Fat, the world is fat. So what?

The rocketing increase of obesity calls for action. Indeed, this public health issue has become a social and an economic problem in many developed countries. However, taxing junk foods or taxing the consumer may not be the right answer to the problem. Considering that the cause for obesity lies mostly in social habits and education, I doubt that this late economic measure would have anything but a minor effect in the process.

Some say that obesity is our century’s plague. As a matter of fact, obesity is nowadays responsible for many diseases –some of them deadly- such as strokes, diabetes and heart weakness, which have direct and indirect consequences. Health insurance companies tend to be reluctant to cover obese people who often remain un- or under-covered. More generally, society is in a way weakened by this fragile, dependent or costly part of the population. So obesity has turned into a major challenge in developed countries.

But who is this population concerned by obesity? Mostly the poor. If the underprivileged do not face starvation anymore, food still highlights social and economic differences: studies show that a poor family is less likely to buy fresh products than a wealthier one. It was recently revealed that poor neighbourhoods of Baltimore have not access to any food market in an area of less than five miles. So, obesity is above all a social issue: were a quick move expected from the authorities, it would not be to start taxing junk food.
When you tax a product, consumers’ economic and social differences are enhanced: the poor might need to spend a larger part of their income on food, but would they change their habits?

Moreover, the example of tobacco shows what else could be done to help fight obesity. On the one hand, public taxes on tobacco have kept rising at a quick pace for some years without having a great impact on the smokers’ habits, but on the other hand, prevention campaigns and warning messages that have flourished on cigarette packs have proved some efficiency in preventing youngsters to start smoking. Why not try and lower the price of some products “based on their healthy content” and promote educational programs on healthy diets, starting in schools? Everything shows that reprehensive measures are less efficient than information and education on health issues.

From an economic point of view, this measure surely has the advantage of bringing some money into the state coffers; one could argue that taxing is better than spending money on prevention. However, to me, it is the State’s duty to choose a risky political move over a liberal and dangerous project. People confronted with obesity need to get some help in order to become aware of how jeopardized their life is. These people need to get involved in the problem. A good message to begin with could be a higher regulation of the food companies by the authorities. It seems weird that the consumer would be the only one to bear the price of the existence of junk food. Therefore, instead of choosing a liberal action (consisting in the State hiding behind the concept of freedom of choice of the consumer), I would think that food companies should be held responsible for selling unhealthy items in the first place. Economically speaking, this regulation could go with a system of tax for the reluctant companies. It would be to the State’s advantage to do so.


Furthermore, it is obvious that developing countries are facing the problem of obesity. If obesity has spread throughout the century to a larger number of developed countries - the U.S.A. is not the only one concerned anymore-, we should not forget that developing countries are also concerned. Globalization has played a great role in generalizing what could be called the “western way of life”, which includes eating junk food. Brazil is one of these countries with a great rate of overweight people. An economic measure such as the one promoted by some experts with regard to developed countries seems all the more useless as it could not be generalized throughout the world.

Taxing junk food in order to fight obesity would come to taxing the poor, who are the most threatened by it. The way developed countries choose to tackle this issue is quite relevant in a globalized world; they should confirm their leadership in these matters too.