Effects Of Soda On The United States

Sugar addiction is a problem that has been in our society for many years. In today's world this type of addiction is being composed into drinks. Sugary drinks are found everywhere from local stores, to in home refrigerators. Sodas, juices, and energy drinks, all fall under unhealthy remedies to thirst. Sugar addiction can only restrain us from accomplishing healthy goals in life. Sugary drinks can lead to harming one's body. Over the past few years, many cities and states have considered taxing sodas and other sugary beverages. Sugary drinks must be tax due to its unhealthy components and addiction.

If this happened, it would presumably effect people who are in poverty from buying soda, but what about all the other products out there? They would have to tax cane sugar or high-fructose corn syrup itself. These taxes would have to be very broad. If the taxes were so high that people would stop buying sugary beverages this would still not solve obesity or diabetes. The majority of my family drinks soda to what I consider to be excess; some drink over 6 cans a day; most of them also happen to be obese and have type 2 diabetes. I doubt paying extra would cause them to stop drinking these beverages.

The debate on weather sugary drinks, especially soda, should be taxed or not has been a topic for years. Some people believe that they should be taxed for the improvement of health while on the other hand some people think that taxing the drinks won't do much and actually hurt people. Taxing sugary drinks is helpful to those who have a hard time with temptation for the drinks. In the article "Do Soda Taxes Really Work?" Sifferlin states that when researchers looked at Berkeley residents, they found that when taxing soda started "sales of sugary-sweetened drinks fell by close 10% and sales of water increased in Berkeley by about 16%" (4) Just by the percent difference rasing prices on soda made people decide against buying the sweet drinks,

If done right the political side would be able to use this accurately, however it is not done right. The tax shouldn't be enforced because of the way obesity isn't drastically improved upon from these taxes. The people who don't want to pay high prices have alternatives available to them, so the taxes stopping obesity proves useless. The alternatives are going to be more tempting when consumers see the prices of the taxed drinks and still be consuming drinks that may not be healthy. This, on top of the political eye of the situation, are reasons that the tax can't be helpful to stop obesity; one of the main claims to stop the taxes being to stop obesity. Further support of this being that author Brian Gale points in his article, "What the Soda Tax Means for Consumers" that even with the drink's taxes reducing how much is being consumed, it is uncertain if it's changing the consumers' choices of unhealthy drinking choices. It is undeniable that gauging every singe persons drinking and health choices will prove difficult based solely on the taxing of sugary beverages, especially with the idea of multiple variables having an influence on the drinking habits of every

More than 35% of American adults are obese and as a consequence, are at increased risks for health issues such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes ("Overweight & Obesity"). The U.S. taxpayer is supplementing much of the cost to treat obesity related health issues through public health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid ("Economic Costs"). A positive externality will occur in the form of decreased health care expenditures on Medicare and Medicaid. The U.S. government should impose an excise tax on soda and other beverages that contain sugar. Consumers who drink excess sugary beverages impose a negative internality on their health; as well as imposing a negative externality on the American

Firstly, taxes on sodas would decrease the consumption of soda. People would think twice before buying a soft drink if there was an increased tax on carbonated beverages. They may choose bottles of water with a cheaper price. When people don’t spend on carbonated beverages, the consumption of soda would decrease. According to a survey of Powell et at., suggested that a 20% increase in price would reduce consumption by 25%. As a result, it would break the link between the consumption of soda and obesity. It also encourages the consumption of healthier beverages, such as water, vegetable drinks, etc. If people consume fewer sodas, in particular, they would have better health conditions as well as lower obesity rate. Therefore, these taxes would decrease the obesity rate in our country.

It states here " The Tax in Berkeley, which will increase prices around 20%, is forecast by experts to reduce consumption" (Wood and Shughart 7). This is stating that if we do tax sodas then the consumers will decrease and increase in buying healthy drinks. Which it would show more people to focus on staying healthy and start acting healthy too. This will help a lot of people from getting sick and start to focus on exercise and eating, drinking also acting healthy by stopping soda from being cheaper than healthy menus like water and other healthy drinks. But there a problem with this is that only one city from one state isn't going to be enough to start a big movement like that as you need, a lot more than one city or one state in order for to work they need more than half of the states to start the movement.

In Marion Nestle’s blog post, she discusses the positive effect of the soda tax in Berkeley on soda consumption. She compared Berkeley’s soda intake data to the soda drinking of neighboring cities that do not have a soda tax. She noticed that the soda consumption decreased significantly in Berkeley and increased slightly in Oakland and San Francisco where there was no soda tax

If the idea was to get people to not drink the these beverages as much as we are used to then a tax would be going at it all wrong. It would be a better idea to have more marketing or information about the benefits of limiting their sugary drink intake. I don’t even think I have ever seen an ad or service announcement about not drinking soda. Everything shown to us is to encourage us to go to the store and pick up the pack of soda or a huge bottle of gatorade. But there are ads against smoking and drinking shown all the time. Ads are about awareness and are an easier approach to the public because it’s a win-win (Clemmit). These companies don’t lose customers to high taxes and the public learn some of the health issues that come with most of the products. If we were going to put the same taxes on sugary drinks they would have to be treated the same. “If you want to tax the hell out of soda, then you need to make people think that’s a drug, not a beverage - that downing a Coke is just like puffing on a cigarette (Engber 641).

This law would have somewhat of a domino effect as it would also affect fast food chain restaurants as they wouldn’t make as much money with them losing money on the soda machines they purchase. On the contrary, the soda tax would help with “medical costs for overweight and obesity alone are estimated to be $147 billion or 9.1% of U.S. health care expenditures with half these costs paid for publicly through the Medicare and Medicaid programs”(Brownell). This quote means medical programs will invest that money into other people who have more severe conditions and not use them on some conditions that could’ve been prevented.

Soda companies “dramatically announced that they would aim to cut the number of sugary drinks calories by twenty percent over the next ten years by reducing the portion size and trying to sell more zero-calorie and low calorie options.” By reducing the portion size, Americans could be drinking more cans, and possibly drinking more ounces than they were originally. As for the zero-calorie and low calorie options, the drinks are considered by doctors to be worst than the original because they contain artificial sweeteners that are not ‘natural sugars’, but chemically made sugars that puts an individual at greater risk of being morbidly obese by slowing their metabolisms, and is also known to elevate their blood pressure. Mexico’s soda consumption and obesity rate was once worst than the United States a few years ago, Mexico then established “a significant tax on soda and junk food.. Soda consumption in Mexico fell by a couple of percent points almost immediately.. there was almost as large increase in the sale of bottled water (not taxed).” Mexico had went ahead with its initiative to stop their nation’s problem, as for the United States, soda has become a major part of our diets. I believe that is restricting us from progressing from this aggravated problem.

Many store owners might argue that if they ban super-sized soda drinks they will be receiving less money because the bigger the drink the more it costs; however, the health of the U.S citizens is much more important because the more they consume those sugary foods and

One of the biggest health concerns facing children in the United States to is childhood obesity. Childhood obesity has grown to become a major epidemic all across the nation effecting millions of children both physically and emotionally. One of the biggest contributors to this public health issue is sugar sweetened beverages. Sugar-sweetened beverages are an unregulated and out control beverages that is being consumed by millions of children each and every day. Progress is being made on the local level to treat and control this concern, but in order to truly make a difference a federal policy needs to be implemented. This federal policy needs to tax sugar-sweetened beverages to encourage consumer to make healthier and cheaper choices. A federal

With a growing epidemic of obesity in America, some states and lawmakers have resorted to taking unconventional measures in order to counter the growing issue. Many legislators are debating the effectiveness of a “fat tax” would be on limiting the consumption of soda, high fat foods, and high sugar foods, and ultimately reducing the rate of morbidity and mortality due to obesity. The idea is that long term consumption of high fat, high sugar foods and drinks lead to many health problems, so making them more expensive and less accessible should decrease the health issues related to their consumption.

Only 2% of children in the U.S. eat a healthy diet (“Facts about Childhood Obesity” 1). Junk food is a leading factor in the growing obesity epidemic in America. To help stop the epidemic a high tax must be placed on junk food. The “fat tax” would be added to items considered to be unhealthy. There are a plethora of potentially taxable items such as sugar, caffeine, artificial sweeteners, even salt. The “fat tax” will help deter consumers from purchasing these items in an effort to improve the overall health and nutrition of American’s. There are a plethora of ideas to help and prevent obesity as well as other health issues.