"Tax sugar to combat obesity" The latest revenue raising scam, this time from Chief Medical Officer for England.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/tax-addictive-sugar-to-combat-growing-levels-of-obesity-says-chief-medical-officer-9169310.html
Dame Sally Davies told the Health Select Committee she believes that “research will find sugar is addictive”.
It is always the case that when some substance or other is identified as harmful, or is alleged to be harmful (or it becomes popular to be described as harmful for a couple of weeks), some "expert" or organisation or government "spokesperson" trots out the same cliched solution."Put a huge tax on it".
If these people are really serious, and really want to protect the rest of us from cigarettes, alcohol, fizzy drinks, or a thousand and one other things including, this week sugar, they should completely ban the manufacture, distribution and sale of the particular product or commodity.
An impractical solution? Perhaps, but please do not insult our intelligence with the feeble reasoning that the imposition of a higher level of tax is "for our own good" rather than just another means of making money for the producers and creating another lucrative source of revenue for the exchequer.
Tax ‘addictive’ sugar to combat growing levels of obesity, says chief medical officer
| "just a spoonful" |
It is always the case that when some substance or other is identified as harmful, or is alleged to be harmful (or it becomes popular to be described as harmful for a couple of weeks), some "expert" or organisation or government "spokesperson" trots out the same cliched solution."Put a huge tax on it".
If these people are really serious, and really want to protect the rest of us from cigarettes, alcohol, fizzy drinks, or a thousand and one other things including, this week sugar, they should completely ban the manufacture, distribution and sale of the particular product or commodity.
An impractical solution? Perhaps, but please do not insult our intelligence with the feeble reasoning that the imposition of a higher level of tax is "for our own good" rather than just another means of making money for the producers and creating another lucrative source of revenue for the exchequer.
Comments
Post a Comment