[ennay]

"what is a junk food"

That is where, even if the repeated comparison to cigarettes and the taxing of the poor didnt make this a ludicrous law, it logically falls apart. Because I dont think there is any concensus on what is a junk food. I think the list would be made by lobbyists and artificial "low fat low sugar" crap would be let off the hook. I think there would be very little consistancy, or else the rules would be set by some artificial measure of "healthy" that would eliminate some very healthy foods.

For ME the following foods are all vital to my healthy diet, have supported my weightloss and more importantly my drop in cholesterol and my insulin resistance therefore lowering my current and future health care costs

pizza
dark chocolate
icecream (real not fake)

And on certain specific occasions quickly absorbed, highly refined white flour and sugar.

The following foods are toxic to my weightloss efforts and I consider them junk foods

milk - even skim
watermelon
anything with artificial sweeteners
anything that is supposed to have fat but is "fat free"

Most attempts at the lists would tax the first 4 items and not tax the last 4. But if I avoided the first 4 and ate the last 4 I would be much less healthy

[LisaMarie71]

You can add red wine to the list. I imagine lots of people would want to tax it because it's alcohol, but a glass here and there is apparently great for your heart. I don't drink it as much as I used to because I'd rather eat my calories, but I think it has its place in a healthy diet, as does dark chocolate. A good piece of high-quality dark chocolate and a glass of red wine is much better for you than some crappy fat-free cookie and a Diet Coke, but I'm sure the taxes would go on the former combo and not the latter.

Wait...I said I should stop reading this thread... I don't know, I guess when something is so blatantly obvious I have to keep trying to convince people.