Another assumption is getting responses right away from the few applications you send. The chances of job success will increase manifold when you apply for many number of jobs everyday, instead of applying for a couple of jobs every week. Have your resumes on different job boards at a time. If you call one employer today, make calls to two different employers tomorrow, and increase your contacts everyday aggressively.
"This article should be offensive to anyone with a shred of human decency and common sense."
OMG, the bloody drama. A shred of human decency? Seriously? An article in favor of a tax on junk food proves that the author has no shred of human decency? You, sir, need to rethink your concept of "decency".
I don't think that the taxes are meant to actually prevent people from eatin crappy food - they're meant to help the government take care of people without health insurance who end up in the ER.
Anyone with a shred of human decency might argue in favor of health care coverage for all, but then, that's another topic (one that no one at Wise Bread will bother to post, because of the idiotic attacks from people calling the writers "communist").
Because I have such a macabre sense of style, many of my normal decorations double as Halloween decorations - I'm a big fan of Day of the Dead paintings, sculptures, and other kitsch. All I have to do is throw some "spider webs" up and light some candles and my house is one creepy place.
Recently I read that the new CEO of AIG will only be paid 5.5 Mil. The money generated by this tax could go a long way to help out Wall Street and our Banks. The taxes would not have to be very much as I have just found out that the bonus money will be a record high of 240 Billion Dollars.
I am not concerned about our Insurance Executives as they will be rolling in the dough as soon as mandatory health care is passed. I expect that like in California when the mandatory auto liability tax was passed premiums will rise faster than health care.
I just love everyone who stands for higher and higher taxes. It's just so American.
Here in Illinois, we just passed a tax on "junk" beverages and candy. Based on the tax law things like chocolate chips are now being taxed, but Twizzlers are not. I forget the specifics, but it's pretty apparent that this is not as easy as "all junk food gets a tax", because you can't come out and say all things at McDonald's are junk food.
And overall, I think taxation will unfairly affect the poor as posters mentioned above. I doubt taxation will really cause true change, it's just not that simple. Things like making cities walkable, putting grocery stores in neighborhoods where they don't exist-that's real change.
Thank you for your comment. While I appreciate the alternatives offered by others in the comments and I am actually in favor of tax increases in general, I feel like only your answer truly addresses the question posed, "Should we have a 'fat tax'?"
Fast food is overall, cheaper. I mean, I know we could really analyze cost/meal when you cook at home and disagree with that, but in general, unhealthy foods are cheaper because of what they're composed of. People on limited budgets find what is affordable and available. You are certainly right, in many poorer urban areas, fast food franchises exist but there might not even be a local grocery store. This is particularly a problem if you are poor and don't have a means of transportation, and/or walking in your neighborhood could be dangerous.
Statistics show that most people who smoke are poor, which perhaps has something to do with life stresses resulting from being poor. While ideally placing taxes on cigarettes would make it too expensive for the poor to purchase them and thus discourage them from doing so, this is not what happens. The poor probably don't have insurance or a surplus income to get Chantix (or other stop-smoking medications) or therapy to curb their habit. So what the tax does is just widen the economic gap - the poor get poorer. While unhealthy foods might not have 'addictive' substances in them per se, ways of life are addictive in that it is hard to change and change all the factors that contribute to that way of life. So let's not make the poor poorer.
I feel the same way. It is also frustrating that 2 qts of fruit juice is over $3 and a 3-liter of soda is $.88! We can fix a decent dinner at home for $6 or buy a "hot and ready" pizza for $5.
I think calling it a "fat tax" is not exactly what you're proposing. It's not about taxing people who are fat, it's about taxing the food. Skinny people eat value meals, too.
While you're idea sounds good in that "pop-psychology" kind of way, it actually penalizes the people who have no other options than to eat junk food...i.e. the poor.
People living in impoverished neighborhoods do not have access to groceries, farmers markets, and other sources of fresh, nutrition-intense foods. If you don't own a car, and the nearest grocery store is a 45 minute bus ride away, and you just finished working a 12-hr. minimum wage shift...McDonald's is your only option for dinner that evening.
Putting a tax on junk food won't stop the people that have no other options from eating there. It will however, eat into the already meager income they have, and make it even harder for them to escape poverty and/or eat healthily.
Um, not to be cynical Sam over here but these prices are outrageous for a book that never actually gets physically bound and has no shipping costs attached. In addition, what do you think the odds are that these writers discovered that overpriced e-books are the way to be financially independent in the course of their experiences? They get rich, and we get a bunch of ideas that anyone could implement without instruction if they really wanted to and had the drive to do it... no thanks.
ADVANTA Credit Card interest jumped to 23.99 percent because less than $10 short on pmt and previously to that and after, never late nor payment never short. They closed the account and won't lower the interest rate or discuss account because it is closed. $500 Interest keeps accumulating each month. Am trying to find another cc to transfer it to but so far unsuccessful. Preditory Lending to the max.
FATS are not unhealthy. OILS (cottonseed, soy, canola) are. Fats have heart and health-protective benefits oils do not. Fats contain essential nutrients that help us assimilate vitamins and minerals in our food. If you like "Super Size Me", please watch "Fathead" for the other side of the argument.
We have been lied to for years, first by medical "researchers" (I use the term loosely) with a prejudiced point they wished to further to appease their funding sources; then by the media who perpetuates the fat/oil mistake by simply not changing their wording; and now by a mega-industrialized food system that is failing and thus struggling all the harder to maintain its grip.
If you are interested in the basis for my astounding statemnts, I offer: "Eat Fat, Lose Fat" by Mary Enig, "Nourishing Traditions" by Sally Fallon and most importantly, "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes.
I think fat taxes are a great idea, but think that the same thing could be accomplished with what others say - reductions in agricultural subsidies and taxes on greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of meat and dairy, and the transportation of all foods.
Though I think it's a great idea that if we're going to subsidize anything, it should be gym memberships and personal training (actually, I think that should be covered as part of your health insurance, but I doubt that'll make it into the bill...
I'll second "Guest"'s comment. Get rid of the subsidies on crops such as corn. They are why companies can produce highly-processed, preservative-laced, saturation-advertised, fat-and-sugar-laden, devoid-of-any-real-nutritional-value foods cheaper than food that was simply harvested and sent to the store.
In short, don't add a fat TAX, remove the fat TAX CREDITS called subsidies.
Man, some of you really don't trust the government to do anything right. Misplaced distrust in government aside, I disagree as well, but not for the "no more taxes" reasons.
Good, healthy food is expensive enough as it is, I don't think making the bad stuff pricier would be beneficial at all. Instead, how about nixing the corn subsidies that lead to massive amounts of High Fructose Corn Syrup that's been pumped in to all of our food, and give the subsidies to natural & organic farms so that they can raise healthy produce and animals that aren't full of hormones and chemicals? They could give restaurants that use less processed ingredients a break as well.
I love to receive and give gift cards. The catch to them is not to get gift cards that you can use on others.I like gift cards from places that I won't be temped to buy something for my kids. NO WALMART CARDS unless you are giving a large amount for the entire family to share. Keep the cards personal like purchasing gift card or certificates at speciallty store. I purchase Gift card for the movie theatre and a resturant and place a IOU babysitting receipt so our freinds can truly have a night out on me. By keeping it personal gift cards can still be a wonderful gift to give and receive.
It will be a painful realization for people that follow the media BS of a recovery. When the other shoe drops on the credit card default sleeping giant, the escalating mortgage tsunami and ACTUAL unemployment rate, there will be hell to pay. And it will be payed by Joe Consumer (you & me).
I see someone else pointed out my first thoughts...that many working poor, students or elderly don't have the money or options to eat the produce centered, organic, locavore, grass fed beef that health bloggers are advocating.
As a middle class family in the suburbs, we rarely eat fast food. I can possibly support a tax on my purchase. But to endorse a fast food tax on everyone by saying "fast food is a luxury" is elitist. There's a reason why poverty is one of the greatest indicators of obesity. Making fast food equivalent to a "sin tax" is misleading. You don't have to drink or smoke to live, but you do have to eat.
Instead, we need to focus on making fresh produce and healthier food cheaper and widely available to everyone.
Yes, clearly the government does not have enough money to spend because they are so in debt. And clearly the people have too much money because look at how they blow it on junk food. So I am for more taxes. I would also vote for vegetarian ticket to force people not to eat meat.
Only thing is, I only don't see anything in the Constitution that says the State is to practice social engineering and be everybody's mother.
I hit Target both days after Halloween. Everything is 75-90% off. I have a full yard and porch of Halloween decorations. It looks very nice (and expensive). All of which cost me no more then $40 total.
Yikes. You put a lot of misplaced trust in the government to decide what foods should be taxed and how to use that money. Why should fast-food eaters shoulder an additional burden to (supposedly) pay down the deficit, or pay for anything else for that matter? Because they buy something that isn't healthy for them? They say people watch too much television, so let's slap a tax on DirecTV. People are too fat, so let's put a tax on XXXL shirts and plus-size dresses. As pointed out, who will determine what is "bad" food? Will 99-cent french fries at McDonald's get a big tax? Will pommes frites that go with your ribeye at the upscale steakhouse get a pass?
Why should people who indulge occasionally or even frequently be taxed? Because you say it's bad for them? Buying expensive jewelry or a Lexus might be an occasional indulgence for someone. Should they be taxed because you or the government says they'd be better off with faux pearls and a Honda?
Even if there were some magical way to appropriately decide who gets taxed and who doesn't, the federal government has shown, now more than ever, that they are by far the least fiscally responsible entity in the nation. They have spent their way almost into oblivion. Giving them more of our money is like giving an alcoholic a pint of Jack and the keys to the car.
Instead of dreaming up a million ways to shear (or butcher) the American sheep, maybe the government should stop wasting our money and find a way to save some of what they do get from us. Isn't that the first step in debt recovery? Stop spending so much and pay down the credit cards?
It is hypocrisy at its height for the completely dishonest and irresponsible federal government (or any state and local government as far as I'm concerned) to think they have the moral standing to make Americans live responsibly. How dare they attempt to lecture us on moderation? To fit the topic, that's like a 1000-pound slob scolding me for eating a Big Mac.
Its really easier, take away the agricultural subsidies. If they have trouble competing against foreign sources still introduce a *gasp* tariff. Might not go over well with the free trade people, but it would simply protect our national interests(home grown food). After that take away the subsidies for transportation fuel with the same method helping people to eat locally and hopefully at home. We have been combating low foreign prices the wrong way the whole time. We gave our companies money to make it cheaper instead of raising the costs of others to sell it. It might be controversial, but we screwed up our economy forcing it to be competitive with markets that have cheap labor, low restrictions and little respect for the environment. We should protect against that, not compete against it. These symptoms like too much sugar in food, gas guzzlers, polluting power plants, foreclosures, will sort themselves out once we stop encouraging it.
As left-leaning as I am in many ways, I 100% agree on cutting corn subsidies instead of adding "fat" taxes!
As a society, our idea of what is "junk food" is constantly changing. Within the past 20 years we have gone from demonizing saturated fat, to all fat, then all carbs, to high fructose corn syrup and only hydrogenated oils, and then saturated fats are fine as long as they aren't the "fake" fats, then all "fake" stuff is bad and we should all grow gardens.
Is a Snackwell's cookie healthy? Is a homemade burger and fries junk food? Who gets to decide and, in turn, tax us based on their food-industry-funded study of the day?
Another assumption is getting responses right away from the few applications you send. The chances of job success will increase manifold when you apply for many number of jobs everyday, instead of applying for a couple of jobs every week. Have your resumes on different job boards at a time. If you call one employer today, make calls to two different employers tomorrow, and increase your contacts everyday aggressively.
Word!
"This article should be offensive to anyone with a shred of human decency and common sense."
OMG, the bloody drama. A shred of human decency? Seriously? An article in favor of a tax on junk food proves that the author has no shred of human decency? You, sir, need to rethink your concept of "decency".
I don't think that the taxes are meant to actually prevent people from eatin crappy food - they're meant to help the government take care of people without health insurance who end up in the ER.
Anyone with a shred of human decency might argue in favor of health care coverage for all, but then, that's another topic (one that no one at Wise Bread will bother to post, because of the idiotic attacks from people calling the writers "communist").
Oh, I so love the after-Halloween sales.
Because I have such a macabre sense of style, many of my normal decorations double as Halloween decorations - I'm a big fan of Day of the Dead paintings, sculptures, and other kitsch. All I have to do is throw some "spider webs" up and light some candles and my house is one creepy place.
No wonder my dogs are so neurotic.
Recently I read that the new CEO of AIG will only be paid 5.5 Mil. The money generated by this tax could go a long way to help out Wall Street and our Banks. The taxes would not have to be very much as I have just found out that the bonus money will be a record high of 240 Billion Dollars.
I am not concerned about our Insurance Executives as they will be rolling in the dough as soon as mandatory health care is passed. I expect that like in California when the mandatory auto liability tax was passed premiums will rise faster than health care.
I just love everyone who stands for higher and higher taxes. It's just so American.
Here in Illinois, we just passed a tax on "junk" beverages and candy. Based on the tax law things like chocolate chips are now being taxed, but Twizzlers are not. I forget the specifics, but it's pretty apparent that this is not as easy as "all junk food gets a tax", because you can't come out and say all things at McDonald's are junk food.
And overall, I think taxation will unfairly affect the poor as posters mentioned above. I doubt taxation will really cause true change, it's just not that simple. Things like making cities walkable, putting grocery stores in neighborhoods where they don't exist-that's real change.
Thank you for your comment. While I appreciate the alternatives offered by others in the comments and I am actually in favor of tax increases in general, I feel like only your answer truly addresses the question posed, "Should we have a 'fat tax'?"
Fast food is overall, cheaper. I mean, I know we could really analyze cost/meal when you cook at home and disagree with that, but in general, unhealthy foods are cheaper because of what they're composed of. People on limited budgets find what is affordable and available. You are certainly right, in many poorer urban areas, fast food franchises exist but there might not even be a local grocery store. This is particularly a problem if you are poor and don't have a means of transportation, and/or walking in your neighborhood could be dangerous.
Statistics show that most people who smoke are poor, which perhaps has something to do with life stresses resulting from being poor. While ideally placing taxes on cigarettes would make it too expensive for the poor to purchase them and thus discourage them from doing so, this is not what happens. The poor probably don't have insurance or a surplus income to get Chantix (or other stop-smoking medications) or therapy to curb their habit. So what the tax does is just widen the economic gap - the poor get poorer. While unhealthy foods might not have 'addictive' substances in them per se, ways of life are addictive in that it is hard to change and change all the factors that contribute to that way of life. So let's not make the poor poorer.
I feel the same way. It is also frustrating that 2 qts of fruit juice is over $3 and a 3-liter of soda is $.88! We can fix a decent dinner at home for $6 or buy a "hot and ready" pizza for $5.
I think calling it a "fat tax" is not exactly what you're proposing. It's not about taxing people who are fat, it's about taxing the food. Skinny people eat value meals, too.
While you're idea sounds good in that "pop-psychology" kind of way, it actually penalizes the people who have no other options than to eat junk food...i.e. the poor.
People living in impoverished neighborhoods do not have access to groceries, farmers markets, and other sources of fresh, nutrition-intense foods. If you don't own a car, and the nearest grocery store is a 45 minute bus ride away, and you just finished working a 12-hr. minimum wage shift...McDonald's is your only option for dinner that evening.
Putting a tax on junk food won't stop the people that have no other options from eating there. It will however, eat into the already meager income they have, and make it even harder for them to escape poverty and/or eat healthily.
Um, not to be cynical Sam over here but these prices are outrageous for a book that never actually gets physically bound and has no shipping costs attached. In addition, what do you think the odds are that these writers discovered that overpriced e-books are the way to be financially independent in the course of their experiences? They get rich, and we get a bunch of ideas that anyone could implement without instruction if they really wanted to and had the drive to do it... no thanks.
ADVANTA Credit Card interest jumped to 23.99 percent because less than $10 short on pmt and previously to that and after, never late nor payment never short. They closed the account and won't lower the interest rate or discuss account because it is closed. $500 Interest keeps accumulating each month. Am trying to find another cc to transfer it to but so far unsuccessful. Preditory Lending to the max.
FATS are not unhealthy. OILS (cottonseed, soy, canola) are. Fats have heart and health-protective benefits oils do not. Fats contain essential nutrients that help us assimilate vitamins and minerals in our food. If you like "Super Size Me", please watch "Fathead" for the other side of the argument.
We have been lied to for years, first by medical "researchers" (I use the term loosely) with a prejudiced point they wished to further to appease their funding sources; then by the media who perpetuates the fat/oil mistake by simply not changing their wording; and now by a mega-industrialized food system that is failing and thus struggling all the harder to maintain its grip.
If you are interested in the basis for my astounding statemnts, I offer: "Eat Fat, Lose Fat" by Mary Enig, "Nourishing Traditions" by Sally Fallon and most importantly, "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes.
I think fat taxes are a great idea, but think that the same thing could be accomplished with what others say - reductions in agricultural subsidies and taxes on greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of meat and dairy, and the transportation of all foods.
Though I think it's a great idea that if we're going to subsidize anything, it should be gym memberships and personal training (actually, I think that should be covered as part of your health insurance, but I doubt that'll make it into the bill...
I'll second "Guest"'s comment. Get rid of the subsidies on crops such as corn. They are why companies can produce highly-processed, preservative-laced, saturation-advertised, fat-and-sugar-laden, devoid-of-any-real-nutritional-value foods cheaper than food that was simply harvested and sent to the store.
In short, don't add a fat TAX, remove the fat TAX CREDITS called subsidies.
Man, some of you really don't trust the government to do anything right. Misplaced distrust in government aside, I disagree as well, but not for the "no more taxes" reasons.
Good, healthy food is expensive enough as it is, I don't think making the bad stuff pricier would be beneficial at all. Instead, how about nixing the corn subsidies that lead to massive amounts of High Fructose Corn Syrup that's been pumped in to all of our food, and give the subsidies to natural & organic farms so that they can raise healthy produce and animals that aren't full of hormones and chemicals? They could give restaurants that use less processed ingredients a break as well.
I love to receive and give gift cards. The catch to them is not to get gift cards that you can use on others.I like gift cards from places that I won't be temped to buy something for my kids. NO WALMART CARDS unless you are giving a large amount for the entire family to share. Keep the cards personal like purchasing gift card or certificates at speciallty store. I purchase Gift card for the movie theatre and a resturant and place a IOU babysitting receipt so our freinds can truly have a night out on me. By keeping it personal gift cards can still be a wonderful gift to give and receive.
Don't post anything you wouldn't want your worst enemy seeing. If something can be used against you, leave it out. Keep personal info general.
It will be a painful realization for people that follow the media BS of a recovery. When the other shoe drops on the credit card default sleeping giant, the escalating mortgage tsunami and ACTUAL unemployment rate, there will be hell to pay. And it will be payed by Joe Consumer (you & me).
Spend wisely my friends. Good Luck.
I see someone else pointed out my first thoughts...that many working poor, students or elderly don't have the money or options to eat the produce centered, organic, locavore, grass fed beef that health bloggers are advocating.
As a middle class family in the suburbs, we rarely eat fast food. I can possibly support a tax on my purchase. But to endorse a fast food tax on everyone by saying "fast food is a luxury" is elitist. There's a reason why poverty is one of the greatest indicators of obesity. Making fast food equivalent to a "sin tax" is misleading. You don't have to drink or smoke to live, but you do have to eat.
Instead, we need to focus on making fresh produce and healthier food cheaper and widely available to everyone.
Yes, clearly the government does not have enough money to spend because they are so in debt. And clearly the people have too much money because look at how they blow it on junk food. So I am for more taxes. I would also vote for vegetarian ticket to force people not to eat meat.
Only thing is, I only don't see anything in the Constitution that says the State is to practice social engineering and be everybody's mother.
Freedom is Healthier than Fascism.
The day after Halloween, hit Target or the big chain stores for 75-90% savings. Stock up for next year!
I hit Target both days after Halloween. Everything is 75-90% off. I have a full yard and porch of Halloween decorations. It looks very nice (and expensive). All of which cost me no more then $40 total.
Yikes. You put a lot of misplaced trust in the government to decide what foods should be taxed and how to use that money. Why should fast-food eaters shoulder an additional burden to (supposedly) pay down the deficit, or pay for anything else for that matter? Because they buy something that isn't healthy for them? They say people watch too much television, so let's slap a tax on DirecTV. People are too fat, so let's put a tax on XXXL shirts and plus-size dresses. As pointed out, who will determine what is "bad" food? Will 99-cent french fries at McDonald's get a big tax? Will pommes frites that go with your ribeye at the upscale steakhouse get a pass?
Why should people who indulge occasionally or even frequently be taxed? Because you say it's bad for them? Buying expensive jewelry or a Lexus might be an occasional indulgence for someone. Should they be taxed because you or the government says they'd be better off with faux pearls and a Honda?
Even if there were some magical way to appropriately decide who gets taxed and who doesn't, the federal government has shown, now more than ever, that they are by far the least fiscally responsible entity in the nation. They have spent their way almost into oblivion. Giving them more of our money is like giving an alcoholic a pint of Jack and the keys to the car.
Instead of dreaming up a million ways to shear (or butcher) the American sheep, maybe the government should stop wasting our money and find a way to save some of what they do get from us. Isn't that the first step in debt recovery? Stop spending so much and pay down the credit cards?
It is hypocrisy at its height for the completely dishonest and irresponsible federal government (or any state and local government as far as I'm concerned) to think they have the moral standing to make Americans live responsibly. How dare they attempt to lecture us on moderation? To fit the topic, that's like a 1000-pound slob scolding me for eating a Big Mac.
Its really easier, take away the agricultural subsidies. If they have trouble competing against foreign sources still introduce a *gasp* tariff. Might not go over well with the free trade people, but it would simply protect our national interests(home grown food). After that take away the subsidies for transportation fuel with the same method helping people to eat locally and hopefully at home. We have been combating low foreign prices the wrong way the whole time. We gave our companies money to make it cheaper instead of raising the costs of others to sell it. It might be controversial, but we screwed up our economy forcing it to be competitive with markets that have cheap labor, low restrictions and little respect for the environment. We should protect against that, not compete against it. These symptoms like too much sugar in food, gas guzzlers, polluting power plants, foreclosures, will sort themselves out once we stop encouraging it.
As left-leaning as I am in many ways, I 100% agree on cutting corn subsidies instead of adding "fat" taxes!
As a society, our idea of what is "junk food" is constantly changing. Within the past 20 years we have gone from demonizing saturated fat, to all fat, then all carbs, to high fructose corn syrup and only hydrogenated oils, and then saturated fats are fine as long as they aren't the "fake" fats, then all "fake" stuff is bad and we should all grow gardens.
Is a Snackwell's cookie healthy? Is a homemade burger and fries junk food? Who gets to decide and, in turn, tax us based on their food-industry-funded study of the day?