Sunday, March 08, 2009

The Nanny State Comes After Chocolate

In Scotland there are calls for a high tax on chocolate, supposedly to fight obesity, and, of course, provide money for health care. Because there never has been, and never will be, enough money for socialist health care. Let's fight to keep the nanny state out of the U.S. and save our chocolate!

5 comments:

Susan B. said...

The politicians who pass these stupid "sin" taxes know very well it will not cause people to eat less chocolate or drink less soda or whatever. (After all, cigarettes are taxed and plenty of people still smoke.) It's disingenuous for them to say that these taxes are to discourage unhealthy eating. They are *counting* on people to still consume these products. It's all about getting more money into the gov't.

Andrea said...

What's funny is I don't think chocolate is all that fattening. It's all that other stuff people eat -- all the fried foods and fatty foods and custards and pies and cheese and potatoes and beer. I know what they eat in Scotland -- I've been there. It's carb heaven.

I'll bet they're just going after chocolate because it's an exotic import, so it's easily isolated and singled out. And yeah, it's all about the money.

Barb the Evil Genius said...

I don't think chocolate has that much to do with obesity either. But they are fulfilling a politician's job: look like they're doing something, and raise taxes.

John O said...

I may be the odd man out here - literally - but Ive always thought chocolate was kinda gross. Just never cared for it.

As for taxing it, its a food product and shouldn't be taxed at all. As I remember, Ohio doesn't have a food tax, or does it now with Strictland in charge?

Barb the Evil Genius said...

Food in Ohio is not taxable, except at restaurants. This chocolate discussion is going on in Scotland. However, it seems the USA wants to follow Europe in whatever they do, and cigarettes and alcohol are already taxed here, so it's not inconceivable. The US does seem to be leading the way in poor diplomatic choices, however.