- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
For me, someone who has struggled with stress eating (often with junk food), the price increases with the junk food items alongside less and less multi buy promotions for them have been encouraging me to eat better, make my own food etc.
I am not blaming the availability of these unhealthy items as the biggest issue, and I acknowledge it’s an internal situation more than anything, yet these initiatives have been a welcomed push to get me in the right direction.
It’s just a good influence.That always bugged me. How about half-price?
If only, nowadays at most i see something like: buy 3 get 1 for free (only cheapest option is free, *conditions apply).
That’s a good thing. But only the first step. Hopefully retailers will now halve the prices instead of doing a bogof. And the next step would be to make manufacturers and retailers start promoting healthy foods more and reducing prices
FFS the problem is the price disparity between standard prices and “loyalty card” prices. It’s anti-competitive.
How is that not obvious to politicians?
You can have loyalty cards from as many shops as you want, so it’s not inherently anti-competitive. They’re not even particularly meant to encourage loyalty, they’re a way to track what individuals buy over multiple trips and then deliver targeted advertising. The non-loyalty-card prices are high to ensure that customers are incentivised to sign away their data.
Which shop does that other than Tesco?
I’ve not been in a Waitrose or a Sainsburys in a few years but I’ve not seen that problem in Morrisons, Co-op, Lidl, or Aldi.Serious question because Tesco take the piss.
…and replaced with more BOGOF for healthier items?
Oh, nothing? Oh, okay
This think of the children phase the government has got going in is just making everything more shit… Don’t ruin everything just because some people can’t control themselves.
just because some people can’t control themselves
That’s kinda the whole point of laws, exactly because people can’t control themselves, drugs and all kinds of things are illegal, and it costs a shit ton of tax payers money (everyone pays) to heal or rehabilitate those people when they do destroy their bodies and minds or worse.
This is literally to everyone’s benefit.
Drugs should be legal.
If we want to encourage people to be healthy we should be making leisure centres free and make sure people have enough time to use them.
As usual this is just a sticking plaster policy on the real causes of why people eat shit or take drugs.
10% of the NHS’s budget goes towards treating diabetes. That’s a huge amount of money. It’s not just a problem for sufferers - its everyone elses problem too.
In my view*, government has two main jobs: promoting our happiness, and curbing our excesses. This is firmly within those remits, albeit trading short term for long term happiness.
You probably wouldn’t say firearms/crack cocaine/embezzling shouldn’t be illegal just because some people can’t control themselves, I hope? This is much like that - it just seems harmless because you’re used to it being there.
People can still buy crisps and pizza. They just won’t get a discount on over-indulging anymore
*actually, Bertrand Russell’s view.
It’s cute you think this will tackle obesity and diabetes. People will eat the same amount it’ll just cost everybody more money. Smoking/drinking related illness probably costs the NHS more why not just put more restrictions on that too while they’re at it.
Habits can change. And if not with this generation, then with the next. I support this change.
Funny you mentioned smoking and alcohol. Because this is a perfect example of restrictions being imposed on both alcohol and tobacco and both had huge success in reducing how many people drink and smoke.
You kinda blew your own argument.
Funny you say that because there’s been a huge increase in kids SMOKING vapes. These “restrictions” haven’t actually done anything to curb that behaviour. Why hasn’t imposing restrictions improved the situation here? Vapes have been available from around 2013 and I imagine are included in most legislation relating to tobacco products. Maybe education and proper parenting are the answer not just blanket banning BOGOF offers. This would be a greater public service than stopping reasonably healthy people from saving a few quid bulk buying treats for themselves.
Kids are smoking vapes because they don’t have the same restrictions as tobacco. Thanks for proving my point again.
Please elaborate
Here you go:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/507/contents
These are the tobacco regulations. Have a read and think if any of them apply to vapes (spoiler alert, most of them don’t, like packaging , no health or addiction warnings, being visible in stores, low prices, etc.).
We also know for a fact that the tobacco sales dropped dramatically over the last decade as more restrictive regulations were introduced.
Coincidence? I think not.
Unless you want to do something dystopian like requiring a parenthood licence before people are allowed to have children and then force them to keep it renewed by attending regular parenthood classes, you can’t force people to receive education on how to be better parents. The state doesn’t have many levers to pull that don’t involve taking people’s children away. Making harmful products less appealing by preventing retailers promoting them is a much better balance of good effect against oppression. The kind of deal being restricted here is something supermarkets do because it manipulates people into buying things they otherwise wouldn’t. It’s not like every time you see a BOGOF sale in a shop it’s because they’re overstocked and are trying to clear things before they go past their sell-by date. If that’s not happening, then the only rational reason for supermarkets to have these deals is to manipulate their customers, and it’s not oppressive for a government to prevent multi-billion pound companies from manipulating its citizens.
I agree it’s used to manipulate but that’s the nature of a free market. I Shouldn’t have my choices taken away by the government and be burdened by the other recent changes just because some people have no self control or can’t effectively police what their kid does online.
Parenthood license also sounds like a great idea and I would be super on board with it. Bad parenting is often a vicious cycle that can destroy families over multiple generations. A license would be a preventative measure to stop children’s lives being ruined by unfit parents. Much like the porn ban stopping people from becoming porn obsessed psychos or stopping me from becoming obese because of my donut addiction.
These rules for the “greater good” are quite frankly a bit shit…
They do put restrictions on smoking and drinking - they outlawed deals on those years ago. Tobacco is about 50x the price it costs to manufacture because of taxes, and guess what? There’s millions fewer smokers now than there were in the 1900’s! People who don’t drink, or who drink much more rarely, are a much higher number than they used to be too.
Personally though, I do think tobacco should be completely illegal. Maybe nicotine products too, though they do help people with ADD self-regulate
EDIT You are right that the costs of alcohol to the NHS is still pretty huge though - about £5bn a year and 10,000 deaths, not to speak of all the other costs. Some good stats here: https://britishlivertrust.org.uk/27-4-billion-cost-of-alcohol-harm-in-england-every-year/
Healthy people cost the NHS a lot more when they live to 90+, I can say for sure when my 97 year old nan died she used up a LOT of resources that last 20 or 30 years.
I just don’t find the NHS costs argument convincing.
Good point, there.
I think they are sabotaging themselves to hand it all back to the tories…
Ain’t no sane government gonna put a ban on porn
The way everything is going it’ll be reform not tories and then we’re fucked
I am crazy but I haven’t seen a bogof in years?
More nanny state shite, so glad I can say I did not vote for this Tory wanker.
Is this not a good change or am i missing something?
Shit getting more expensive, yeah fantastic.
It’s a good change. What would be even better is promoting 2 for 1 deals on fruit, veg, nuts, seeds, pulses and grains. Arguably meat too, though with the environmental impact of the industry that’s harder to justify
So if I want one lettuce which only has a short shelf life, but there is a buy one get one free deal, I’d be stupid not to pick up two. Because I can only eat one lettuce before it goes bad, the second lettuce will be binned before its even started. All buy one get one free deals should be banned - if you want us to buy more of a product, halve the price!
Fwiw, lettuces will stay fresher longer by wrapping in a paper towel and then foil, rather than plastic.
You would be stupid to pick up two if you knew you were going to throw one away. Food waste is not a good thing.
But - as odd as this might seem - you could offer the second lettuce to someone else. Either someone else leaving the store, a friend/neighbor or work colleague. Yes I know it’s unusual to stand up in the office and say “does anyone want a free lettuce?” but it’s not only harmless, its positive!
People who are capable of controlling their eating habits are being penalised. Just like every adult is being penalised for poor parenting in regards to online safety
