Sugary drinks are definitely a good target, but fruit juice is just as bad.
Question Time & This Week
- Thread starter Liam147
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Sugary drinks are definitely a good target, but fruit juice is just as bad.
Obviously when you phrase it with that language it's hard to disagree, the question is whether sugary products are more affordable rather than the only stuff that is affordable, and whether food manufacturers load their products with it to get more taste without spending much more money, something a tax would reduce. It should be evidence led, Johnson said that countries that have brought that in have seen positive effects, though I haven't seen the figures myself so can't attest any more to that.
True, obviously I'm not sure how "sugar" would overall be defined and whether it would include fructose and other natural sugars as well as additives.
Isn't that part of the problem here? This tax won't stop at the bottle of coke or wine i have in the fridge, it's gone to juice and the fruit bowl on the sideboard too. Potentially this could be a new and very lucrative tax for the government.
well as they have said they are not introducing it then no it wont be a lucrative tax for the government... but should in the future some tax be devised that can be applied to processed / manufactured foods (which would exclude fruit or pure fruit juice, but capture juice with additives for example?) then I for one would hope that the money it raises is ring-fenced for the NHS or other health initiatives (weight loss / dietry / nutritional support type activities)
There was a panel of nutritionists on BBC Fivelive earlier this year, and they were making the case against oranges, apples and bananas when simply consumed as fruit (let alone as juice or smoothie).
I think I may have heard the same thing - but I thought it was a case of in moderation (as fruit) and being careful with children - especially on fruit juice (always dilute if they do have it and rinse mouth after) - though its the kind of topic that crops up regularly on five live so it may be a different occasion?
Like I said above, cheap healthy food exists, but it's not accessible to everyone for a variety of reasons.
On the tax, that entirely depends how far you go with it. If you tax unhealthy food to the extent that it costs the same as healthy food you'll probably see a change in eating habits. But then, you could achieve the same results without making poor folks poorer by making healthy food cheaper.
Yep. If the evidence suggests that they have worked elsewhere that should be trusted. And that second point is really important. At the moment the incentives for the food producers are aligned around increasing sugar content (better taste leads to more sales). If the sugar is taxed then a sweeter product would have to be priced higher. It is debatable whether this would just lead to food bills rising or whether the manufacturers would fight to be lower in price by lowering sugar content (the desired effect).
In other words the tax isn't merely punitive, the idea is to shift the incentives for manufacturers/producers.
Yeah I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just pointing out the fruit juice is something that is often considered "healthy" but really isn't
I imagine fruits are being bred progressively sweeter. Bananas in particular are like rocket fuel nutritionally (I pretty much reserve them for post gym smoothies)
That would be a pretty good way to sell it, in fact.
Yep agreed, which can potentially be even worse as it's at least obvious that coke's bad for you, particularly when "five a day" is so heavily pushed.
Here we go again. Billy fecking Bragg. Very BBC.
Hope he gives us a rendition of keep the red flag at the end.
Got a feeling that a question about transgender's may be coming up looking at that last member of the audience.
So i think that was a no from the SNP guy.
Labour woman's soundbites met with stoney silence in Edinburgh. Bit flat this episode.
So does that Scottish Labour woman support Trident or not? No-one is any the wiser.
The reason being, that those UKIP and Green voters would have even more reason to back one of the smaller parties.
I think that guy was hoping to get a laugh there. I really hope he's not an aspiring comedian cos' he'll be crushed.
Well said Billy.
Merryn Somerset Webb knows her stuff. Good journalist.
That Labour woman is suddenly an expert on the steel industry. So she wants protectionism and state subsidies now- illegal under EU law.
Dugdale and Bragg are in a contest to see who can produce the most platitudes before the hour is up.
This arsehole is saying we kept the banks going so they could lend to small businesses, but they didn't. They used the money to build up their balance sheets. Who do you think told them to build up their balance sheets? Hard to lend more and build up reserves...
Seconded.
She is also inclined to plain speaking, a rarity on this programme.
ETA: Even told Bragg to button it! Let's have Webb back on next week.
Go Merryn!
How much can a steel mill diversify its output ffs!
My heart bleeds for the Journalists. How could you compare.
Feck off, we have feelings and responsibilities too!
Do you f*ck. If you did, you'd feature more real-life, badly photographed rubbish ghost stories in your financial publication.
The Chilcot inquiry is just a joke, the families must be disgusted.
Am tempted to do some kind 'Is the ghost of fun in journalism' piece bemoaning the financial inducement clampdown killing off freebies.Merryn, Jeff Prestridge at Mail on Sunday and Pat Collinson, the Guardian money editor, are all genuine consumer forces for good.Seconded.
She is also inclined to plain speaking, a rarity on this programme.
ETA: Even told Bragg to button it! Let's have Webb back on next week.
It is bad (speaking relatively). Companies would take a bunch of clients and a handful of journos to Wembley, Wimbledon or whatever...the inducement rules made them shit themselves so journos got everyting for about two years. Was great. Now inducement rules may cover us and it's all lost.
Journo pay aint great. The freebies subsidise it. How else would you get to have oral sex in a toilet cubicle at the Brits?!
Another Journo on This Week demonising people on Tax Credits.
Wait 'til the queue for Madonna shortens?
She said she's a multilateralist, i.e. she supports Trident as there's no way anyone else is giving up their nukes.
Was that the young gimp at the back? Took less than a second to take a lifelong dislike to his being.
Can't remember her commenting on tax credits. She just argued against propping up ailing industries.
I went to the Brits twice. Both ended up well
Remember one year I nipped to the loo when James Blunt came on. So did 15,000 others...I was there the year Paul Weller won lifetime achievement? He did a 4-5 song set, including Town Called Malice. Was brilliant.She didn't say yes or no. She was shite throughout I thought, an empty vessel. Apart from fat.
Dugdale is awful. Woeful, terrible, appalling politician.
Julia Hartley-Brewer on This Week was who he was talking about, who was doing her usual contrarian shtick.
Jip, you know full well it was a yes. Though I will agree she was a bit crap, but so was everyone (it's Question Time after all).