woodmally Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 As I said, share your fury with your MP, see if they can do something about the evil doctors trying to improve peoples health. I dont have a problem with the doctors campaigning on this issue and raising awareness its when they start interfering and suggesting we pay more tax thats the issue I have with it. Why should the majority pay for the mistakes of a minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I dont have a problem with the doctors campaigning on this issue and raising awareness its when they start interfering and suggesting we pay more tax thats the issue I have with it. Why should the majority pay for the mistakes of a minority. We do already, through the costs of treating the people who make the mistake of drinking too much sugary drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 If farmers were rewarded for producing free range or organic, or schools or hospitals could get more funding if they could prove they were feeding the kids or patients healthier food Maybe we should also have proof first that organic and free range is actually healthier. But as far as sugar is concerned, make all drinks sugar free and use sweeteners instead. I don't see why I should be taxed because some people cant control their diet as I like sugar and will continue to use it. Given to cost of sugar at present, .65p per kilo as oppose to .85p a kilo last year, I wouldn't be surprised that the fall in price is due to lower consumption given all this anti sugar hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Why should the majority pay for the mistakes of a minority. That is currently the situation. We're all paying for the healthcare of the minority of people who overindulge. The real question is what is the lesser evil, I'd say the tax on the drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Maybe we should also have proof first that organic and free range is actually healthier. But as far as sugar is concerned, make all drinks sugar free and use sweeteners instead. I don't see why I should be taxed because some people cant control their diet as I like sugar and will continue to use it. Given to cost of sugar at present, .65p per kilo as oppose to .85p a kilo last year, I wouldn't be surprised that the fall in price is due to lower consumption given all this anti sugar hype. It's much more than 0.65p/0.85p per kilogramme! Did you mean 65p/85p? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 (edited) It's much more than 0.65p/0.85p per kilogramme! Did you mean 65p/85p? Yes its .65p as its usually sometimes written that way, that's why I didn't put 0.65p I believe both .65p and 65p to be correct. Edited July 19, 2015 by apelike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 No, a decimal point quite clearly indicates that you're specifying <1 of the subsequent unit, even if you omit the zero. ---------- Post added 20-07-2015 at 07:44 ---------- Maybe we should also have proof first that organic and free range is actually healthier. But as far as sugar is concerned, make all drinks sugar free and use sweeteners instead. I don't see why I should be taxed because some people cant control their diet as I like sugar and will continue to use it. I hate artificially sweetened drinks, they taste disgusting. And on the rare occasion I buy a sugary drink, I want the sugar. Add the tax, don't ruin the drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 That is currently the situation. We're all paying for the healthcare of the minority of people who overindulge. And that will not change but we could also end up paying extra for sugary drinks as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 And that will not change but we could also end up paying extra for sugary drinks as well. Extra tax revenue that could go towards treating sugar related illnesses is a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Extra tax revenue that could go towards treating sugar related illnesses is a change. Jobs for the boys and girls in hospital office's more like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now