The Pros And Cons Of Mexico's Soda Tax

Policymakers forget to actually offer solutions, something that we should be working on. Many experts recommend decreasing the amounts of the foods we eat. Food and beverage companies have introduced thousands of healthier alternatives. Consumers need to learn more about healthy diets. A helpful task would allow the government to implement a tax on food that is considered unhealthy. The financially disadvantaged would be less inclined to indulge in fast food dinning. According to the article “Mexico’s Soda Tax is working. The US Should Learn from It” Berkeley, California, became the first city in the United States to pass a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. In 2013, Mexico’s congress passed a one-peso-per-liter tax on sugary beverages that

went into effect all over the country. During the first year of the soda tax in Mexico, the purchases of the beverages went down to six percent. Initiatives to raise this percentage included funding for programs to support healthy eating, improve food labelling to help consumers understand health implications, and regulating marketing of junk food to children. As the year went on, by December the declined rate was at 12 percent. By decreasing consumption, reducing obesity, chronic diseases, and healthcare costs can be reached. The negative affect with placing higher taxes on junk food is that it has been implemented in areas before and results show that it fails to directly target the cause of obesity. In the past, in Denmark the tax was placed on certain products but ended up being removed because eating behaviors were not changing. The Deontology theory states that the correct action is chosen without any thought to the positive or negative consequences that result (Macdonald & Beck-Dudley, 1994). The junk food tax was soon claimed to be unfair, discriminatory, and a threat to freedom of choice which eventually brought on an argument from consumers.