Fructose tax

Abject stupidity. HFCS is obviously not healthy, but there are legions of ectomorphs who can gorge on it without any change to their body type. Look for a paper entitled Adiposity 101, should still be floating around there somewhere. The ignorance about obesity boggles the mind. Not saying eating garbage is good. I’m saying tons of thin people eat garbage and remain thin, thus blowing the diet and exercise theory out of the water. You can’t turn an ectomorph (eg Jim Carrey) into an endomorph (eg Chris Farley) and viceversa. What’s next? Banning HFCS to promote height in short people? It’s the same reasoning.

Issue two is taxing whatever we don’t like, Nanny State, points well-covered by another poster.

3 Likes

Kudos on the list.

NO MORE TAXING US FOR STUPID SHIT!
NO TO THIS WASTE OF AMERICAN MONEY!
JUST H TO THE HELL NO…
Are you crazy for even suggesting such a thing… you are a FED!

2 Likes

I’m not a fan of the govt banning stuff. BUT I would be in favor of removing corn subsidies and/or tariffs on sugar.

!!WWG1WGA!!Know it so … Amen :us:

Rather than a TAX,
why not require a LABEL stating ‘High Fructose Corn Syrup’ ??
Free markets can continue and people can choose.

1 Like

NO to TAX
YES to Free Market
REQUIRE ‘High Fructose Corn Syrup’ prominently displayed next to product name (not just in the ingredients section).

1 Like

Edit: ‘High Fructose Corn Syrup’ label prominently by product content, not just in the ingredients list.

All this talk about injesting things is making me laugh! When I ingest things they satisfy hunger.

Well, then it is a good thing that we are only discussing policies that cause you to laugh and become hungry, Mr. Huth – I would be concerned if the policy was related to toilet plumbing regulations and you happened to “pass through”. :laughing: