• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Well to start, everything that’s included in this sugar tax. Does anyone really need this garbage?

      But really, it’s more important to give people lives that are good so they don’t get sucked in to unhealthy behaviors.

      Give people something to live for any they won’t kill themselves.

      • ryannathans
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        How is banning sweet food in its entirety supposed to help give people something to live for? It only makes life shitter

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Not what I said.

          I said I prefer a ban instead of a tax. A tax just bans sugar for the poor. A ban effects everyone, so it’s fair and more effective.

          But also, the optimum solution instead of a tax or a ban would be to make people’s lives better so they don’t kill themselves.

          • ryannathans
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I wonder how much diabetic deaths would increase with no easy access to sugar

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              To clarify, I didn’t say to ban the ingredient itself, just foods with added sugars i.e. sugar-sweetened beverages, sugary snacks and junk food, sugary breakfast cereals, etc. We’re talking about this in context of the tax, which doesn’t ban raw bags of sugar.

              If someone wants a teaspoon of sugar in their coffee at home then whatever, that’s not the source of the public health crisis. The problem is from convenience and processed foods. We could solve the problem. We won’t.