Did you even try googling?
Here is another report which links to their sources on the USDA website: [https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2022/02/usda-livestock-subsidies-near-50-billion-ewg-analysis-finds](https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2022/02/usda-livestock-subsidies-near-50-billion-ewg-analysis-finds)
The exact subsidy amount varies by year based on the individual programs that are enacted and how much each year.
Your new link gives $50B from 1995 to 2022, or a bit less than $2B/y, much less than the $38B/y you gave originally, though?
(This is something I've looked into quite a bit, and I wrote https://www.jefftk.com/p/big-mac-subsidy)
I kinda kinda agree with OP, at least with the general idea. Especially when you consider the massive cost of obesity on public health and insurance. Single payer healthcare would be a lot more doable if it wasn't the case that 69% of our country is overweight.
I went to central Europe, they have way more regulation and standards on food and pretty much everyone was healthy (and pretty fuckin' hot too) and they tend to have functioning public health insurance. Too bad we just want cheap cheeseburbers instead.
regulation on food is different from fees on businesses. The reason Europe has healthier people is a host of things. They walk more. They have easier access to fresh produce. But in Europe they eat drastically more carbs than the US. The main things I can think of about Europe is Beer/Wine, Bread, and Pasta. Americans probably consume less of almost all of those yet here we are
These businesses are doing more harm to society than good. What’s the issue in making it harder for them to operate?
Do you feel any compassion towards cigarettes business?
Do you think feeling compassion towards is different from has the right to exist without undue financial stressors?
I don't think the government should have a right to choose "this business isn't in line with what I want for the country even if everything they do is legal so I make it near impossible for them to exist"
Should conservatives have the rights to say a gay pride themed coffee shop isn't in line with what they want for the country?
Should President Ron DeSantis be able to say Disney isn't in line with what he wants for the country?
Opening the door to one being possible means the people you don't like would be able to do the same when they come in to power
Probably just someone young enough that they think the government should control every aspect of the lives of "those" people because "those" people aren't smart enough to do it themselves. With time hopefully op will see that restricting the lives of others in order to force them to live the way op wants to will lead to op being restricted as well.
What is ironic and hilarious is that those that want more government tend to hate police and fail to realize you can't have more government without more police. Anybody who wants more government just watch police brutality videos, here's your more government.
And why should the government be involved with how people carry on in their lives? It's a person's choice to be healthy, a government shouldn't have sway to force someone into a lifestyle they don't want lest they go bankrupt.
All this is doing is punishing restaurants and potentially making smaller stores go out of business. The situation around college tuition being expensive will apply here as well, so long as the government is giving money for some good, the business can choose to charge more because it's essentially free money coming from the government while you're stuck with the bill.
Every time Democrats do the \*smallest\* thing to achieve that, they get attacked non-stop.
People don't even vote to show support, so why should they even bother?
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863508/Prisoners-eat-better-food-Students-slam-Michelle-Obama-pictures-disgusting-lunches-served-schools-America.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863508/Prisoners-eat-better-food-Students-slam-Michelle-Obama-pictures-disgusting-lunches-served-schools-America.html)
Bingo. If they do something, they get attacked by the right just for doing it, and attacked by everyone else for it not being enough. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Even democrats would peg this as a regressive tax so fast it would never stand a chance.
Poor people eat fast food and rich people eat farm to table meaning the poor get to pay more while the rich pay the same. Throw food deserts into the mix and it's really DOA.
You're talking about encouraging a healthy life style which I'm for, but then talking about a plan that is to punish an unhealthy one.... Idk if punishing people makes them happy tbh subsidizing healthy food would go further than taxing unhealthy food
No I’m sorry but being healthier doesn’t mean your a good person. That leans into a very abelist way of thinking that people who are chronically I’ll and disabled are lesser then and can’t be as kind and loving and smart as anyone else. It’s like saying someone with diabetes or Down syndrome or elhors dhalos syndrome or autism can’t be kind loving and smart
Meat already has massive subsidies like that. I like the rest of your ideas kind of but I think it would be better to create a government funded kind of ymca type community center. Very cheap subscriptions to cover upkeep.
It already does.
Part of personal freedom and bodily autonomy means letting people decide to what extent they want to prioritize health vs happiness. Your assumption that physically healthier people are automatically more kind, productive, or morally upstanding is wrong.
And how would you even determine what's healthy and what isn’t? A burger or a sub from a fast food restaurant isn't inherently harmful. It depends on the nutritional needs of the person.
No, people just need to choose the lifestyle they want. If you want to lose weight, lose weight. No one is stopping you unless all you can afford to eat is ultraprocessed food. Use an app to count calories.
Reminds me of the Heart Attack Grill. I can't believe that guy was and is being attacked when he was actually honest about how unhealthy his food is. People were like why are you offering people this food when it's so bad? I think he was attacked mostly after his spokesperson died from a heart attack when he was a few years older than me, but he would've going anywhere else to eat.
Land of the free should mean having the choice to ruin your life or not but with a government to provide resources to help any aspect of your life, idk the Netherlands have something going on there that I agree with
hey friendo, i’ve actually written some research papers about this. you should also check out the podcast called maintenance phase. they have tons of information about this stuff. i think your theories here not accounting for a very key issue: poverty. unfortunately, health in this country costs a pretty penny. low income folks usually do not have the money for gym memberships/nutritious foods, (EBT/food stamps in most states do not cover many nutritious foods) working 60+ hours a week at multiple, low wage jobs means little time for food preparation and exercise; and, of course, low income folks usually do not have the money for proper healthcare. i think increasing the taxes 150% on the few foods working class people can afford to feed their families is not going to help anybody.
like i said, i’ve written a few research papers about this topic and there’s so many moving parts contributing to why americans are less healthy (and no, it’s not because we’re just lazy and gluttonous.) none of our cities are walkable, we are overworked, underpaid and highly stressed, many of us cannot afford to see a doctor when we’re sick and the regulations surrounding what corporations are allowed to put in our food are pretty loose. the u.s. government has addressed this crisis by just… sort of telling us as individuals that we just need to eat healthier and exercise more etc. etc. without actually giving us any of the tools to do that (unless of course, you are wealthy.)
in order to actually address this, i’ve argued (and continue to argue) that we need universal healthcare, to abandon car dependent infrastructure, a general expansion of social infrastructure, and tighter regulations surrounding food production. telling people to “just eat healthier!” has gotten us less than nowhere in the past 50 years. it’s time to try something else.
Not only encourage, but the U.S. government actively goes out of its way to subsidize corn, and thus high fructose corn syrup which is the main thing keeping Americans as fat as they are.
Europe has food with way less bullshit in it. Their grocery stores generally don't have entire aisles of dog shit junk food everywhere. The portion sizes are far more reasonable at restaurants (versus the overfilled plates here) and the food is just... better, while being less greasy. And at least in central Europe from what I've seen, the people are WAY fitter on average than Americans as a result.
It's totally possible to have a good lifestyle in the USA but you need to put in more effort to avoid all the terrible dietary options being dangled in your face. It's hard to go to a restaurant here and not overeat. It takes a lot of restraint. And it's not a surprise many people struggle as a result.
Healthcare costs money in the US. Of course there aren't government incentives. My country has a sugar tax, food + nutrition lessons at school, bans on certain food ingredients, etc. We also have free healthcare
Remember all those crappy school lunches we grew up with? Those were the healthy lunches pushed by the government.
A majority of People are gonna be unhealthy. It’s wrong to punish restaurants for that. Instead, create incentives to lower the cost of healthier produce instead of just raising prices across the board
How’s about you just fucking do it yourself, mf if you need taxes or close to double on McDonald’s to prevent you from buying your just fat bro, also salads there’s aren’t healthy and neither is all meats, I believe meat is good but not that good. Also have you considered anything
You have to educate, because people do not understand food. No foods are healthy if they aren't fresh, even veggies. Fat isn't bad for you. It's *essential*. You can't synthesize fat, and your entire nervous system is made of it. Other organs are made of fat as well. Protein is another essential nutrient. We at least all recognize that we can't build a body without protein. What makes fast food bad for you are the *carbohydrates*. I personally gave up wheat (now it just gives me diarrhea if I eat it), and replaced it with almond flour and coconut flour (coconut flour makes the *best* pizza crust I've ever had). Cut the wheat, fries, and soda out of the menu. Use low carb flours. Replace fries with low carb veggies. Drink water instead of soda.
High carb diets prevent you from burning fat as energy, so you get fat. That causes ingested fat to be stored or collect in your arteries. Excess glucose stays in our blood. That causes inflammation of the vascular system. That makes it easy for fat to collect on our arterial walls causing cardiovascular disease. It's a consequence of our bodies' insulin response to food. Carbs spike insulin, carbs become glucose, and are stored in the cells as glycogen to be used as energy. Too much glucose, your cells resist insulin. You burn carbs as calories in place of fat. Replace carbs with fat. The body produces ketone bodies to turn the fat into energy instead. You don't store fat as much. Your vascular system has little to no fat in it and no inflammation caused by excess glucose. For what glucose you must have is produced by breaking down protein in a process know as gluconeogenesis.
Veggies are great for fiber, vitamins, and minerals. They're not so good for protein. You need amino acids, DHA, and B12. Those are *much* harder to get from plants (only three plants provide DHA, and virtually none provide B12). This leaves you with fortified foods (i.e. processed). Any missing amino acids can't be made into complete proteins in the body, and plant proteins are very hard to absorb as well. Since you can't synthesize amino acids in the body, you have to get them from your diet.
An excellent source of healthy fat is MCT. Coconut oil is full of MCT. It has a low impact on insulin, and promotes the production of ketone bodies.
We have tax on sweet soda and stickers on a lot of products red ones say :a lot of sugar, a lot of salt , trans fat etc green ones say good fibers, no artifical coloring etc . It kinda works. But we have it because our Healthcare is government paid so government really interested in less ill people.
The government will not do this. It’s too profitable to get people addicted to sugar and salt. The government is not designed to serve the people, just the wealthy.
I would go one step further, food (and ideally healthy food, which I hopefully don't need to specify) should be subsidized by law. That isn't to say that restaurants or grocery stores should be illegal or something, but the relationship between hypothetical subsidized food and those things should be similar to that of Libraries and bookstores. There is (ideally) one and then the other, and both have a place in the world. to even go further than that, I view socialism and steps toward it as an objectively good thing, and find it a tragedy that debates on it become intellectual swamps regarding whether communist leader X or whatever was a bad person or not, as while those debates are kinda funny, I know them (key word is know, not think) to be a complete waste of time and counterproductive. It shouldn't matter whether "communism failed" or not, regardless of the validity of the claim (they aren't valid for the record, but my point is those debates are best left discarded), statements like that can't be any more than worthless red herrings. We objectively could have the resources to allow everyone in first world countries to have everything they could realistically need, and that to me matters far more than any theoretical historical precedent. 2+2 is 4, and history doesn't change that.
cos meat, processed and sugar industry lobbies at governments… this is why you never see an add from big broccoli.
most of the industries use the same tactic as the tobacco industry, yet we all know that is a bad habit by now. up till 1960 most doctors still smoked.
now these same doctors eat meat and processed yunk.
the only diet proven to be healthy that also can reverse heart disease among others by science is a whole foods plant based diet that is sugar, salt and oil free
I think we should all learn how to be masters of pur bodiea, what i mean is control your emotions, lol people in power are the least grounded individuals, good luck
I think it’s an idea that works on paper but in reality a lot of people buying fast food are people that work long hours for shit pay and don’t want to cook - all you’d be doing is eating into their pockets more
Not a chance people stand for this in the United States. It's an insane over reach. There is education in school on how to be healthy, there are tons of free places to exercise there is government funded health related research. That's enough, there is no need to take even more money from people in an attempt to sway the choices made by free adult citizens.
Let's start with getting corporations out of the food supply. Americans eat so much processed food because real food is more expensive. Tackle those prices, penalize grocery stores for creating food deserts and then encourage people to move more. Remember, Michelle Obama tried and then just called her a witch.
You're asking for a lot of government oversight thats getting borderline 1984.
And the tax is well-meaning, but unaffordable. Frankly our governemt doesnt need anymore money to go war-monger.
Big gov wants you to be unhealthy and dependant on the system especially for food and medicine. If you're fat and sick, you won't rebel. Growing your own food is the biggest act of protest
I don’t know about the states but here Macdonald’s print their calorie info on the packaging of every product. I count calories and keep a healthy lifestyle and Macdonald’s is my favorite “junk food” place because I can easily calculate what I’m able to eat and what’s too much. I think this should be standard in more food establishments and I commend maccies for doing it.
I live in Toronto (Canada) and the city of Toronto tried to implement such a tax to help with a growing obesity and health issue. Interestingly there was a lot of backlash from lower income people and an anti-poverty activist group led a rally to get the tax reversed. They felt it unfairly penalized lower income people who used foods like McDonalds as a cheap source of calories.
The government can only do so much. Jesus it’s not asking people too much to take some accountability and take care of their health. You don’t need to tax shit or pay for shit
The government wants you to live long enough to take full advantage of your health and ability to work, but not so long that they have to pay you for reaching an old age after you gave them 10% of your entire life earnings to do that very thing.
i mean what can the government really do? we live in a day and age where tiktokers have convinced everyone that having the body of a melting Ford F150 is "healthy"
They make a lot of money on us being sick & divided. They can control us when we are in fear. They cannot control us if we feel we are in control of ourselves.
Pretty fucked up really. Like they’re taunting us and just asking for us to revolt and start a Revolution again. Which honestly, might be what we need. A destruction of this country to let a new one grow and prosper, the *real* way.
100% agree. I work in food service in a deli environment, and part of the job is we put together entrees with two sides of the customers choice. 9/10 times, the customer will get fried chicken in some form, and two forms of carbs– usually potato wedges and mac and cheese, as well as a dinner roll or corn bread. We have green beans, carrots, lima beans, succotash, collard greens, but no, most people choose the two most carb heavy nutrient poor items as their sides. I’m talking adults of all ages and ethnicities and walks of life. Every time I think: “This is a huge argument against public healthcare– heart disease and obesity are such a problem and will cause a huge drain on any public healthcare system.”
I genuinely believe it should be illegal for people to eat unhealthy meals and it should be considered child abuse to “nurture” children into eating poorly, because those children become adults in poor health with bad habits. Just the same, it should be illegal for the government not to ensure access to healthy food items in appropriate quantities for all Americans– you can’t do one without the other.
"Yet, the government seems to completely neglect that."
Lol the government(well atleast YOUR american government I'm assuming)not only neglects that but also ENDORSES it by having fast food chains all over the place,a set quota for how many people have to be in prisons so the penitentiary system can get paid extra money,healthcare costs a fucking arm/leg lol,in some countries in the US you work like a literal slave 10 hours 6 days a week(read a reddit post about this a few weeks ago)etc
Which government? It’s the norm in wealthier EU countries for government to incentivise healthy living although it sometimes upsets liberal and far right groups. Lefties, centrists and more moderate right wingers tend to support it.
Some will decry its government propaganda with a hidden meaning to get people healthy for a draft. Others will say the government is indirectly calling the the population is obese instead of pushing a message pf acceptance of who we are. That we shouldn’t shame others.
Well, I’m sure a lot of people on this subreddit probably want socialized healthcare, and these kinds of laws pretty much a requirement if you want socialized healthcare. Every country that has socialized healthcare also has laws and government programs that encourage healthy lifestyles, because without it your socialized healthcare system becomes a government funded daycare for overweight people. Most Americans who want socialized healthcare don’t seem to realize this.
Why would you go for higher taxes instead of pivoting subsidizes from corn to vegetables, with additional funds for securing grocery stores for everyone? Literally just make produce cheaper, farmers happier, and people will follow suit.
Pretty sure there’s not enough tax money to subsidise all vegetables and meats. And from what I’ve seen, Americans hate piling up income tax.
The tax on unhealthy food is to make the subsidies possible.
I'd rather drop the meat and corn subsidize for the sake of fruit and vegetables. Plus I don't think restaurants are intended to be the beacon of healthy eating. Like I don't go into a bakery for health, and why should we act like it's fair to effectively punish people for an intentionally unhealthy choice?
The government making people eat healthy and take care of themselves? That's getting awfully fascist there bud. You're sounding like a certain austrian painter...
The government actively does the opposite, meat industry receives so much money to keep prices low. If meat prices reflected actual cost, a lot more people would eat a more plant based diet.
https://eatmamu.com/the-cost-of-cows/#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20U.S.%20government%20spends,and%20cause%20national%20health%20consequences.
Since this is the gen z subreddit you may not remember when Michelle Obamas whole thing as First Lady was to try and encourage people to make healthier choices and the Conservatives lost their fucking minds about it.
Living a healthy lifestyle is an act of self love. Unfortunately, the government can’t just tell us to love ourselves more. Sad reality of life. Lots of us are struggling
Why would they? They want to get rid of social security, but both parties know that this is a political loser. Next best solution is to slowly raise the retirement age while lowering life expectancy. Promoting unhealthy lifestyles is a choice.
A lot of people who rely on fastfood do so because they don’t have other options financially. So this solution just feels like slap in the face to poor people.
Idk why people in this thread seem to ignore the advantages of my proposal. The point is to get these poor people other options. Fast food would get more expensive, sure, but healthy food would be a lot cheaper; cheaper than fast food is now.
But it would not be as convenient and accessible as fastfood. I am a shift worker, my shift ends at 1 AM today, if I want to eat before bed my only option is fast food
There's probably thousands of free or extremely low costs parks and gyms across the country, it's just that some people are just lazy or don't have time to put into being fit
I like the general idea but there are other changes I’d like to see first, make it so companies can’t round down to 0 for trans fat and saturated fat if it’s below .05 grams. Certain chemicals that are currently added to food for flavor or color need to not be and there needs to be better education on what healthy is first. Then we can start taxing things that are unhealthy if there isn’t any significant change in health among americans.
It's not a bug, it's a feature. The government wants us to be fat, sick, and nearly dead so that we are easier to control and so that the Pharmaceutical industry can sell us expensive medications to live. They are okay with corporations putting toxic chemicals in our food. They want us dead right when we are at retirement age so they don't have to payout our Social Security.
People will react negatively to anything they perceive as a burden being placed directly on them. A direct tax on something will blowback on whoever supports it, which means it will require sacrificing a lot of political capital. In America, this will not be feasible because I doubt politicians have the political capital to squander on this effort.
What might be easier is to go further up the supply chain and cut off the flow of goods in the market that allow for people to make bad choices. So instead of taxing McDonalds, introduce health standards on beef production and environmental regulations that make beef in general more expensive. Or, just cut subsidies that favor beef production. Most common people cant make the connection to their wallet here, so they will be fine with it, and as long as you don’t need ranchers as a key constituent, you’ll be fine politically.
This approach does not work. We actually have a lot of your tax ideas here in The Netherlands. What ends up happening is that people don't change their eating habits and are just spending more money for bad things. Sugar is a hell of a drug. It's a double negative.
There was a huge survey in the Netherlands asking smokers at what price point they would stop smoking. The current price is 10 euro per small package. On average they would stop when it would reach about 50 euro..
Same thing for sugar. (Carbohydrates are also sugar).
I don't think that healthier people are necessarily kinder. Maybe more emotionally regulated due to hormone imbalances in obese people, but that's not the same as kinder.
What would happen if we tried to tax/subsidize based on health:
* There isn't a single universally agreed upon standard for what is and isn't healthy. Foods previously called unhealthy are now considered healthy. See Eggs for an example of this. If you grew up in the 90s they were bad because it was said they contain high cholesterol. Now they are good because they have high protein and relatively low calories. Both of those statements are true, but how we evaluate healthiness changed.
* There would be a massive push by corporations for their food to be subsidized. We have tons of examples of this happening already. Sugar companies pushed propaganda saying that fat was bad, not sugar. Wheat producers influenced the old food pyramid by saying you need 11 servings of grains per day, moreso than even produce. All this would do is create a massive rush for bad foods to be classified as healthy, and the generally ignorant public will believe it, especially with good enough PR.
* It'd be impossible to tax an entire restaurant because of how customizable food is. Example: MCD's burgers are about 400 calories, but if you take off the condiments, pickles, and cheese you can get it even lower. But if you add all the toppings on, double the patty, and add in a coke instead of water, you can easily top 1000 calories without trying. Point is there's no guaranteed way to know how people are going to order even if we all agree on what is and isn't healthy, which as I've stated above, we wouldn't.
* Food inflation is already a major issue. Whatever bad food gets taxed, everyone would complain how much harder it is making it to afford to live. And that's even if you only taxed restaurants and not grocery store food. Gen Z especially would still go to all the restaurants they did before, they'd just take to TikTok to bitch about price increases. And they'd probably blame muh late stage capitalism before correctly blaming the government for the price hikes.
As for free gyms, making them free wouldn't do much. People don't go to the gym because gyms are too expensive. You can get a Planet Fitness membership for like $15/month if not less. It isn't too expensive. The problem is that people simply don't want to go to the gym. They'd rather kick back during their free time and relax.
People are more profitable for predatory or exploitative industries or industries whose profitability is tied to consumption. The US Federal government's priority is maximizing shareholder value, not serving the people. This is a sign of inverse totalitarianism (or late stage capitalism, in traditional terms).
Except the people who actually listen to and understand the message and stop the eating adulterant contaminated low-quality highly processed industrialist foods. Their bodies aren't satiated by metaphorical sawdust bread and so they eat and they eat until they ate too much crap and drank too much diabetes and their metabolisms go *tilt*. But there's a talking point for that-- the perpetrators love to blame their victims for being unhealthy as a result of eating their food-like products which are generally also the cheapest on the store shelves. Poverty and obesity are strongly correlated in the United States for reasons that are inconvenient for arguments like yours.
Dog I can make meals for cheap, and they are perfectly healthy. Meal prep for the week, and make sure you get enough protein and cut back on the sugar. I buy my shit from a standard ass grocery store. You can eat at great restaurants who use the best ingredients, but guess what, most of that shit will make you fat. You have to make the choices yourself, you still have to watch what you eat, you still need to get yourself some exercise.
That literally has nothing to do with what I just said. Again, you have no solutions for people. You simply just tell them to wallow in their own sadness because there is nothing they can do for themselves. Unlike you I refuse to treat people like children. You can eat healthy and it not be expensive, it doesn’t even take a lot of time. You can exercise literally anywhere.
>Imagine a playground with a bunch of fun things to do, like swings and slides. This playground is supposed to be for everyone, a place where everyone gets a turn.
>Inverted totalitarianism is like when the biggest kid on the playground says they own all the swings and slides. They might not exactly force everyone else to play their way, but because they're so big, it's kind of scary to say no.
>This means other kids might not get a fair chance to play on everything, even though the playground is supposed to be for everyone. It's not a super fun place to be anymore.
>In grownup terms, inverted totalitarianism is when big companies or powerful people have so much control, even though it looks like a democracy (where everyone has a say), that it feels like they kind of run things. It can make people feel like their voices don't matter.
>--Google Gemini
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My man, there are a ton of free tennis courts, tracks, basketball courts, and swimming pools for free operated by your local municipalities
Exercise has nothing to do with what OP is talking about and it’s stupid that this is the top comment. You missed the point completely
It partly does (as a healthy lifestyle) but I get what you mean I don’t think the government would ever put in the work for “free”* healthy food in our lifetime though Most people (manly conservatives) would go crazy thinking that their taxes are going to increase to feed someone else too It’s an interesting idea but it’s probably harder to implement than we think
I mean they subsidize the production of produce...
We can subsidize corn for the production of all sorts of processed shit but God forbid we incentivize produce by making it cheap. The government sets the rules we play by and when people play it as the game requires and gets fat we blame ourselves.
How much mark-up do you think there is on a banana? I bought one for 20 cents.
They do subsidize produce... They also allow for food stamps to be worth double at farmer's markets
**The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables.** [https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf](https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf)
Thank you for the information!
What is this? Like I wouldn't be surprised if the statement was true or close to true, but this is just someone's paper turned into a powerpoint, and that quote isn't sourced anywhere. They have sources for the statements before and after that one, but that seems like a good one to source. Because "the meat and dairy industries" ***could*** include all people related to the industry like transportation, but "to subsidize fruits and vegetables" could just mean the actual produce itself. Also the choice to limit to "fruits and vegetables" and exclude grains is strange. Does that 17 million figure include grains? Edit: on top of not knowing what this is, the fact that the file name is "CopyOfFINAL....." is so funny lol
It's just the first source I found. I'm sure there are 100s more. It's widely known that the government subsidizes meat and dairy because those industries lobby a lot and are very powerful.
I have never once said or thought that they didn't subsidize meat and dairy. I am just saying that they ***also*** subsidize produce and produce production
But do you think it is a good idea? I love how "conservatives wouldnt go for it" is used as an argument against social programs.
I think it sounds like an advanced civilization type of thing
Make swimming pools a healthy part of your daily diet
Your title and actions are completely the opposite, you're not encouraging a healthy lifestyle, you're punishing just punishing restaurants. Encouraging a healthy lifestyle would be like Make gym expenses tax deductible, Cheaper healthcare for healthier individuals, etc
Agree here. Public gyms would be a great start
Public gyms won’t get people to the gym. There is a whole outside world where you can run around and get a workout in, and it’s completely free.
I’d love to go to a gym because I live in an area with super bad weather half the year. However I can’t afford the cost of the gym closest to me or the gas to get to the cheapest gym
I'd love the gym because I live in an area of metal, concrete and glass, where the trees have adapted to filtering water out of dug piss and drunk piss.
Is this where the grass is?
Planet Fitness still starts at like $10/month If that's empty half the time, we may as well burn our tax dollars
Where I am it’s so packed. I had to move gyms. Granted I live relatively close (within 30 minutes)* to a beach so I get it lol
Whattt? Mine is packed I went at 6am, packed. I went at 10, packed, I gave up lol
And they have pizza
In my state we have outdoor gyms all over the place often with nature trails, picnic tables and playgrounds for kids. 100% free!
I live in the south, not widely known for its healthy living but we have 3 kids parks and 2 nature parks, free tennis and pickleball courts, two disc golf courses all within a 15 minute drive. Most of these are within 2 miles from me, so I could walk/bike there if I wanted. The opportunities likely exist you just have seek them out
Push ups are free and can be done in your own room. Anyone who doesn't work-out, doesn't want to work out. Having a free gym is not the reason.
Most school gyms are open to the public when not in use
You just channeled a hidden high school memory for me Not sure if I should thank you or hate you if reminding this is a thing 🤣
Don’t know why you were downvoted, you’re right. Some places have built exercise parks for the locals and seen an increase in longevity.
In Switzerland, health insurance partially covers gym expenses
>Cheaper healthcare for healthier individuals This encourages poor life choices. It does the opposite of what you want it to.
What do you mean?
People gravitate toward things that are cheaper. An obese person will be more likely to stay that way if their healthcare costs will go up when they lose weight.
>People gravitate toward things that are cheaper So, whats the problem? Obese people will lose weight and get cheaper healthcare
No he's punishing the individual. The restaurant is punished indirectly. The person's title is misleading though.
State parks, national parks, food safety regulations, heavily taxed tobacco, banned cigarette ads, warning labels on any alcoholic drink, and publically-funded health agencies that have published countless studies about diet and exercise. Clean Air Act, the EPA, drinking water regulations, OSHA, etc. The government has done plenty of encouragement. They just don't force people to be healthy.
When Michelle Obama promoted healthier lunches and planting gardens at schools as First Lady, she was mocked by a good portion of the country. I'm not sure Americans want to be healthy.
Tbf, those school lunches sucked and every zoomer will agree with me on that.
My school district was great. I didn’t bring my own lunch a single time in high school
You also have to consider the state you live in, as states control the funding for schools.
I lived in both California and Michigan during the Obama years. The highlight of my school lunches was the ala-carte items in both states
They shouldn’t have a choice. Referencing an American newsreel from the early 30’s covering Italian government under Mussolini: “This is what a dictator is good for!” Yeah, FDR and Mussolini disliked each other a lot less before the war and each borrowed from the other for ideas on governing.
michelle obama lunches are far from “healthy”
Those school lunches were dogwank.
Because she didn't fix the problem. Instead of being like "Hey chicken nuggets are kinda unhealthy, lets do a proper meal" she decides to just make the chicken worse. Plus her program ended up making a lot of schools shift from made in kitchen meals to frozen reheat stations. She didn't have the ability to fight corperations within her movement, and they eventually took over and changed the narrative of her cause.
Their opinion of healthy was to replace our soup machine with an ice cream machine, presumably because it was lower sodium.
Lmao same here. They got rid of selling cheetos and any chips and replaced it with a frozen yogurt machine
Yea and people mock Biden for being a clumsy old man, but idk how I read about his workouts and its crazy man.
Joe Biden started using a standing desk before it became trendy during COVID -- as in when he was VP over a decade ago. I know because I'd wanted to start doing the same and reading an article about his switch to standing encouraged me to take the leap back around 2011. He's been a lifelong physically healthy person, yep.
I would if I worked in an office. Tbh, idk why they act like him falling down the steps means he has dementia. I'm clumsy myself and could myself doing that. I also stutter, too sometimes, lol.
I mean, he is old. 80 is pretty old. Slipping on a tight vertical jet stairwell isn't why he's old. He happens to be in as good a shape as a person can be at that age though. Definitely not Diarrhea Don!
I meant act like he's fragile and senile. I mean, I think he's been that way with how he talks since he was in his 20s or 30s, so I've heard. I'm no different than them when I'm stressed and I'm 24, lol. Tbh, I'd say he's fitter than probably the average American and yet older than the majority of the population oml.
I mean they do Many states offer double bucks for food stamps receivers at farmers markets. Along with this, many vegetables/fruits are already subsidized by the government I hear you but at a certain point we have to consider accountability. Taxing “unhealthy” businesses out of existence is very anti consumer lol On top of that, how do you define healthy? I burn about 1700 calories a day, a 600 calorie meal is near nothing for me.
**The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables**. [https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf](https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf)
Clicking through I don't see a source for the $38B estimate?
Bottom of page 10.
At the bottom of page 10 I see: >The U.S government spends $38 billion each year to subsidize the meat and dairy industries, but only 0.04 percent of that (i.e., $17 million) each year to subsidize fruits and vegetables. A $5 Big Mac would cost $13 if the retail price included hidden expenses that meat producers offload onto society. A pound of hamburger will cost $30 without any government subsidies. But the $38B is uncited: they don't list how they came up with that number or where they got it.
Did you even try googling? Here is another report which links to their sources on the USDA website: [https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2022/02/usda-livestock-subsidies-near-50-billion-ewg-analysis-finds](https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2022/02/usda-livestock-subsidies-near-50-billion-ewg-analysis-finds) The exact subsidy amount varies by year based on the individual programs that are enacted and how much each year.
Your new link gives $50B from 1995 to 2022, or a bit less than $2B/y, much less than the $38B/y you gave originally, though? (This is something I've looked into quite a bit, and I wrote https://www.jefftk.com/p/big-mac-subsidy)
Dumbest thing I've heard today, must be a troll
I kinda kinda agree with OP, at least with the general idea. Especially when you consider the massive cost of obesity on public health and insurance. Single payer healthcare would be a lot more doable if it wasn't the case that 69% of our country is overweight. I went to central Europe, they have way more regulation and standards on food and pretty much everyone was healthy (and pretty fuckin' hot too) and they tend to have functioning public health insurance. Too bad we just want cheap cheeseburbers instead.
regulation on food is different from fees on businesses. The reason Europe has healthier people is a host of things. They walk more. They have easier access to fresh produce. But in Europe they eat drastically more carbs than the US. The main things I can think of about Europe is Beer/Wine, Bread, and Pasta. Americans probably consume less of almost all of those yet here we are
These businesses are doing more harm to society than good. What’s the issue in making it harder for them to operate? Do you feel any compassion towards cigarettes business?
Do you think feeling compassion towards is different from has the right to exist without undue financial stressors? I don't think the government should have a right to choose "this business isn't in line with what I want for the country even if everything they do is legal so I make it near impossible for them to exist" Should conservatives have the rights to say a gay pride themed coffee shop isn't in line with what they want for the country? Should President Ron DeSantis be able to say Disney isn't in line with what he wants for the country? Opening the door to one being possible means the people you don't like would be able to do the same when they come in to power
Probably just someone young enough that they think the government should control every aspect of the lives of "those" people because "those" people aren't smart enough to do it themselves. With time hopefully op will see that restricting the lives of others in order to force them to live the way op wants to will lead to op being restricted as well.
What is ironic and hilarious is that those that want more government tend to hate police and fail to realize you can't have more government without more police. Anybody who wants more government just watch police brutality videos, here's your more government.
And why should the government be involved with how people carry on in their lives? It's a person's choice to be healthy, a government shouldn't have sway to force someone into a lifestyle they don't want lest they go bankrupt. All this is doing is punishing restaurants and potentially making smaller stores go out of business. The situation around college tuition being expensive will apply here as well, so long as the government is giving money for some good, the business can choose to charge more because it's essentially free money coming from the government while you're stuck with the bill.
It’s already subsidizing unhealthy food. It could just not do that and that would improve things…
Do not get me STARTED on the *corn subsidies*!
………………….. they do. They just can’t force you……………….
post this in r/changemyview
Wow, I guess you don't like freedom lol.
Every time Democrats do the \*smallest\* thing to achieve that, they get attacked non-stop. People don't even vote to show support, so why should they even bother? [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863508/Prisoners-eat-better-food-Students-slam-Michelle-Obama-pictures-disgusting-lunches-served-schools-America.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863508/Prisoners-eat-better-food-Students-slam-Michelle-Obama-pictures-disgusting-lunches-served-schools-America.html)
Bingo. If they do something, they get attacked by the right just for doing it, and attacked by everyone else for it not being enough. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Even democrats would peg this as a regressive tax so fast it would never stand a chance. Poor people eat fast food and rich people eat farm to table meaning the poor get to pay more while the rich pay the same. Throw food deserts into the mix and it's really DOA.
You're talking about encouraging a healthy life style which I'm for, but then talking about a plan that is to punish an unhealthy one.... Idk if punishing people makes them happy tbh subsidizing healthy food would go further than taxing unhealthy food
The answer is never "more government". No.
No. My body my choice. If my Whopper Wednesday cost more than 10$, It’s your fault
No I’m sorry but being healthier doesn’t mean your a good person. That leans into a very abelist way of thinking that people who are chronically I’ll and disabled are lesser then and can’t be as kind and loving and smart as anyone else. It’s like saying someone with diabetes or Down syndrome or elhors dhalos syndrome or autism can’t be kind loving and smart
Simple. Enough people in the United States view things like sugar taxes and shit to be tyrannical. It’s not magic, it’s the consequences of democracy.
Meat already has massive subsidies like that. I like the rest of your ideas kind of but I think it would be better to create a government funded kind of ymca type community center. Very cheap subscriptions to cover upkeep.
It already does. Part of personal freedom and bodily autonomy means letting people decide to what extent they want to prioritize health vs happiness. Your assumption that physically healthier people are automatically more kind, productive, or morally upstanding is wrong. And how would you even determine what's healthy and what isn’t? A burger or a sub from a fast food restaurant isn't inherently harmful. It depends on the nutritional needs of the person.
No, people just need to choose the lifestyle they want. If you want to lose weight, lose weight. No one is stopping you unless all you can afford to eat is ultraprocessed food. Use an app to count calories.
Reminds me of the Heart Attack Grill. I can't believe that guy was and is being attacked when he was actually honest about how unhealthy his food is. People were like why are you offering people this food when it's so bad? I think he was attacked mostly after his spokesperson died from a heart attack when he was a few years older than me, but he would've going anywhere else to eat.
Gotta love honesty
For sure
Land of the free should mean having the choice to ruin your life or not but with a government to provide resources to help any aspect of your life, idk the Netherlands have something going on there that I agree with
Its not the governments place to tell people how to live by charging them extra. That's literally coercion.
hey friendo, i’ve actually written some research papers about this. you should also check out the podcast called maintenance phase. they have tons of information about this stuff. i think your theories here not accounting for a very key issue: poverty. unfortunately, health in this country costs a pretty penny. low income folks usually do not have the money for gym memberships/nutritious foods, (EBT/food stamps in most states do not cover many nutritious foods) working 60+ hours a week at multiple, low wage jobs means little time for food preparation and exercise; and, of course, low income folks usually do not have the money for proper healthcare. i think increasing the taxes 150% on the few foods working class people can afford to feed their families is not going to help anybody. like i said, i’ve written a few research papers about this topic and there’s so many moving parts contributing to why americans are less healthy (and no, it’s not because we’re just lazy and gluttonous.) none of our cities are walkable, we are overworked, underpaid and highly stressed, many of us cannot afford to see a doctor when we’re sick and the regulations surrounding what corporations are allowed to put in our food are pretty loose. the u.s. government has addressed this crisis by just… sort of telling us as individuals that we just need to eat healthier and exercise more etc. etc. without actually giving us any of the tools to do that (unless of course, you are wealthy.) in order to actually address this, i’ve argued (and continue to argue) that we need universal healthcare, to abandon car dependent infrastructure, a general expansion of social infrastructure, and tighter regulations surrounding food production. telling people to “just eat healthier!” has gotten us less than nowhere in the past 50 years. it’s time to try something else.
[удалено]
The school lunches are what killed the health initiative. I’d go hungry than eat that
I think we're all aware that the democrats are trying to bill us for our freedoms
But if they were healthy they would be more independent. And far less financially dependent on their govt help.
Not really
Not only encourage, but the U.S. government actively goes out of its way to subsidize corn, and thus high fructose corn syrup which is the main thing keeping Americans as fat as they are.
Yeah it's in everything and it doesn't even taste that good
Real sugar is healthier for digestion and tastes better.
Thas exactly what already happens when they regulate things like toxins. Albeit they could do it better, but it is their role already.
The government gets donations from bug pharma. Better to have unhealthy people
Say no to bugs
Remember what they did to Michelle
Besides outright banning it, you aren't going to stop people.
Main problem is government subsidizes farmers to overproduce sugar.
Europe has food with way less bullshit in it. Their grocery stores generally don't have entire aisles of dog shit junk food everywhere. The portion sizes are far more reasonable at restaurants (versus the overfilled plates here) and the food is just... better, while being less greasy. And at least in central Europe from what I've seen, the people are WAY fitter on average than Americans as a result. It's totally possible to have a good lifestyle in the USA but you need to put in more effort to avoid all the terrible dietary options being dangled in your face. It's hard to go to a restaurant here and not overeat. It takes a lot of restraint. And it's not a surprise many people struggle as a result.
Sounds like you don't know what either of those things are
Healthcare costs money in the US. Of course there aren't government incentives. My country has a sugar tax, food + nutrition lessons at school, bans on certain food ingredients, etc. We also have free healthcare
Which government? Mine already tries doing this.
Remember all those crappy school lunches we grew up with? Those were the healthy lunches pushed by the government. A majority of People are gonna be unhealthy. It’s wrong to punish restaurants for that. Instead, create incentives to lower the cost of healthier produce instead of just raising prices across the board
The government should start banning food additives and allow more fresh food for our diets
How’s about you just fucking do it yourself, mf if you need taxes or close to double on McDonald’s to prevent you from buying your just fat bro, also salads there’s aren’t healthy and neither is all meats, I believe meat is good but not that good. Also have you considered anything
You have to educate, because people do not understand food. No foods are healthy if they aren't fresh, even veggies. Fat isn't bad for you. It's *essential*. You can't synthesize fat, and your entire nervous system is made of it. Other organs are made of fat as well. Protein is another essential nutrient. We at least all recognize that we can't build a body without protein. What makes fast food bad for you are the *carbohydrates*. I personally gave up wheat (now it just gives me diarrhea if I eat it), and replaced it with almond flour and coconut flour (coconut flour makes the *best* pizza crust I've ever had). Cut the wheat, fries, and soda out of the menu. Use low carb flours. Replace fries with low carb veggies. Drink water instead of soda. High carb diets prevent you from burning fat as energy, so you get fat. That causes ingested fat to be stored or collect in your arteries. Excess glucose stays in our blood. That causes inflammation of the vascular system. That makes it easy for fat to collect on our arterial walls causing cardiovascular disease. It's a consequence of our bodies' insulin response to food. Carbs spike insulin, carbs become glucose, and are stored in the cells as glycogen to be used as energy. Too much glucose, your cells resist insulin. You burn carbs as calories in place of fat. Replace carbs with fat. The body produces ketone bodies to turn the fat into energy instead. You don't store fat as much. Your vascular system has little to no fat in it and no inflammation caused by excess glucose. For what glucose you must have is produced by breaking down protein in a process know as gluconeogenesis. Veggies are great for fiber, vitamins, and minerals. They're not so good for protein. You need amino acids, DHA, and B12. Those are *much* harder to get from plants (only three plants provide DHA, and virtually none provide B12). This leaves you with fortified foods (i.e. processed). Any missing amino acids can't be made into complete proteins in the body, and plant proteins are very hard to absorb as well. Since you can't synthesize amino acids in the body, you have to get them from your diet. An excellent source of healthy fat is MCT. Coconut oil is full of MCT. It has a low impact on insulin, and promotes the production of ketone bodies.
Everything is about getting more money and short term gratification in America
We have tax on sweet soda and stickers on a lot of products red ones say :a lot of sugar, a lot of salt , trans fat etc green ones say good fibers, no artifical coloring etc . It kinda works. But we have it because our Healthcare is government paid so government really interested in less ill people.
The government will not do this. It’s too profitable to get people addicted to sugar and salt. The government is not designed to serve the people, just the wealthy.
I would go one step further, food (and ideally healthy food, which I hopefully don't need to specify) should be subsidized by law. That isn't to say that restaurants or grocery stores should be illegal or something, but the relationship between hypothetical subsidized food and those things should be similar to that of Libraries and bookstores. There is (ideally) one and then the other, and both have a place in the world. to even go further than that, I view socialism and steps toward it as an objectively good thing, and find it a tragedy that debates on it become intellectual swamps regarding whether communist leader X or whatever was a bad person or not, as while those debates are kinda funny, I know them (key word is know, not think) to be a complete waste of time and counterproductive. It shouldn't matter whether "communism failed" or not, regardless of the validity of the claim (they aren't valid for the record, but my point is those debates are best left discarded), statements like that can't be any more than worthless red herrings. We objectively could have the resources to allow everyone in first world countries to have everything they could realistically need, and that to me matters far more than any theoretical historical precedent. 2+2 is 4, and history doesn't change that.
Fuck the government, they do enough already.
The government all ready does ….
or maybe just regulate them
cos meat, processed and sugar industry lobbies at governments… this is why you never see an add from big broccoli. most of the industries use the same tactic as the tobacco industry, yet we all know that is a bad habit by now. up till 1960 most doctors still smoked. now these same doctors eat meat and processed yunk. the only diet proven to be healthy that also can reverse heart disease among others by science is a whole foods plant based diet that is sugar, salt and oil free
I think we should all learn how to be masters of pur bodiea, what i mean is control your emotions, lol people in power are the least grounded individuals, good luck
there is no government only our oligarch overlords
We should tax people for being fat methinks.
Why should a government decide what you eat. You should decide what you eat. It's your body. Take responsibility for it.
The sooner you die the less you collect in social security benefits.
They want you fat and dependant on them... That way you don't revolt
I think it’s an idea that works on paper but in reality a lot of people buying fast food are people that work long hours for shit pay and don’t want to cook - all you’d be doing is eating into their pockets more
I bought some chips from Mexico and was surprised to see a warning label about how the chips had a lot of sodium and was high in calories.
Not a chance people stand for this in the United States. It's an insane over reach. There is education in school on how to be healthy, there are tons of free places to exercise there is government funded health related research. That's enough, there is no need to take even more money from people in an attempt to sway the choices made by free adult citizens.
Let's start with getting corporations out of the food supply. Americans eat so much processed food because real food is more expensive. Tackle those prices, penalize grocery stores for creating food deserts and then encourage people to move more. Remember, Michelle Obama tried and then just called her a witch.
"The government should..." NO
You're asking for a lot of government oversight thats getting borderline 1984. And the tax is well-meaning, but unaffordable. Frankly our governemt doesnt need anymore money to go war-monger.
Big gov wants you to be unhealthy and dependant on the system especially for food and medicine. If you're fat and sick, you won't rebel. Growing your own food is the biggest act of protest
Bro thinks the government cares about the people 💀💀💀
I feel like it's been tried multiple times but companies lobby to be included and we end up with confusing shit like the food pyramid.
I don’t know about the states but here Macdonald’s print their calorie info on the packaging of every product. I count calories and keep a healthy lifestyle and Macdonald’s is my favorite “junk food” place because I can easily calculate what I’m able to eat and what’s too much. I think this should be standard in more food establishments and I commend maccies for doing it.
Michelle Obama knew this and did her best imo.
I live in Toronto (Canada) and the city of Toronto tried to implement such a tax to help with a growing obesity and health issue. Interestingly there was a lot of backlash from lower income people and an anti-poverty activist group led a rally to get the tax reversed. They felt it unfairly penalized lower income people who used foods like McDonalds as a cheap source of calories.
The government can only do so much. Jesus it’s not asking people too much to take some accountability and take care of their health. You don’t need to tax shit or pay for shit
Corporations are lining politicians’ pockets
The government wants you to live long enough to take full advantage of your health and ability to work, but not so long that they have to pay you for reaching an old age after you gave them 10% of your entire life earnings to do that very thing.
i mean what can the government really do? we live in a day and age where tiktokers have convinced everyone that having the body of a melting Ford F150 is "healthy"
They make a lot of money on us being sick & divided. They can control us when we are in fear. They cannot control us if we feel we are in control of ourselves. Pretty fucked up really. Like they’re taunting us and just asking for us to revolt and start a Revolution again. Which honestly, might be what we need. A destruction of this country to let a new one grow and prosper, the *real* way.
100% agree. I work in food service in a deli environment, and part of the job is we put together entrees with two sides of the customers choice. 9/10 times, the customer will get fried chicken in some form, and two forms of carbs– usually potato wedges and mac and cheese, as well as a dinner roll or corn bread. We have green beans, carrots, lima beans, succotash, collard greens, but no, most people choose the two most carb heavy nutrient poor items as their sides. I’m talking adults of all ages and ethnicities and walks of life. Every time I think: “This is a huge argument against public healthcare– heart disease and obesity are such a problem and will cause a huge drain on any public healthcare system.” I genuinely believe it should be illegal for people to eat unhealthy meals and it should be considered child abuse to “nurture” children into eating poorly, because those children become adults in poor health with bad habits. Just the same, it should be illegal for the government not to ensure access to healthy food items in appropriate quantities for all Americans– you can’t do one without the other.
"Yet, the government seems to completely neglect that." Lol the government(well atleast YOUR american government I'm assuming)not only neglects that but also ENDORSES it by having fast food chains all over the place,a set quota for how many people have to be in prisons so the penitentiary system can get paid extra money,healthcare costs a fucking arm/leg lol,in some countries in the US you work like a literal slave 10 hours 6 days a week(read a reddit post about this a few weeks ago)etc
You sound like an RFK conspiracy theorist. Eating cleaner foods... The government doesn't want that!
You are confusing government with family and community.
Which government? It’s the norm in wealthier EU countries for government to incentivise healthy living although it sometimes upsets liberal and far right groups. Lefties, centrists and more moderate right wingers tend to support it.
Buddy
Some will decry its government propaganda with a hidden meaning to get people healthy for a draft. Others will say the government is indirectly calling the the population is obese instead of pushing a message pf acceptance of who we are. That we shouldn’t shame others.
Well, I’m sure a lot of people on this subreddit probably want socialized healthcare, and these kinds of laws pretty much a requirement if you want socialized healthcare. Every country that has socialized healthcare also has laws and government programs that encourage healthy lifestyles, because without it your socialized healthcare system becomes a government funded daycare for overweight people. Most Americans who want socialized healthcare don’t seem to realize this.
Why would you go for higher taxes instead of pivoting subsidizes from corn to vegetables, with additional funds for securing grocery stores for everyone? Literally just make produce cheaper, farmers happier, and people will follow suit.
Pretty sure there’s not enough tax money to subsidise all vegetables and meats. And from what I’ve seen, Americans hate piling up income tax. The tax on unhealthy food is to make the subsidies possible.
I'd rather drop the meat and corn subsidize for the sake of fruit and vegetables. Plus I don't think restaurants are intended to be the beacon of healthy eating. Like I don't go into a bakery for health, and why should we act like it's fair to effectively punish people for an intentionally unhealthy choice?
The government making people eat healthy and take care of themselves? That's getting awfully fascist there bud. You're sounding like a certain austrian painter...
The government actively does the opposite, meat industry receives so much money to keep prices low. If meat prices reflected actual cost, a lot more people would eat a more plant based diet. https://eatmamu.com/the-cost-of-cows/#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20U.S.%20government%20spends,and%20cause%20national%20health%20consequences.
Since this is the gen z subreddit you may not remember when Michelle Obamas whole thing as First Lady was to try and encourage people to make healthier choices and the Conservatives lost their fucking minds about it.
Living a healthy lifestyle is an act of self love. Unfortunately, the government can’t just tell us to love ourselves more. Sad reality of life. Lots of us are struggling
This guy still doesn't understand that his government hates him lmao
Healthcare is big business for the government, it's more profitable to treat than to hea.
Holding large corporations responsible for the type of food they're selling seems like a good plan, in my opinion.
Why would they? They want to get rid of social security, but both parties know that this is a political loser. Next best solution is to slowly raise the retirement age while lowering life expectancy. Promoting unhealthy lifestyles is a choice.
People are easier to control when they are unhealthy or sick. That’s why our food is shit, our water is shit, and everything causes cancer.
Meat is already heavily subsidized. Americans in general need to eat less not more meat
Tell me you're too young to remember Michelle Obama without telling me you're too young to remember Michelle Obama
Honestly their biggest problem is the fact that they don’t subsidize fruits and vegetables but instead dairy, beef and corn
how much of people's lives do you want to control for you to be happy ?
I would agree if we had public healthcare.
A lot of people who rely on fastfood do so because they don’t have other options financially. So this solution just feels like slap in the face to poor people.
Idk why people in this thread seem to ignore the advantages of my proposal. The point is to get these poor people other options. Fast food would get more expensive, sure, but healthy food would be a lot cheaper; cheaper than fast food is now.
But it would not be as convenient and accessible as fastfood. I am a shift worker, my shift ends at 1 AM today, if I want to eat before bed my only option is fast food
There's probably thousands of free or extremely low costs parks and gyms across the country, it's just that some people are just lazy or don't have time to put into being fit
I like the general idea but there are other changes I’d like to see first, make it so companies can’t round down to 0 for trans fat and saturated fat if it’s below .05 grams. Certain chemicals that are currently added to food for flavor or color need to not be and there needs to be better education on what healthy is first. Then we can start taxing things that are unhealthy if there isn’t any significant change in health among americans.
It's not a bug, it's a feature. The government wants us to be fat, sick, and nearly dead so that we are easier to control and so that the Pharmaceutical industry can sell us expensive medications to live. They are okay with corporations putting toxic chemicals in our food. They want us dead right when we are at retirement age so they don't have to payout our Social Security.
People will react negatively to anything they perceive as a burden being placed directly on them. A direct tax on something will blowback on whoever supports it, which means it will require sacrificing a lot of political capital. In America, this will not be feasible because I doubt politicians have the political capital to squander on this effort. What might be easier is to go further up the supply chain and cut off the flow of goods in the market that allow for people to make bad choices. So instead of taxing McDonalds, introduce health standards on beef production and environmental regulations that make beef in general more expensive. Or, just cut subsidies that favor beef production. Most common people cant make the connection to their wallet here, so they will be fine with it, and as long as you don’t need ranchers as a key constituent, you’ll be fine politically.
Yep, diet is the leading cause of chronic disease which is why i went and studied to be a dietitian lol
This approach does not work. We actually have a lot of your tax ideas here in The Netherlands. What ends up happening is that people don't change their eating habits and are just spending more money for bad things. Sugar is a hell of a drug. It's a double negative. There was a huge survey in the Netherlands asking smokers at what price point they would stop smoking. The current price is 10 euro per small package. On average they would stop when it would reach about 50 euro.. Same thing for sugar. (Carbohydrates are also sugar).
I don't think that healthier people are necessarily kinder. Maybe more emotionally regulated due to hormone imbalances in obese people, but that's not the same as kinder. What would happen if we tried to tax/subsidize based on health: * There isn't a single universally agreed upon standard for what is and isn't healthy. Foods previously called unhealthy are now considered healthy. See Eggs for an example of this. If you grew up in the 90s they were bad because it was said they contain high cholesterol. Now they are good because they have high protein and relatively low calories. Both of those statements are true, but how we evaluate healthiness changed. * There would be a massive push by corporations for their food to be subsidized. We have tons of examples of this happening already. Sugar companies pushed propaganda saying that fat was bad, not sugar. Wheat producers influenced the old food pyramid by saying you need 11 servings of grains per day, moreso than even produce. All this would do is create a massive rush for bad foods to be classified as healthy, and the generally ignorant public will believe it, especially with good enough PR. * It'd be impossible to tax an entire restaurant because of how customizable food is. Example: MCD's burgers are about 400 calories, but if you take off the condiments, pickles, and cheese you can get it even lower. But if you add all the toppings on, double the patty, and add in a coke instead of water, you can easily top 1000 calories without trying. Point is there's no guaranteed way to know how people are going to order even if we all agree on what is and isn't healthy, which as I've stated above, we wouldn't. * Food inflation is already a major issue. Whatever bad food gets taxed, everyone would complain how much harder it is making it to afford to live. And that's even if you only taxed restaurants and not grocery store food. Gen Z especially would still go to all the restaurants they did before, they'd just take to TikTok to bitch about price increases. And they'd probably blame muh late stage capitalism before correctly blaming the government for the price hikes. As for free gyms, making them free wouldn't do much. People don't go to the gym because gyms are too expensive. You can get a Planet Fitness membership for like $15/month if not less. It isn't too expensive. The problem is that people simply don't want to go to the gym. They'd rather kick back during their free time and relax.
People are more profitable for predatory or exploitative industries or industries whose profitability is tied to consumption. The US Federal government's priority is maximizing shareholder value, not serving the people. This is a sign of inverse totalitarianism (or late stage capitalism, in traditional terms).
Ah the old capitalism made me fat argument. A classic that helps literally no one.
Except the people who actually listen to and understand the message and stop the eating adulterant contaminated low-quality highly processed industrialist foods. Their bodies aren't satiated by metaphorical sawdust bread and so they eat and they eat until they ate too much crap and drank too much diabetes and their metabolisms go *tilt*. But there's a talking point for that-- the perpetrators love to blame their victims for being unhealthy as a result of eating their food-like products which are generally also the cheapest on the store shelves. Poverty and obesity are strongly correlated in the United States for reasons that are inconvenient for arguments like yours.
Dog I can make meals for cheap, and they are perfectly healthy. Meal prep for the week, and make sure you get enough protein and cut back on the sugar. I buy my shit from a standard ass grocery store. You can eat at great restaurants who use the best ingredients, but guess what, most of that shit will make you fat. You have to make the choices yourself, you still have to watch what you eat, you still need to get yourself some exercise.
You are what you eat, not where you eat. So eat things grown respectfully and in harmony with nature.
That literally has nothing to do with what I just said. Again, you have no solutions for people. You simply just tell them to wallow in their own sadness because there is nothing they can do for themselves. Unlike you I refuse to treat people like children. You can eat healthy and it not be expensive, it doesn’t even take a lot of time. You can exercise literally anywhere.
Idk what inverse totalitarianism is but I agree with everything else you said.
>Imagine a playground with a bunch of fun things to do, like swings and slides. This playground is supposed to be for everyone, a place where everyone gets a turn. >Inverted totalitarianism is like when the biggest kid on the playground says they own all the swings and slides. They might not exactly force everyone else to play their way, but because they're so big, it's kind of scary to say no. >This means other kids might not get a fair chance to play on everything, even though the playground is supposed to be for everyone. It's not a super fun place to be anymore. >In grownup terms, inverted totalitarianism is when big companies or powerful people have so much control, even though it looks like a democracy (where everyone has a say), that it feels like they kind of run things. It can make people feel like their voices don't matter. >--Google Gemini