Health experts have thrown their support behind the proposal, which aligns with long-standing recommendations from the World Health Organization.
Researchers suggest money generated from the proposed tax could be used to strengthen oral health services, improving access and cutting costs at the dentist.
The revenue from the tax could go precisely to the services you mention.
Also less sugar would help with a lot of other health issues like diabetes, obesity etc.
I don’t have an issue with the prices going up on soft drinks, but it would achieve very little unless it was (as you suggest) used to fund medicare dental.
The government cannot be trusted though, if they really were genuine, dental medicare could easily be funded, there are currently another few very, very obvious places taxpayer money is going to, where it shouldn’t be.
They would not have a leg to stand on if they put up the soft drink tax and then not implement better dental care as the medical/dental profession and the rest of us are seeking, but I understand where you’re coming from.
Worse case scenario: the govt doesn’t do anything to improve access to dental care, there would still be positive health outcomes. Overseas they’ve found that putting up the price has reduced consumption of these drinks which in turn has reduced some obesity and dental caries, particualarly in the young.
The price of cigarettes increased dramatically decades ago, to a much higher price point than soft drinks ever will. That definitely stopped/helped some people from smoking, but many others continued, and many more have taken it up since.
If the government were serious, advertising these drinks would be banned as a 1st step. The 2nd step would be banning the drinks themselves, which would have to flow onto other items that fit in the same category.
The government is, as per usual, completely full of sh*t though.
I agree with you. It’s just capitalism is a beast. No govt would dare, not even a more progressive mob like the Greens if they were in power.
It could, but it wont
How can you know for sure?
Precedent
Illinois tried this a few years back to help shore up budget shortfalls. Number one, it didn’t bring in very much revenue. Number two, literally everyone hated it because it is a tax on poor people.
It was killed, I believe in less than a year.
“Suggest” and “could be used” are weasel words already. When they’re spoken by researchers with no say in how the budget is spent, i cant help feeling sceptical.
More likely it gets lost into general revenue with only some big media buys and ad campaigns to show for it; (with message variations of “Govt good😀, Sugar bad☹️” )
We can’t know for sure and it’s also up to us to support the research and and demand better dental care services.
There is honestly no downside to less sugar.
unless that means more artificial sweeteners
They’re pretty dodgy too. Our palates have been conditioned by the processed food and drink industries to seek overly sweet foods and drinks (let alone all the other chemicals they put into what goes into our mouths). All of these make the so-called food and drinks addictive which leads to exactly where they want us to be.
I would take sugar over that stuff any day.