South Africa sugar tax will cost 60,000 jobs

[BusinessTech]

South Africa sugar tax will cost 60,000 jobs

Reuters reported that South Africa could lose as many as 60,000 jobs in the beverage industry because of the proposed tax on sugary drinks.

 

[Hemi300c]

As long as the anc has more money for KFC and Johnny Walker they don't care.

 

[Arthur]

That's what you get when you turn Caesar into a nanny. A nanny with guns and prisons.

 

[Albert Broco]

Unfortunately, this is how the dice rolls. It just goes to show, the ANC does not care about people. It is all about self-enrichment by stealing taxes they have full control over. Too bad for those who will be without jobs. At least Zuma and cronies will be smiling...

 

[ellyally]

Unemployed need not worry, ANC is renaming streets, all is good

 

[Kosmik]

Sugar is a serious problem. Not sure if a tax is the right way to do it, rather penalize companies accordingly.

 

[Albert Broco]

Sugar is a serious problem. Not sure if a tax is the right way to do it, rather penalize companies accordingly.

Will not help to punish the companies. Business 101 - pass all losses to the consumer. Even if sugar is a problem, this is not a nanny state, we do not need a government to tell us what to consume and what not to consume.

This is a money racket for Zuma and his bosses. They invested a lot of money in capturing Zuma, the ANC and the State and they need to realize a return on their investment before everything falls apart. This is what it is all about.

 

[Kosmik]

Will not help to punish the companies. Business 101 - pass all losses to the consumer. Even if sugar is a problem, this is not a nanny state, we do not need a government to tell us what to consume and what not to consume.

This is a money racket for Zuma and his bosses. They invested a lot of money in capturing Zuma, the ANC and the State and they need to realize a return on their investment before everything falls apart. This is what it is all about.

Actually no, it is a world wide issue. Sugar has impregnated nearly everything we eat and it is hidden quite well. Try this, take a product, look at the sugar portion on the nutrition label and see if there is a figure for daily RDA%. It's one of the only ingredients that doesn't state it anywhere.

Understand that medical costs have skyrocketed with illness related to sugar and excessive consumption of sugar. Not excessive consumption of food, sugar. There is as big a fight now between international companies and folks like the WHO over sugar as there was over Tabacco. Also what I meant by penalizing the companies, is forcing them to reduce the sugar load in their products.

 

[Arthur]

forcing them to reduce the sugar load in their products.

Really? And why would they do that? Just because it adds a few cents to the price the customer will pay? How little our Great Nannies understand.

 

[Nerfherder]

Sugar is a serious problem. Not sure if a tax is the right way to do it, rather penalize companies accordingly.

I agree... the principle is right but as usual with the ANC the implementation is the problem.

 

[Nerfherder]

That's what you get when you turn Caesar into a nanny. A nanny with guns and prisons.

I bet you had a nanny as a child. She must have wiped your little tottie just a bit too hard.

 

[Kosmik]

Really? And why would they do that? Just because it adds a few cents to the price the customer will pay? How little our Great Nannies understand.

Actually no, it's not about product cost, it's about the effect that excess sugar has on health and the increased costs to the health system in treating related diseases. Maybe you misunderstood, I agree that a tax is not the correct way as many manufacturers will just pass the cost on, rather enforce restrictions or mandatory information regarding it. In the states, they've now changed the nutritional labels so that they HAVE to state the ADDED sugar. Before, folks would eat what would be considered healthy but actually take a sugar knock to their system.

 

[Arthur]

Actually no, it's not about product cost, it's about the effect that excess sugar has on health and the increased costs to the health system in treating related diseases. Maybe you misunderstood, I agree that a tax is not the correct way as many manufacturers will just pass the cost on, rather enforce restrictions or mandatory information regarding it. In the states, they've now changed the nutritional labels so that they HAVE to state the ADDED sugar. Before, folks would eat what would be considered healthy but actually take a sugar knock to their system.

Ja, I understand what they intend. The Food Police are using guns and prisons to force people to eat healthier. (In between guns and prisons they just add huge financial penalties called fines. But in the end it comes down to guns and prisons if they don't obey and pay their extra money/tax/fine.). That just aint right. And it won't change consumption much.

 

[Kosmik]

Ja, I understand what they intend. The Food Police are using guns and prisons to force people to eat healthier. (In between guns and prisons they just add huge financial penalties called fines. But in the end it comes down to guns and prisons if they don't obey and pay their extra money/tax/fine.). That just aint right. And it won't change consumption much.

Hey I know, lets remove speed limits, traffic signs, etc. They are trying to regulate it, yes people have freedom of choice but not to the detriment of society, that is any activity. The current proposal is to simply make folks more aware by hitting their pockets, whereas my preference would be revamped labels\advertising.

 

[Arthur]

Hey I know, lets remove speed limits, traffic signs, etc. They are trying to regulate it, yes people have freedom of choice but not to the detriment of society, that is any activity. The current proposal is to simply make folks more aware by hitting their pockets, whereas my preference would be revamped labels\advertising.

Ah, so because we have speed limits and laws against taking other people's property without permission the government can now introduce taxes and fines to tell people what and what not to eat? I don't see how that follows.

 

[Nerfherder]

The financial punishment worked well with electricity. Look at how have reduced their usage - the same thing will happen with water... and now sugar.

The sugar cane farmers can plant other crops or use the cane for biofuel. The Refineries can also open their businesses up to other industries or export.
The goods manufacturers can either choose to change their recepies or make their product more expensive OR offer different products.

There does not have to be job losses.... and way that up against he cost of the diabetes epidemic.

 

[Arthur]

Oh, it might well work. But my quibble is not based on a pragmatic or utilitarian evaluation.

Many things work in a practical sort of way. Incineration and gas chambers work well to dispose of undesirable populations.

They're not just.

And that's my beef with this "pragmatic" legislation. It's not just.

 

[Nerfherder]

Oh, it might well work. But my quibble is not based on a pragmatic or utilitarian evaluation.

Many things work in a practical sort of way. Incineration and gas chambers work well to dispose of undesirable populations.

They're not just.

And that's my beef with this "pragmatic" legislation. It's not just.

Do you feel that our current prison system works ? Just out of interest ?

 

[Arthur]

Do you feel that our current prison system works ? Just out of interest ?

It's a big question with many issues. All depends what you mean by "prison system" ... the courts that sentence people, the incarceration itself, the parole system, conditions inside, rehabilitative vs punitive imprisonment, etc, etc?

In my view it works poorly.

 

[Kosmik]

Is it just to allow companies to disguise or effectively poison people with regards to health without regulation?