Throughout the past few years, we have slowly seen the goal to becoming healthier become a bigger and bigger impact on our lives. Diet sodas were introduced, junk food with no trans fat were selling in grocery stores, multi grain chips were brought out into vending machines, daily physical activity was mandatory for elementary schools, and countless commercials about healthy eating were played again and again on the television. I remember in my elementary school we had a vending machine filled with chips and all kinds of pop. One day, all the chips and pop were gone. In its place were apple juice, and orange juice (Minute Maid)... in the form of cans. I'm sure many of you readers have seen the Ice Scream commercial by the Concerned Children's Advertisers possibly a billion times on YTV. This commercial showcases four kids who sit on the grass while an ice cream truck drives by. They start to chase it and eventually run out of breath.

Even in popular fast food chains like McDonalds and Wendy's, we are starting to see more healthier choices on the menu. In 2003, McDonalds introduced three entree-sized salads into their menu. These salads include your choice of crispy or grilled chicken, two sides of vegetables and in 2005, a fruit and a walnut was added. This fulfills the 2.5 servings of fruit recommended for adults.

So back to the issue about taxing sugared drinks. Governor David Patterson proposed this issue for an 'obesity tax' which puts a 15% tax on soft drinks (not including diet drinks). This puts a $1 worth of Coke, to $1.15. By putting on extra tax for pop and other sugary drinks, Patterson is hoping many New Yorkers would slowly cease the habit of buying pop. Let's say I lived in New York just for the purpose of the article. As a junk food lover, I would not like seeing taxes being put on sugary drinks and chips. If this were to happen, I would of course eat less junk food, while saving money, and I would be contributing to the net gain of around $404 million a year, if not more. In theory, putting on the additional tax is a good idea. But in reality, it doesn't work. Some people who are 'addicted' to pop will find a way to access it for cheaper prices. This may lead to underground markets and more of 'bootleg' pop.

Some individuals have spoken out against the flaws of this potential tax. The American Beverage Association said, "It makes no sense to single out one food product as the cause for obesity." In a way, this statement is true. But I also think the Association said this was to defend their company. If the number of people who constantly buy pop were to decrease, the ABA would not make any money. In fact, they would be losing money. If worse comes to worse, they may even become bankrupt. But will putting on taxes will solve the problem? If it was a necessity to put on an additional tax, employees working for the ABA would lose their jobs. Much like the fact they cannot close down nicotine factories because thousands of people would lose their jobs.

To back up Governor David Patterson, the President of the United States, Barrack Obama agrees with this proposal. He states, "It's an idea we should be exploring. There's no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda. And every study that's been done about obesity shows that there is a high correlation between increased soda consumption and obesity as just about anything else." Again, if you think outside the box, Barrack Obama would want the best for the country. By putting on an extra tax on a can of pop, the number of people who buy pop will increase, which means there will be some extra money. With the extra money, the government can use it for health care and other necessities. On an online poll, 88% disagreed with President Obama that a tax should be put on sodas and other sugary drinks.

This kind of campaign does not necesairly scare me. Of course, I love chips and pop, and all kinds of junk food, but if the government decides to put on a tax, then it's decided. What's done is done. All I can do is buy less pop. First of all, it's healthier, and they government can use the extra money to cover up the cost of the health care system. (Again we pretend we're living in the United States). But in my opinion, it will be effective. People will buy less pop, more money will be saved, more money comes back to the citizens. But on the other hand, it will not make me become a 'healthier' person. Just because pop is taxed, there are also other factors that can result to being unhealthy. For example spending your day sleeping, eating, and sitting on the couch, getting no exercise. Oh! Might as well tell the governement, to pile up our bills with extra taxes because we don't get enough exercise.

I think that the growing obesity in our nation is not an epidemic of large proportions. Sure, eating unhealthily could result to weight gain, but have you noticed? As the years pass, people are getting fatter and fatter ... for the lack of using a better word. This is mainly because technology has improved quite drastically. We can do things more quicker than we did before. This results in laziness. Even Bob Harper, the trainer for the American reality show, The Biggest Loser, said each time a new season starts, they receive contestants who are bigger than before.

The video listed is somewhat over exaggerated. No person with some sense in their head would drink something that looks like pasta-gone-wrong-and-looks-like-molasses. The facts are indeed scary, but this makes it effective. It scares the viewer into thinking that we they should stop drinking so much unnecessary pop.

If this new additional tax follows through, there is a chance that pop and chips can be taxed here in Canada. If this happens, thousands of Canadians will slowly decrease their consumption of pop, including me. But this won't stop me (or other Canadians for that matter) from buying pop. Sure, we may consume less, but it is a lifestyle many Canadians (and Americans!). It is hard to just cut off an addiction, much like nicotine.

4 Comments:

haha, bootleg pop... i don't think that would happen, but it's a funny thought. i agree with what you said though, i don't think this taxing pop would actually work. Taxes on pop probably won't change anything.I don't think they should single out a single product and blame it for obesity.

By  Kyle Tran (CrocoKyle), at February 1, 2010 at 7:11 AM  

Honestly, if Supersize me didn't get me to stop eating McDonald's, I don't think anything can make me stop drinking pop. So, taxing pop, I don't think it's really a solution. Anyways, I hope I don't end up on The Biggest Loser. :) Although if I keep on at my diet, yeah... I'll be a TV star in no time!

By  Joan Padaloy, at February 10, 2010 at 9:05 PM  

I agree fully, Whatever happened to us kids drinking chocolate milk or having the milk program at school. And McDonald's isn't that bad for you but when you eat it constantly its hazardous.

By  BLUKERS, at February 18, 2010 at 11:23 AM  

What you say is true. I also don't think taxing pop will work. People would continue to buy it because it tastes good. I personally think taxing pop is not such a great idea. Why single out one product when there are so many others that are just as unhealthy? We should follow better diets instead of increasing the price on something and hoping no one buys it. There are many alternatives to pop such as water or orange juice. Pop dehydrates you anyways. I don’t think taxing pop will make a difference to numerous people. Some just love pop and they’ll continue buying it.

By  DI, at March 28, 2010 at 7:11 PM  

Post a Comment