Editorial

First tobacco, then obesity, what's next to be taxed?

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

One fact that shouldn't be lost among the debate about healthcare reform that along with responsibility comes control.

If we are going to give government the final responsibility for paying for health care, governmental control over our lifestyle choices will naturally gravitate in government's direction.

Health costs have been used as a reason for tighter controls on smoking, hence the recent ban on indoor smoking in all Nebraska bars, restaurants and work places, higher taxes on cigarettes and other moves to discourage smoking.

One doesn't have to look far to find ammunition against smoking. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says smokers cost the country $96 billion a year in direct health care costs, and an additional $97 billion in lost productivity.

But there's another health problem -- also directly related to behavior -- that is even more costly.

The CDC said Monday that obesity-related diseases may have created medical expenses as high as $147 billion in 2008, more than double the $74 billion they were estimated to cost in 1998.

At a Washington D.C. conference, the CDC released information that obesity rose 37 percent between 1998 and 2006, and medical costs climbed to about 9.1 percent of all U.S. medical costs.

Obese people spent 42 percent more than people of normal weight on medical costs in 2006, a difference of $1,429, the new study found.

Not surprisingly, since the average American consumes about 250 calories more a day than 20 or 30 years ago, the average American is also about 23 pounds overweight.

So it's also not surprising that some are pushing the idea of adding a 3-cent federal tax on high-calorie soda, which they say could generate $24 billion over the next four years to help pay for healthcare.

Alcohol is already heavily taxed, but what's next? Fast food and ice cream? Candy and cookies? How about computers and video games that encourage a sedentary lifestyle?

Following the same flowchart used in the history of society's reaction to tobacco, can junk food taxes and further restrictions on our activities be far behind?

Comments
View 2 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I do genuinely hope that this line of reasoning isn't isn't in the same camp as the line of reasoning supporting legalizing marijuana. Otherwise, it would be kind of amusing to think that the same people use the idea of marijuana taxes as a plus to legalizing it getting worried about taxing soda. Not to mention the whole "if this is accepted, then eventually worse things will be" reasoning applicable to both.

    As it stands, I'm not angered by the idea of paying 3 cents more for a bottle of soda, if it'll help things out in the long run. Paying 30 cents more for a Jr. Bacon Cheeseburger, now THAT'S an outrage.

    -- Posted by bjo on Wed, Jul 29, 2009, at 4:33 PM
  • How about the air you breath? They are going to tax ranchers and farmers for methane,because their livestock farts.

    -- Posted by orville on Thu, Jul 30, 2009, at 5:39 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: