h a l f b a k e r yThere's no money in it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The US senate is considering a tax on sodas as one way to help pay for the planned health care overhaul. This seems to be unfairly directed at the soda industry.
If the government instead taxed high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), the main ingredient in high calorie sodas, it could achieve the same short
term effects -- get money and raise the price of soda to try to reduce consumption -- but it would spread the burden out slightly, since it would target all users of HFCS.
Furthermore, an HFCS tax would have a long term effect, of causing manufacturers to gradually shift to less unhealthy sweeteners... like old fashioned sugar.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
What's the evidence that old fashioned sugar is less
unhealthy than HFCS? |
|
| |
It'd be kind of redundant/ridiculous to tax something that is (heavily) subsidized. Then again, I wouldn't put it past the US Government. |
|
| |
no actually HFCS is just as bad for you as glucose or sucrose. I doubt a tax on it would do anything for consumer health. Corn syrup is an "old fashioned" sweetener; Corn syrup in one form or another is as old as corn cultivation. |
|
| |