...Or, so says a new study published by the New York Times.  File this under the current "Far-Reaching-Scope" of the U.S. Government.

The answer, for New York Times food columnist Mark Bittman, is obvious: Put the government in charge of what people eat. And not just any government: Our diet dictator, he writes, “should be the federal government, fulfilling its role as an agent of the public good and establishing a bold national fix.” Constitutionalists point out man’s unalienable rights as set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and the powers delegated to the federal government under the Constitution, which do not include acting as food führer. Something must be done, and to progressives such as Bittman, only Washington can do it.

The details:

Rather than subsidizing the production of unhealthful foods, we should turn the tables and tax things like soda, French fries, doughnuts and hyperprocessed snacks. The resulting income should be earmarked for a program that encourages a sound diet for Americans by making healthy food more affordable and widely available.

And who would decide what constitutes good and bad foods?

loading...

Those extra funds would then be utilized by the government to subsidize "more healthy" foods.

One has to wonder:  If this plan were put in place - would there be exemptions?  Could people buy "Unhealthy Offsets"...like you can with the environment?

What do you think?

 

 

More From KOOL 101.7