General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHelp poor folks, NO TAX on fast food
I don't want to judge fast food ... I know it is not the best food to eat. But, if you are a poor working American, maybe with 2 jobs, kids, or care for aged or sick parents ... they rely on fast food. Basic food supply for many, let's admit that. One big way we can help the poorest folks is NOT TO TAX FAST FOOD! It is a massive tax on them.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Based on what numbers, study, references?
I have no idea whether or not that proposition is true. What data supports it?
TheBlackAdder
(28,189 posts)
LostinRed
(840 posts)Better to address the food deserts that exist and encourage them to buy food in grocery stores that aren’t taxed. Fast food isn’t good for them and will cause more strain on our health system. Use those taxes to create programs to help them eat healthfully.
Croney
(4,659 posts)I see poor people buying fruit and vegetables. How do I know they're poor? Actually I don't, but they sorta look like me and I'm not rich and seldom eat fast food.
I say tax the hell out of fast food until it's cheaper to eat something else.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,607 posts)And it might even help, in the short term.
But I think a better answer is to get good local grocery stores into those neighborhoods so that these folks will have good stuff to buy and consume.
Get to the root of the problem is the answer. Fast food is a symptom.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/12/health/poor-americans-fast-food-partner/index.html
Our recently published research examined this assumption by looking at who eats fast food using a large sample of random Americans. What we found surprised us: Poor people were actually less likely to eat fast food -- and do so less frequently -- than those in the middle class, and only a little more likely than the rich.
It's annoying when people just make stuff up.
greyl
(22,990 posts)
nini
(16,672 posts)They can't win one way or another.
thanks for the link
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)... I could never change my view with just that one post that you posted ... what's wrong with a Middle Class tax break on FOOD! BTW, I just don't make shit up ... why so many Fast Food places in poor neighborhoods but no Supermarkets. "Wake up Everybody"
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)That doesn't make it data.
Numerical propositions are subject to measurement. It appears that the relative frequency of fast food dining among different economic groups has, in fact, been the subject of at least one study findable in a very casual search, and I would tend to believe there is likely a whole lot of actually measured data on the subject aside from that. I have neither the time nor the inclination to conduct a research project into it, but neither, it appears, do you.
Shilling for fast food, though, is not a good look.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)OK ... engage with real people that live tucked away in our Mid-West, a place where I live, just an EXIT off the Interstate ... would like to know where you live and the WORLD VIEW from that periscope .... Howard Zinn is one of my heroes ...
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)That does not invalidate the point that fast food is still a particularly important food source ... for large numbers of poor people. Nowhere does the OP say anything contradicted by your article.
IOW, your argument essentially consists of a logical fallacy, relative to the point of the OP.
Not to mention, a hell of a lot of 'middle class' folks ... are actually pretty damn 'poor' even if their 'income' doesn't technically put them into the class of 'poor people'.
TheRealNorth
(9,478 posts)Do we give fast food a price advantage over other dining establishments?
If you want to make all restaurant food tax-exempt, that's one thing, but just making fast food tax exempt would be asking for problems. I would rather address poverty by increasing the minimum wage or reducing regressive taxation in general by balancing it with either progressive income tax rates or cutting loopholes used by the rich (i.e. bring tax rates for investment income or business income in line with personal income taxes)
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)I agree with you, actually 
Marrah_Goodman
(1,586 posts)
Celerity
(43,334 posts)the bottom 60% of Americans make less that 40,000 USD per year. Over 40% make less than 25,000 USD per year. Over one third make less than 20,000 USD per year. So that puts the percentiles used in the graph into a different light in terms of saying who is 'middle class' and who is 'poor'. It (consumption) really starts to drop off if you make more than 40K per year.
Also, I would love to see see the numbers on people who eat fast food far more than once over three one week periods. I would hardly call that level a huge amount. That is what the graph question asked:
https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2017
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)The root of that particular problem is ... the people there are poor, so nobody wants to build a grocery store there.
Just sayin' .
otherwise, they'd be there.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts).42 cents on a $7.00 tab ... what percentage tax is that on a minimum wager? I would think that this idea will spark many Mom and Pop local eateries. Not just a tax break to help the Corps.
hlthe2b
(102,236 posts)AirmensMom
(14,642 posts)We pay tax on food in TN. Hell, we pay tax on EVERYTHING. I personally think food and clothing should be exempt from tax in every state.
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,784 posts)If not, then everything is taxed.
We have a State Income Tax in Minnesota. Cothing, necessary Food, and Medications are not taxed.
AirmensMom
(14,642 posts)And there's the state sales tax plus local sales tax, so ours ends up being 9.75% for everything, which hits the poor really hard. I wouldn't mind paying income tax, but obviously that idea isn't popular here.
DBoon
(22,363 posts)If you want to help the poor, move away from sales taxes altogether and replace them with an income tax.
2naSalit
(86,577 posts)
Doodley
(9,088 posts)
former9thward
(31,997 posts)I guess we should have an obesity tax on any food you don't eat.
Doodley
(9,088 posts)former9thward
(31,997 posts)You will be horrified. But the people don't have the obesity problem we have. Hmmmm....
MarvinGardens
(779 posts)But no one is going to get fat eating broccoli, or cabbage, or green beans. Even pinto beans, or a sweet fruit like apple or pineapple, I'd be surprised if you could get fat eating. There's fiber, and bulk, and you're full before you get too many calories. It's the calorie dense, low fiber, low nutrient foods that will get you.
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,784 posts)Food bought off shelves for consumption, is not taxed here in Minnesota. Foods that fall under Taxable Grocery are Sodas, Chips, prepared Snack foods, Candy.
Prepared food such as at Deli and Food counters that has to be served you, is taxed because a service is provided. Fast food is food that has to be prepared for the customer and thus may be subjected to taxation. It depends on the state. Look at your recipts.
diva77
(7,640 posts)affording the cost of food
Perhaps fast food should be heavily taxed, and the government should subsidize fresh produce to make it more affordable
former9thward
(31,997 posts)Totally regressive.
diva77
(7,640 posts)
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)MarvinGardens
(779 posts)In some states, groceries are not taxed, but prepared food is. For the poor, food stamps only allow certain purchases. Not sure fast food is allowed.
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)This is not a good way to go.
Making food... whole food... affordable is the way to go.
And making whole food more accessible and easy to eat and serve is a better avenue to explore.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)building on the legacy of many past sins has been the foundation for better things
wryter2000
(46,039 posts)We ended up having to make crazy distinctions about what was a snack food and what wasn't. It's a stupid idea to tax food, period.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)Restaurants with high priced menu's, tax, should apply. No one needs to eat Fois Gras, but if they do , as they pay now, should be continued to be taxed. Not asking here for changing deductions on corp. lunches.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)$20 an entree, $50? What's considered high price in one region could be a steal somewhere else
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)
Doreen
(11,686 posts)I know people who have more than one job and kids or eldery ( some have both ) and they find the time to fix meals for everybody. The trick is making bigger portions than needed at that time so they can freeze it and have their own homemade fast food. Doing that keeps them from having to cook every day. Yes, very occasionally they do get fast food but not very often. I have seen some people who do use fast food as their quick and easy way out from having to cook. They and the people they take care of are not as healthy as the ones who fix their meals themselves. Food purchased from the store should not be taxed giving those who want to make healthier meals and able to better afford fruits and vegetables and raw meats. I truly see no reason why fast food, restaurant, things like candy bars, and soda should not be taxed.
xmas74
(29,674 posts)Or kitchens. Some,especially low wage workers, might live in an efficiency or a motel or rent a room in a basement. They're lucky; others live in shelters,vehicles or even tents. They don't have access to freezers. A mini fridge and maybe a microwave might be the extent.
Volunteering at winter shelters opened my eyes to how many work yet are homeless. For them fast food is a viable option,especially since a number of those in our shelter were employed in fast food establishments.
One size fits all solutions don't work.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)I was not thinking that deep on the issue ( as I should have. ) I was thinking about people who live in a home of some sort barely scrapping by but have a stove and oven.
I have been volunteering feeding lunch to the homeless for about five years and should have known to include them. I think also the reason I answered the way I did was because the people I know feeding lunch to do not go to fast food restaurants very often at all.
I do know the Starbucks in my town and the one next to it give the homeless free regular coffee which I always thought was cool especially in the winter when it is cold.
I apologize to all of them for not thinking about them with my answer.
xmas74
(29,674 posts)I do whenever I have a chance.
That's why I have a problem with these arguments. People think of a middle class with money to spend on bulk items and deep freezes but they forget about those without even a hot plate.
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)to how they are able to manage their time and available food options. That is some elitist bullshit right there. No better than people who think poor people shouldn't have cell phones or decent clothing.
How about we quit punishing poor people with limited options for the sin of being poor and having limited options? Eh? Sounds kind of progressive or something. How about we look for ways to help instead of turning up our self-righteous noses and wagging our finger at them? How about maybe trying that, instead?
xmas74
(29,674 posts)Without acknowledging that some have no facilities to even cook.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)Read my reply to xmas74.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Most of the people I know in my income bracket eat fairly healthy. Including my household where I cook 5 nights a week. But the wife and I are well paid, have full time jobs for the same company for over 30 years and seldom work more than 45-50 hours a week. And my mother was a great cook and taught me to cook. The wife’s mother saw cooking as an unfair burden on women so they eate out 5-6 nights a week in the 60’s and 70’s. But back then we did not realize how unhealthy it was, and at the mom and pop places they ate at in the rural Midwest it probably was no worse than home cooking would have been. Vegetables are still not a real feature on the central Indiana table unless you count potatoes and corn!
But today? Try working 10-12 hours a day often more than 5 days a week and finding time to cook every day! If companies were forced to pay a living wage to full time workers and give benefits more people would cook.
And I do not buy into the normal DU belief about the cause of food deserts, which exist near me in Orlando. If there were a market for good food in these poor areas the market would be served. But the people in those areas are just not given the time necessary to cook. We have had several open over the last 20 years by well mean folks intent on bringing good food to these areas. They all fail to stay in business.
The exception I am seeing are markets catering to our growing Latin population. They do seem to be taking root.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,853 posts)using a crockpot, or cooking enough for several meals on a day off and freezing portions.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)But that gets into the knowledge part. After 2 generations of shrinking free time cooking skills are greatly diminished.
Although frankly, I think we have some nostalgia on home cooked meals from the past. Being from Louisiana I have a huge advantage that I come from an live to eat culture. But my wife’s family does not nor do the fame of many of the people I know. If home cooked to a person is putting red meat or chicken in a crock or Dutch oven and pouring in a couple of cans of processed soup and cubed bullion, they may as well eat out.
I remember in horror when I joined the workforce and older man was craving the barbecue pork he was making for that nights meal. I was seriously confused about how he was barbecuing pork and working. Then he told me he had put a fatty pork roast(Boston butt) in the crock pot, poured in 2 bottles of bottled sauce and would eat it that night with fried potatoes. Hell, he may as well had a Whopper.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,853 posts)Real meat. Real potatoes. Okay, so a green veggie might be a nice addition, but that's not so terrible a dinner.
One thing that can make me crazy is how in this country we tend to either demonize or sanctify various foods. The only foods that you should avoid completely are the ones you are violently allergic to. Or the ones you really, really, don't like.
Otherwise, pretty much anything in moderation is just fine.
And a Boston butt in the crockpot with bottled sauce and fried potatoes, heck I'd join him.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)It was eating like that that lead to expanding heart disease.
Boston Butt cooked in its fat with processed bbq sauce and fried potatoes is no more nutritious than a whopper. Hell, at least a whopper has lettuce, tomato and onion! Both meals are nothing but fat and carbs with a little protein which once broken down in the body are the exact same. When our families were farming with mules not even 100 years ago fat and carbs like this got burned off. But they are death sentences now.
Until our meals focus on whole grains, veges and smaller portions of meat we will continue to have an obesity problem. Unless we find a way to get most Americans burning off 5000 calories a day.
I do agree with your point of demonizing some foods. And in my opinion demonizing fast food compared to equally unhealthy home cooked food is an example of this.
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)they could be cooking and freezing for 5 or 6 hours instead?
They probably don't have any other tasks to worry about on days off either. And there's probably plenty of room for a deep freezer they cant afford in their walk-up apartment or trailer home. Yup.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,853 posts)the kids and teaching them to cook?
No, why bother? I mean, they can just always depend on fast food when they're on their own, right?
In reality, a crockpot dinner, which can be used several times a week takes zero watching. Just put everything in, turn it on, and leave.
And it really shouldn't take 5 or 6 hours to make 3 or 4 days' worth of meals. Especially if you're using the crock pot several nights a week. Or watch a few episodes of "30 Minute Meals". When I first discovered that show I thought it was an exaggeration. After all, there must be cuts in the taping, right? The first time I made one of her meals, chicken tajine, to my complete and utter astonishment it was done in under 30 minutes.
But maybe, just maybe, you don't actually have to spend several hours on a weekend, plus I'll agree that freezer space can be an issue. Who was the Brit who did a series in this country trying to teach schools and regular people that it is not hard or time consuming to cook at home? My favorite episode was the one with the man who had three sons, who normally went out and picked up fast food at two or three different people. So he went off to get dinner while our Brit stayed home and helped the boys fix dinner. When dad got back, the four were outside playing catch, and dad initially thought they'd given up. Nope. They'd made dinner in less time than it took him to go out and pick it up.
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)resources you do and therefore you feel it's okay to be judgemental of others who do not. Somebody who apparently has all the time in the world to sit around watching cooking shows that poor people may not have access to because no cable or internet, and probably doesn't live in a food desert or have a 2-hour commute, might not get it because they don't want to get it. Too easy to be yet one more judgemental finger-wagger, telling all these poor people what's wrong with them.
The bottom line is they don't owe you one goddamn reason or excuse for doing what they have to do and managing their own lives the best way they see fit for themselves and their families in whatever circumstances they have facing them. If you actually want to help, try actively doing something helpful like working long-term in a shelter or finding a way to get to know the poorest of the working poor and perhaps get an understanding of what their real lives are like instead of offering only your disapproval, which is utterly useless.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,853 posts)"who wants to waste a whole day off playing with their children when they could be cooking and freezing for 5 or 6 hours instead?"
You seemed to be referring to those who actually could spend the time cooking and freezing, and not all of the other things you suddenly bring up in the above post.
I've been poor. Really poor. Single mom, five kids. She was a nurse back when nurses made barely above minimum wage. She worked as many over time shifts as she could. I had a Saturday babysitting job that paid all of $3.00 for the day. Okay, so this was 1963 which means it was worth somewhat more than three dollars would be today, but still, it wasn't very much money. Mostly I spent my baby sitting money on groceries. In fact, I'd have the mom of the girls I babysat for stop at a local supermarket when she was driving me home so I could buy food. I recall her being astonished at that, because clearly she assumed I'd spend the money on myself. Are you kidding? Without my input we'd go hungry.
And even allowing for the fact that this was before the colonization of fast food places in the American landscape, it was obvious to the most casual observer that home cooking was vastly cheaper than any version of eating out.
So actually, I've experienced this kind of poverty. And the real problem is that people think that things like home cooking aren't a solution. Oh, and I do volunteer at my local homeless shelter, cooking for their clients. Do you?
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)You want more children with clogged arteries by the time they are 16?
MarvinGardens
(779 posts)They did not tax food at the grocery store but prepared food was taxed. I think that is a better policy, and it was implemented with Democrats in charge. Repugs had only had the helm for a few years when I moved away, and of course they wanted to change that. NC also did not tax services, but of course the repugs wanted to change that so they could cut income taxes.
xmas74
(29,674 posts)They usually receive a discount but not a free meal and pay tax, sometimes on the before discount rate.
Before I see posts about it being healthier to bring a meal from home some posters need to realize there might be no place to store it. Most fast food places do not provide break rooms. Many barely provide a place to hang up a jacket. Maybe they could eat something outside in warm weather if they have a place to keep it(no lunch boxes usually allowed) but in cool or wet weather they are expected to break in the dining room, where they are only allowed food from that establishment.
I've known several over the years who order everything they can at half price off a McDonald's or Wendy's menu and split it up to have a meal later. It ends up being cheaper than most groceries, especially for those with limited use of equipment at home. Those same employees are often going home to an efficiency, a motel room or even a shelter or a rented room. They might have a mini fridge, maybe a microwave. Many do not allow hot plates or even crock pots. At least they have some sort of housing. I've met small town fast food workers living in tents in wooded areaa or mini vans they move every few days. They pay a gym fee for the local community center to take showers and sometimes hand wash their clothes.
I hate to say it but there are posters who really do not understand the reality of the situation. I met several this winter while volunteering at a small town shelter in the situations above. They would love to have a real kitchen to cook in but have learned to live with what's available-discount fast food. And I saw several trade with others from each others restaurants in the shelter, ie someone traded chicken fries from Burger King for a chili from Wendys or a breakfast sandwich from Sonic.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Even prepared meals no questions asked.
Why are you pushing food with no nutritional value and many health risks on people?
xmas74
(29,674 posts)None.
For some, fast food and convenience food is the most readily available.
How do you not understand that not every area has the same options?
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)It is much slower poison.
It has no nutritional value.
Maybe remove the tax on cotton candy?
xmas74
(29,674 posts)Of a lack of food that is ready made for those without cooking facilities. Why?
Once again, not everyone has access to cooking facilities. Not every town offers services and those who do offer them in certain time frames. Some are at work during those limited windows of availability and not able to partake.
A fast food employee might find a soup and a baked potato or side salad, a side of eggs with oatmeal and fruit or a grilled chicken wrap might be a cheaper option and healthier than options that need no refrigeration or heating,which they might not have access.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)I am just rejecting your flawed argument.
xmas74
(29,674 posts)Instead of sitting behind a keyboard?
The people I worked with had no kitchens. They didn't have a roof. There are no kitchens in town that serve to the food insecure-just a couple of churches and the windows to receive a meal are only about an hour, once a day. None are centrally located.
Several of the local homeless also use fast food as warming stations. They know they must purchase a food item so they do,usually making it their meal of the day.
You refuse to acknowledge that for some this might be one of very few crappy options available.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)They must have gnawed off their child's leg?
Because there is NO option other than poison?
xmas74
(29,674 posts)Just recently there were campfires that some were using in the woods until police and fire were sent to extinguish them. Many ate Beef a Roni and such, cold, from a can.
I don't understand why you refuse to see another pov. Here in Missouri we had a brutal winter. We have a GOP supermajority in Jeff City and funding to many human service programs has been slashed. Instead of increasing the shelters and hours many were shut down. Churches in this area were often the "soup kitchens". Now only one in my town offers a service and only twice a week. The others have all opened preschools, day cares and even elementary schools on grounds. For licensure most have ended not just the soup kitchen but even opening as a shelter. Having strangers in the same area as children is a liability issue.
(For context: a nearby city in my state, Kansas City, made international news because the health department went to a local park with the police. They stopped a local group known for serving meals to the homeless every week by confiscating the food, tearing off wrappers and pouring bleach all over the food while the food insecure individuals stood and watched. Some cried. That's how the homeless are treated around here.)
Other services also lost funding. Community centers and libraries lost grants. Our community center now offers less programs, higher costs and no real public areas. The library opens later,closes earlier. Some of the homeless would spend the day on campus at a local university but public safety has made it a policy to run them off, even as far as giving them rides off campus.
Our homeless shelter was temporary. A group of citizens were concerned about the snow, the ice storms and the sub zero temps. An organization loaned us an old building only until April 1. We had to cover all costs to run. We couldn't open until 7 pm and had to close at 8 am because most of the volunteers also had jobs.
I wanted to lay this all out for you so maybe you could finally see where this is leading. In cold weather, in excessively hot weather and in wet weather it isn't uncommon to see the homeless use fast food facilities as a warming/cooling station. In order to do so they must purchase an item. That means they are eating a sausage biscuit or a kids cheeseburger. Sometimes they are making the best of a situation. And fast food employees often live off of the food they make because they get it cheap or can even eat the sandwiches that have sat under a warmer for too long for free.
Is it great? No, nothing about this is good. People deserve good,nutritious food. They deserve stable shelter. They should have options for places to go where they can just exist without fear of harassment. Right now they don't have those things. Who are you to judge what they eat, how they stay warm, how they try to get through the day?
If a goddamn 99 cent cheeseburger at Burger King fills an empty tummy and gives someone a place to rest for a couple of hours, so be it. I refuse to judge them. And you shouldn't either.
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)fescuerescue
(4,448 posts)While the wealthy may eat a little more than the poor, it's not a HUGE gap. Very minor.
If we are going to tax food, then tax it equally.
I'm ok with food not being taxed to.
But In think we should treat all people equally here, since we all tend to eat about the same anyway.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)I can't afford to take my kids out to fast food very often because it is so much cheaper and healthier to make similar things at home...but it all takes time. Shopping takes time and cooking takes time...but eating a healthy, balanced diet at home is definitely cheaper. Instead, like others here have said, they should NOT tax healthy foods - whole grain items, fruit, veggies.
