Food seems not to be a problem in the Western World, but in many places it is. I think the government should tax food to raise the value importance on food (and maybe thin out some thrifty grocery buyers in the process). If we make food more expensive then people will try harder to waste less, and then either the world will be more effiecient (rather than using our energy and money to feed the bacterial hordes, we can use that for our own ends), or we will be more able to export our food to places that need it. anyone have any ideas?
Because someone has to spend their time and money growing the food, jerk. If nobody paid you for doing your job would you keep doing it, even though you'd have no money to support yourself?
Hmm, no, I think higher prices would lead to less relative production. People would eat less, therefore less food would be created (relatively). I don't think it would do anything more than seriously damage the economy. Besides, the government already taxes anything you can buy. Can you show compelling evidence that innefficiency in the creation and distribution of food warrent this type of taxation?
The problem with food is that we need to plant alot more then we actually eat. They now about how much food the US is going to eat next year, but not exactly how productive the crops are going to be. For this reason some farmers are paid 'not' to grow food because the food will just flood the market. Now, I don't see taxing food as having any benefit. Processed foods (which are usually the most unhealthy) are already taxed anyway. Taxing food that 'thrifty shoppers' buy will only force the cost of living to increase. Sure, we could waste less food... but a good portion of this wasted food is already taxed, and it doesn't seem to help. Taxed food always seems to have some tiype of 'supersize' sale attached to it where you get double the food for $0.25Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
"but a good portion of this wasted food is already taxed, and it doesn't seem to help. " I doubt the taxation is significant. Food is not taxed on the premise that food is a basic living need. But we don't have hunger problems in this country, other places do. The same goes for gas, that stuff should be taxed the hell out of even more than it already is. People always complain about rising gas prices, but a huge difference in 30 cents per gallon only saves one something around one or two hundred dollars.
as said before food is already taxed also not food in general should be taxed, but unhealthy food such as all the fastfood crap (hamburgers etc) should be taxed more. At the moment this unheatly fattening food is cheaper than some nice fresh vegetables. This is almost criminal.
So screw supply and demand, you know what's best for the people? I mean, honestly I think it seems like a good idea, but what about the implication regarding freedom? You don't think people should be allowed to choose freely what they wish to consume? (like food type things I mean) sure, but don't you think the risk of jacking with freedom on this level is too great? so now the government tells me what I can and can't eat? Now they only make suggestions, that's fine... but mandating it is well, excessive control of state. Sure, health care costs suffer somewhat from it, sure... it's not what's best for people healthwise, but don't you think you should be FREE to be unhealthy? Shouldn't you be FREE to eat what you want? In essence, don't you think that the cost of freedom might be a lot of fat people and expensive medical care? Further, if you don't let people learn their lessons for themselves, you will only create drones by imposing your will upon them. If you feel confident enough in your selection criteria, by all means... give us the plan to weed out the dipshits... you might have to wait though, because there seems to be a lot of interested parties promoting their competing plans. if everyone had their "dipshit reduction plan" implements, it's likely there'd be no one left to call anyone a dipshit. Hehe, either that or some jackass like SH would be the only fucker left. Hehe, okay, sleeping now. Just making a point.. uh sort of.
oh yes...i forgot to include te sentence: this is not valid for the US and they are free to eat what they want, but they might have to pay the real price for what they eat. I.e. with future healthcare costs incorporated into the price of a hamburger
Therein lies the problem with your argument. There are a LOT of people in this country that struggle to afford food. Many children in this country go to bed hungry at night. I am not sure why you think that hunger is not a problem in this country, but you are mistaken. Raise the food prices and more will go hungry. Poor people will suffer more. The idea does have merit, though. If you were to tax "luxury" food items, or hike up the taxes on restaraunt food, that would be a different story. Taxes on food items is determined at state government level, not federal. Some states define taxable food items by either essential or non essential (like rice or candy bars). (pretty much teh same criteria that determines what food can and can't be purchased with food stamps.) In addition to that, many states tax prepared foods, but not food that you have to prepare yourself. Those criteria could be considered for whether federal tax would be collected for certain foods. I definately do NOT think that essential staple foods should be taxed, however.
One Raven: Well I suppose I realize that the poor would have more trouble coming by food, but I would also suppose that these families probably are poor enough to have access to food stamps (?). And since the government would be the organization that taxes the food, the food itself would not be worth more. So the government could quite easily raise the value of food stamps in accordance with the tax. So only the poorest people who can't get food stamps will be a bit worse off. The issue of food that sucks for health is complicated, and I would probably condone the raising of taxes for all foods, rather than just the initiation of taxation of foods that aren't already taxed.
Those statistics are not of people starving, but people who are seeking 'emergency food'. Many are malnutritioned(is that a word?), but few starve to death. This is also including people who are on food stamps, which is still an abused system. The woman who was living next to me (who fortunately moved) have 7 or 8 kids and no father. She receieved enough food stamps to feed her and the kids, and her 2 brothers. On top of this she had an under the table job. I was a cashier at Pathmark 8 years ago, and most of the people who came in with food stamps were dressed better then me, had their nails done, and plenty of jewelry. One top of this, you have people that have jobs and still eat in soup kitchens. Atlantic City is having this worse then most areas. People get off buses, spend all their money in casinos, go eat dinner in a soup kitchen, and get back on the bus to go home. Anyway, the problem seems to be caused more by abuse then anything else.
