Brits. need to hold on to their wallets and their soft-drinks, including the age old Coke & Pepsi, as the obscure Academy of Royal Medical Colleges (no doubt inspired by New York Mayor Michael “Nanny” Bloomberg) has come forth with a report to slap a 20% tax on sugary drinks.
The report was promoted by the predictably left-leaning Guardian newspaper, citing not only the college organization but also food and farming charity “Sustain”, the far-left environmentalist group Friends of the Earth, as well as the National Heart Forum. These organizations are lobby groups without economic expertise, yet they clearly state how much money will be raised by their suggestions; and have equal ideas where to spend it. “Sustain” is notable for its campaign for bees, for promoting the living wage, and for it’s obsession with global-warming.
It sounds reasonable off the top that we have to stop obesity. The truth is that what’s been proposed has been proven to be largely ineffective, what’s been reported has been greatly edited, and what’s not been considered is that people have to bear responsibility for their choices and actions.
Obesity is a growing problem (no pun intended), caused by a multiplicity of societorial ills. The unwise consumption of excessive amounts of soft drinks contributes to that. The question becomes if a tax will forcibly stop the behaviour and should government impose themselves into people’s lives in this way?
A tax on soft drinks will likely reduce, but not eliminate, the use of said products. What will the consumer do instead. It is unlikely that they will all of a sudden develop a liking for natural orange juice which is still more expensive. Nor will they be satisfied turning to water, a free product in Britain via the kitchen tap, on account of the fact they don’t do it already.
Lefties, politically minded people, and government types always see a new programme, a new tax, or a new regulation as the way to go in fixing a problem they have identified in society. In reality, this just creates another government bureaucracy eating up the people’s taxes. Despite the myriad of taxation in the world, we are challenged to point out any existing effective government programmes.
Better than this is an honest attempt to educate people in truth. Government can be effective in pointing out dangerous behaviour as it has with seat-belts, drunk-driving, and the dangers of cigarettes. However, community awareness is a more powerful way since people can best be reached in the context of relationships. Church programmes, for example, have been effective at teaching young mums how to cook nutritionally, or showing married couples how to live on a budget and stay out of debt. Show me the government programme that’s done any of that!
The problem with the tax concept is that it is just another example of the left identifying a problem, taxing it, then proclaiming it fixed when it’s not. Obesity is up 16% in the last decade in the UK despite soft-drink usage falling 9%. We will create another government office which has neither the incentive nor the motivation to be effective. On the contrary, government is only required as long as it’s useful, and as a result spends inordinate amounts of time and money trying to prove it’s worth.
Where does all the tax money go that’s raised from the sale of alcohol? The whole argument from the Institute for Alcohol Studies is that simply keeping the price up will control the problems related to drinking. This conclusion however is, and has been shown to be, a complete farce. It’s the same idea that simply spending more money in the classroom will make schools better.
What’s needed is an honest approach revealing what it really takes to curb destructive behaviour. Unfortunately too many politicians see another one of their ideas as the fix, ideas where they control the money and appoint the people to run it. The biggest problem we have is that government is full of tax and spend control freaks.
Visit a successful alcohol rehab. programme (like A.A.) and you’ll find recovered addicts running the show. They have a great deal of success and they do it for remarkably small amounts of money. Why and how is this? People are invested in success, not in proclaiming success. They understand the problems and what it takes to overcome them. If we want to address obesity, this is where to start and how to move forward.
