*_ash_* Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 So, the ConDems want to put an extra 20% tax on fizzy drinks. Another tax on the poor. Will this also bite them in the arse like the pasty and caravan tax? I wonder if they'll put an extra 20% on one of their regular drinks, after all champagne is fizzy, isnt' it? Better still, why don't they tax the multi million pound fizzy drinks industry, as they can afford it, instead of taxing customers? Perhaps (if this is true, I can't open links, so must rely on brain) they're looking at Iceland and how they are turning things around? It's unpopular there too, but they seem to be doing ok. Also, why is a tax on fizzy drinks a tax on the poor, unless they are cheaper than water, pre-extra tax? (which they aren't, unless you are a moron) Another pasty tax imo - Instead of making things that are bad for you more expensive, why don't they make things that are good cheaper ? Good things are cheaper, but most people who are stupid choose to buy expensive things, because they are stupid and/or lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Whatever they tax alcohol, fizzy drinks, bedrooms, cigs etc at, they'll be able to afford it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoatwobbler Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I was under the impression it was the BMA -not the Gvt- who wanted that extra 20%? Are all the news articles wrong about the source, then? It's The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges calling for this. Its recommendations include: A ban on advertising foods high in saturated fat, sugar and salt before 9pm Further taxes on sugary drinks to increase prices by at least 20% A reduction in fast food outlets near schools and leisure centres A £100m budget for interventions such as weight-loss surgery No junk food or vending machines in hospitals, where all food must meet the same nutritional standards as in schools Food labels to include calorie information for children http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21478314 Some of the headlines about this have been slightly misleading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Another pasty tax imo - Instead of making things that are bad for you more expensive, why don't they make things that are good cheaper ? Healthy drinks are already cheaper than fizzy drinks, that doesn't stop people excessively consuming the fizzy drinks though. The thing that annoys me is that I might drink coke once a fortnight, but now I'll have to pay an extra 20% because of people who drink it everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I was under the impression it was the BMA -not the Gvt- who wanted that extra 20%? Are all the news articles wrong about the source, then? Yes but don't let facts get in the way of some ill informed ranting. ---------- Post added 19-02-2013 at 08:29 ---------- Healthy drinks are already cheaper than fizzy drinks, that doesn't stop people excessively consuming the fizzy drinks though. The thing that annoys me is that I might drink coke once a fortnight, but now I'll have to pay an extra 20% because of people who drink it everyday. They are free, from the tap and you won't have to pay 20% because it is just the BMA saying it not the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I don't recall any outrage when Oldham's LABOUR council was trying to implement a fat tax in February 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I don't recall any outrage when Oldham's LABOUR council was trying to implement a fat tax in February 2011. Yawwwnnn spin spin spin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 More like truth truth truth, as opposed to the lies this thread is based upon, and the usual foaming mouth sheep agreeing with it. You really do yourselves no favours when you can't be bothered to check the source of an article. But, for fairness, how about Stockport's Lib Dem Council removing salt from the counters of all chip shops in 2011? And on the Wirral, the Lib Dem and Tory controlled areas have few takeaways, but head down to Frank Field's Labour patch and its takeaway after takeaway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 More like truth truth truth, as opposed to the lies this thread is based upon, and the usual foaming mouth sheep agreeing with it. You really do yourselves no favours when you can't be bothered to check the source of an article. But, for fairness, how about Stockport's Lib Dem Council removing salt from the counters of all chip shops in 2011? And on the Wirral, the Lib Dem and Tory controlled areas have few takeaways, but head down to Frank Field's Labour patch and its takeaway after takeaway. That's apparently because Labour areas are poor so can only afford takeaways. I think I may need to add a RicGem special I might capitalise this next bit so Mecky can't miss it. IT IS NOT THE CONDEMS PROPOSING IT, IT IS THE BMA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 No, he's been proven wrong now, so he and the others will scuttle away rather than man up and admit they were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.