People who drink, smoke and eat unhealthy food are a major drain on the heath service. This is fact. You can look at studies done in other countries who have a national health service. This type of tax is absolutely appropriate and means those abusing their bodies are then paying proportionately for the additional health care they will need in the future.

The fact that the taxes will "not necessarily be used for health purposes" is a separate issue, which does not change the fact that this sort of funding is the way to go. I certainly don't want to be paying for people who have made bad decisions in regards to their bodies and health.

Sillysonofa

"We don't need a nanny state" it is our right to choose is it not? The tax might be an idea, but those people providing for our own medical well being should then be exempt from the tax according to your arguement?
I wholeheartedly agree that i should not have to pay for someone elses unhealthy choices though.

We don't need a nanny state, I agree. Let me frame my response. I have lived in the UK for a number of years and am now back in South Africa. They have a National Health Service funded by tax on pay amongst other things and a few years ago started looking at "fat tax". I always felt comfortable with the service the government offered and didn't feel the need to top up to private medical care. It's not perfect, but it works reasonably well. Tax and NHS deductions from my salary was around 22% of total. I was paid reasonably well. Here I am being paid a similar salary and my tax rate will aggregate to around 27%, then I need to pay medical aid costs on top of this. So South Africa is expensive if you value your health.

I strongly believe that all people should benefit from quality health care. I haven't been back long enough to experience South Africa's health infrastructure, but from all accounts it sounds dismal. If this processes improves the system and provides health care that meets minimum standards of quality, I'm all for it. There are clearly some issue to sort out within national and local government to improve efficiencies, get the skills in place to make it all work and ensure we get value for our money. Doing this may decrease the need for taxes elsewhere, but the burden on society create by those who are obese (UK estimated a direct cost of GBP4.2 billion) or prone to substance abuse is massive. And South Africa has it's fair share of drunken porkies running around. If you choose to abuse, you choose to pay the extra cost.

I haven't had a close look at how this is all being implemented, but I agree that if someone is using private health care, some form of rebate should be looked at as the person is no longer a burden to the state.

an "innovative financing mechanism" = a new way to screw the middle class into extinction

Sillysonofa

Well put.

The UK's national health system is a good system but has been in decline for years, the norm in the UK is to utalise the NHS as opposed to private, because private medical care is really the realm of the rich there.

You could apply the same argument to SA, but private care here is what i think everyone wants to have, even with the implementation of an NHS scheme here, i think most will still aspire to private care.

I do agree that if you dont care about your own health then do not expect others to pay for it, but in the UK that is how it has worked since its implementation, liberal attitudes to your fellow man and all......

The effect of the proposed "fat tax" is that most of the politicians; MP's; MEC's ; councillors ;officials in the ANCWL ;executive of the ANCYL and the hundreds of their family and cronies will be funding the new tax. I have no problem with that.

In Malawi, you go to jail for that. So consider the path that this could go down to if we allow for a nanny state.

The only thing that the SARS has not yet taxed is the male penis. This is due to the fact that 40% of the time it is hanging around unemlpoyed, 30% of the time it is hard up, 20% of the time it is pissed off and 10% of the time it is in the hole. On top of that, it has two dependents and they are both nuts.

Effective January 1st, 2012 your penis will be taxed according to size. The brackets are as follows:

10"- 12" Luxury Tax..........R300.00
8"- 10" Pole Tax.............R250.00
5"- 8" Privilege Tax.........R150.00
4"- 5" Nuisance Tax..........R 30.00

Males exceeding 12" must file under capital gains. Anyone under 4" is eligible for a refund. PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR AN EXTENSION!!!

Sincerely, Ivor Biggun.

*****NOTE***** We are still waiting for answers for the following questions:

- Are there penalties for early withdrawals? - What if one's penis is self employed? - Do multiple partners count as a corporation? - Are condoms a deductible expense as work clothes? - Is there an additional tax if you are not circumcised?

You have a very good point about the usage of taxes. With the total lack of transparency, it makes sense to influence behaviour by doubling the taxes on cigarettes, tobacco, alcohol and then taxing all foods except basic foods, especially restaurants and take-away foods. The extra tax should be VAT to control spending and then gyms could be zero VAT. If it gets used by politicians it is still taxed because it is VAT. The connect to the medical cover does not exist.

If 40 million people clip their toe-nails once a week at an average of 0.5g per 'clipping' that equates to 200 metric tons per week therefor 10,400 metric tones per anum.

I think you might be onto something here, some kind of tax per kg per houshold :)

Redcoat lol pls don't give the government any ideas.

UK has estimated direct medical cost of obesity at GBP4.2 billion. The cost to the economy at large is estimated at at over GBP20 billion per year. Just over a 10th of our GDP. Granted, the UK has a larger population and is a 1st world country, so difficult to compare. Astronomical costs though.

I'd agree with that.
Its not what he is suggesting though. He just wants to tax everyone (fat or not) that has a pizza and coke on movie night.

Well sushi is quite healthy ;)

Strictly speaking, there is nothing such a thing as 'unhealthy' or 'healthy' foods. Its the quantity and variety which make the entire diet either 'healthy' or 'unhealthy'.

Water, in excess, is toxic. That doesn't mean that drinking water should be discouraged.