EconomicsToo

Here is a short post on a Year 12 student's thoughts regarding the recently unveiled plan to implement a sugar tax across Britain in 2018...Original post here . I mage source The March 2016 budget revealed Chancellor George Osborne's plan to levy a tax of up to 20% on soft drinks and other sugary products in the United Kingdom in an attempt to shadow the results of Mexico, where a sugar tax cut sales of sugary drinks by 12% during 2015. The tax aims to combat the rising obesity that has become endemic to Britain and burdens the national healthcare system whilst simultaneously acting as a fundraising tool to boost government revenue. Economically, the motivation for this tax is sound but could it actually be an effective tool to reduce the domestic consumption of sugar or is a lower obesity rate a distant dream? The rationale behind this tax is that it will simply increase prices which should suppress demand and therefore reduce consumption. Proponents ar...

This Guardian story outlines the plans of new NHS Chief Executive, Simon Stevens, to place a tax on sugar in hospitals. It is an interesting approach to combating the obesity epidemic sweeping the western world and is expected to improve the health of 1.3 million NHS workers by raising approximately £30m a year, and he is urging the government to force food firms into action. Image source:  http://www.ceresproject.org/Sugar.html  Hospitals in England, by 2020, plan to charge increased prices for sugary beverages and snacks that are sold in their cafes and vending machines. A tax of 20% has been suggested by medical groups and health charities but the figure is yet to be decided. This is likely to reduce the levels of consumption of sugar and is a good place to start if the UK is going to do something about the levels of obesity and diabetes, which are both  closely tied to sugar intake. I guess hospitals and government health facilities should lead by ex...

The Malaysian Health Ministry has shared a longterm plan to  ban vaping . Citing 'research' showing that 1 hour of vaping is more dangerous than 150 cigarettes and quoting a study from the University of Athens, conducted in 2012 , that showed that e-cigarettes cause harm to the lungs the government of Malaysia have said that vaping is more harmful than conventional smoking. However, this Medical Daily  story and video claims to have compiled all available data on e-cigarettes and the smoking of normal cigarettes and draws a different conclusion. Although it does state vaping is less harmful, it expresses this does not mean it is safe! Regulation might be a good idea as this US poll shows  and with a 50% adoption rate cited from the findings, until further studies are conducted in to the long term consequences, regulation would be sensible. So has the Malaysia government had a change of heart by deciding that the longterm health of its public is a m...