About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

bots · 22-10-2015, 02:35 PM

i've never liked Jamie Oliver, he does tend to attach himself to causes for his own self promotion. As to sugar, its just one aspect of the issue where parents find it difficult to say no to their screaming children or feed them stuff for an easy life.

Everyone has known the dangers of sugar for at least a couple of generations, taxing it is not the answer just as its not the answer to stopping those that smoke or drink.

Kizzy · 22-10-2015, 02:40 PM

It is becoming more widely known yes but where is the clarity... that is the message.
How much is too much, are companies open about the content in foods/drinks to aid people make better choices?

Kate! · 22-10-2015, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i've never liked Jamie Oliver, he does tend to attach himself to causes for his own self promotion. As to sugar, its just one aspect of the issue where parents find it difficult to say no to their screaming children or feed them stuff for an easy life.

Everyone has known the dangers of sugar for at least a couple of generations, taxing it is not the answer just as its not the answer to stopping those that smoke or drink.

Taxing sugar is not the answer I agree. Which takes us back to cigarettes and gambling, hitting the poor the most.

bots · 22-10-2015, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It is becoming more widely known yes but where is the clarity... that is the message.
How much is too much, are companies open about the content in foods/drinks to aid people make better choices?

Its not a simple issue. For example sugar is part of the manufacturing process of alcohol. Sugar in its natural form in fruits is just as bad for you as sugar in refined format.

Eat carbohydrates and your body converts that to sugar, which again, is just as bad for you,

These people are being overly simplistic and not addressing the real issue - that people are not eating balanced diets, How do we tax that ... you didnt have meat and 3 veg today - pay 5 quid tax, do not pass go.

Marsh. · 22-10-2015, 02:47 PM

Yes, exactly. Educating is key. Taxing is pointless.

Taxing will not achieve what Jamie Oliver appears to want.

Only a matter of time before it's dictated exactly what we all must eat and in what quantity. You can advise people, trying to force them into certain changes with ridiculous suggestions like this doesn't do anyone or anything any good.

Kizzy · 22-10-2015, 02:47 PM

Don't people across the board smoke and gamble? If you have more money you gamble more and therefore would pay more VAT.

Kizzy · 22-10-2015, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Its not a simple issue. For example sugar is part of the manufacturing process of alcohol. Sugar in its natural form in fruits is just as bad for you as sugar in refined format.

Eat carbohydrates and your body converts that to sugar, which again, is just as bad for you,

These people are being overly simplistic and not addressing the real issue - that people are not eating balanced diets, How do we tax that ... you didnt have meat and 3 veg today - pay 5 quid tax, do not pass go.

This isn't suggesting fruit and carbs be taxed no.

bots · 22-10-2015, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

This isn't suggesting fruit and carbs be taxed no.

But the point is that they have the same effect and its not addressing the fundamental issue. Like with smoking and drinking - education is the only solution

Kizzy · 22-10-2015, 02:57 PM

So would you take the VAT from both of those?

Marsh. · 22-10-2015, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

So would you take the VAT from both of those?

Both of what? Neither are taxed on their sugar content are they?

Kizzy · 22-10-2015, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Both of what? Neither are taxed on their sugar content are they?

They both have advice on their use, have a proven medical implication and are subject to VAT therefore they are comparable.

Marsh. · 22-10-2015, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They both have advice on their use, have a proven medical implication and are subject to VAT therefore they are comparable.

But they've not yet had any VAT dependent on how healthy they are so, to me, they aren't comparable to what's being suggested with sugar content.

arista · 22-10-2015, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i've never liked Jamie Oliver, he does tend to attach himself to causes for his own self promotion. As to sugar, its just one aspect of the issue where parents find it difficult to say no to their screaming children or feed them stuff for an easy life.

Everyone has known the dangers of sugar for at least a couple of generations, taxing it is not the answer just as its not the answer to stopping those that smoke or drink.

Yes Sly that
in his Café he sells Fizzy Drinks
making sure all Around the World
come to his Crap Cafe

JoshBB · 22-10-2015, 03:16 PM

tbh I think VAT should be lowered to the lowest possible (15% as per EU rules) and then put things like sugary drinks & extremely fatty foods at 20%.

It's too high, and we should be raising income tax for the richest individuals instead.

arista · 22-10-2015, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshBB

tbh I think VAT should be lowered to the lowest possible (15% as per EU rules) and then put things like sugary drinks & extremely fatty foods at 20%.

It's too high, and we should be raising income tax for the richest individuals instead.

Some Fats are Good for you
its to Complex to do that.

Typical of you JoshBB