Two recent topics really got my mind thinking outside the
box the past few days. The release of the 2012-2013 provincial budget, and the
new drive thru rules for the city of St. John's. At the end of March the city
established new regulations for drive-thru businesses which included not being
within 15 metres of homes or 150 metres of schools and daycares. Also just to
recap, the government is facing a 258 million deficit after recording surpluses
in six of the seven most recent years. So what do the two have to do with one
another? Well, nothing to be honest. But it did get me thinking about an idea
which to my knowledge hasn't been explored in St. John's. It is being actively
pursued in other cities, most recently Charleston, South Carolina, and that's a
fast food drive-thru user fee.
We know obesity is a factor of energy in (food) and the
energy we put out (exercise). An imbalance in that equation can and will lead
to weight change. This is just one, as there are many other contributors to the
rise in obesity we currently see. Another significant contributor and one we
often forget is that fast food is readily available and it's cheap. Amidst
rising grocery store prices, we still see extra value menus, dollar menu items,
and super sized meals for just pennies more. If the low cost of eating fast
food is adding to the obesity problem, potentially the solution lies in
increasing the cost. How can we give people the incentive to pay a little more?
Increased physical effort? Lack of convenience? Certainly. This is where a
drive-thru user fee could be not only helpful, but healthful too.
A drive-thru user fee, or tax would be like having someone
pump your gas for you. A small service charge or premium to each drive-thru order. Add 10% to
each purchase (that's less than the tip while eating in) and leave the purchase
of walk-in meals alone. At the very least, it may entice some to park and walk
rather than waiting in the car.
Some may argue it's an invasion of personal choice. Others
might suggest that we are already being taxed enough, so why suggest to pay
more? The rebuttal here is we tax cigarettes in part because of their health
cost. Poor dietary choices and sedentary lifestyles are health choices with
significant increased health costs as well. We all need to work together and
encourage healthy eating and exercise. One individual’s personal decision to
lead a sedentary lifestyle in the end actually costs all taxpayers. Consider West Virginia, apparently the
'unhealthiest' state in the US. Just only weeks ago they banned all fast food
drive-thru windows in an effort to get people moving and combat obesity. The
idea of a tax really isn't that far fetched when you consider some of our
American counterparts are out right banning the drive-thru windows.
Revenues from a fast food drive-thru tax could go directly
to government health programs. A bigger budget to help trim bigger bellies.
Another added bonus is it would help the environment too. Imagine. We could
fight obesity, and reduce gas emissions from idling cars in parking lots and
(dare I say) streets too. More parked
cars and less drive thru traffic will accomplish a feat or two for the city as
well– making the area safer for pedestrian and drivers. Sounds like it could be
a win-win-win.
As seen in The Telegram April 30, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment