Friday, October 13, 2017

Fast Food Fallacies

They say only two things in life are guaranteed; death and taxes. But if you live in Trinidad and Tobago, it's three things; death, taxes and the stupidity of bright, well-intentioned people. Take for example the recent call by First Lady Rema Carmona for higher taxes to be imposed on “unhealthy food imports”.  Her rationale for this is simple; higher taxes will deter people from purchasing junk food and push them towards healthier options. Thus, “saving people from themselves” as she put it. This is a great example of how public policy is crafted in T&T. Not by using evidence and reason. But by snobbishly assuming you know what’s best for other people.  

Taxing junk food may intuitively appear to be a rationale idea. Lifestyle diseases such as heart disease and diabetes kill far more people in T&T than Rasta City or Unruly ISIS does, and costs our healthcare system billions. But as every respectable economist will tell you; good polices must factor not just what can be seen; but what can be foreseen.  What Mrs. Carmona may not realize is that most Trinbagonians do not have the luxury of a state subsidized housing allowance and as such have to make pragmatic choices about how they spend their income on food. Sugary foods are cheaper than those marketed as healthier alternatives, thus, raising the cost of “junk food” will raise the cost of food  overall for middle and lower income families. This fact appears to not matter to upper middle and upper class persons, who are usually the type lobbying for junk food taxes. Their message to the poor is basically: “Let them eat gluten free, non gmo, non-fat, non-dairy cake”.

Of course nothing brings Trinbagonians of all classes and races together than a shared distaste for facts.  So it’s not surprising that no one has bothered to point out to Mrs. Carmona that there is no evidence that junk food taxes actually help stop obesity. Junk food taxes or ‘fat taxes’ have been imposed in varying degrees across states in the USA and countries in Western Europe, with little success. In New York, Mayor Bloomberg’s controversial  ‘soda ban’- a ban on soft drinks larger than 16 ounces –was ultimately deemed to be unlawful, but studies found that if implemented it could have actually increased soft drink consumption. That's because attempting to regulate portion size incentivizes manufacturers to produce smaller sizes and “bundle them” in sales. Resulting in consumers buying more of these bundles.
In Denmark junk food taxes were abandoned after just one year. Why? Because whether it's weed or Snickers, banned or heavily taxed things that are in high demand, inevitably create a black market. So a trade sprang up with smugglers bringing in snacks Danes love across the border from Germany and Sweden.  Policy makers in Denmark were forced to acknowledge that their fat tax failed to change Danish eating habits and created far more problems than it solved. The Danes replaced their fat tax with an increase in income tax. “That confirms this (fat tax) was never more than a tax hike masquerading as a public health policy,” said Forbes Magazine.
Trinbagonians can take some solace knowing that American and European policymakers can be just as inept as their countrymen. Take for example Minister Terrance Deyalsingh. He instituted a ban on sugary drinks in schools across T&T, to help curb child obesity. Courageously ignoring all the evidence from studies into such bans in the USA that shows that not only do sugary drinks bans in schools don’t work, they actually increase sugary drinks consumption outside school hours.  “We were hoping the policies would lead to lower consumption but we didn’t find any evidence of that", says Dainel Taber, a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Illinois’ Institute for Health Research and Policy. Of course, when his policy fails,  Minister Deyalsingh can always blame iton not being able to beat children anymore.

The big problem with a junk food tax though is the idea that the state should have the right to police the tables of citizens. People will be better served by having access to information about how they can improve and maintain their health, rather than having to answer to the food police. For decades in T&T, state paternalism has been dished out as the answer to every problem. Even as the current economic crisis has exposed the  glaring fault with this mentality, those like Mrs. Carmona and Mr. Deyalsingh still advocate for more of it. As they say, you are what you eat.

No comments: