Sin Taxes on Sugar

As far as 30 is concerned, we already make smokers and drinkers pay more taxes through the various huge taxes on cigarettes and alcohol directly (at least in my country). It's not so far fetched, and if it reduces obesity then it's a net good for society.

Something is enjoyable and has mildly negative health effects? Better tax it! Can't trust adults to decide for themselves if the risk of drinking, smoking pot, or God forbid, eating sugar!

It is possible to tax unhealthy products to compensate for the toll they create on people health and subsequent costs to society. Tobacco is heavily taxed, and so is alcohol. While buying coke is close to the price of mineral water.

Because we need oxygen to live. A less absurd question might be "why do we still permit gambling and alcohol", which the article addresses:> One of the main arguments for the continuance of tobacco sales is that the government should not dictate what vices the public engages in. This is a valid point. Alcohol and gambling are restricted but not prohibited; fast food is unrestricted (although New York City [USA] attempted the restriction of soft drink sizes but failed miserably

Smoking bans or taxes are good as long as you have socialized medicine or regulations which prohibit private insurance from charging higher premiums for smokers. You're free to harm yourself as long as health-conscious people don't have to pay for it. The same for soda taxes and the like.

That's semi-reasonable in America, but less so in any country with single-payer health care. Like smoking, there are serious effects later in life that cost money to treat; this makes for a compelling case for a sin tax IMO, like we have for tobacco and liquor here in Canada.

Since there is a higher incidence of smoking among poorer folks[0], couldn't the same argument apply to the massive sin tax on cigarettes? We justify such sin taxes as being to the benefit of discouraging a harmful health behavior and personally I see the same link with higher sugar consumption.[0] https://trut

Some countries tax tobacco, alcohol and sugar at higher rates to offset the costs incurred to society?

It’s not the state “deciding” it’s the state requiring compensation for the negative externalities created by the product. You’re more than welcome to smoke cigarettes if you so chose. But that decision isn’t made in a vacuum and it impacts the rest of us in the form of increased public health burden, insurance costs, secondhand smoke, etc. A “sin tax” serves not only to discourage the asocial behavior (we’d have a big problem if everyone made the same choice) but also to pay your fair sh

Legalise and tax it then. The exact same argument could be made for smokers "not being fair on everyone else", except they contribute more in tax than they use (partly due to dying earlier).