There are fundamental flaws in socialism, which make it necessary for the rise of a Nanny State. Because the state is responsible for health care, the unhealthy behavior of citizens must be curbed in order to maintain an economically viable system.
In nature the junk food eaters would be culled by natural forces, and the individual would have to suffer the consequences of their poor life choices...But under the socialized system the government subsidizes poor health choices by giving the ill, weak, and helpless a free pass to do what ever they want without having to personally pay the total cost.
Junk food providers can sell extremely cheap foods to the masses, while the government is forced to deal with the ass end of the problem which is the cost of the epidemic health problems.
In seeking out a quick fix for a problem that took generations to develop, the regulators are not dealing with the fundamental crux of the situation, in the UK. Other countries like Finland and some of the more progressive socialist states of Europe spend a lot more money in funding healthy meals for school children, and promoting healthy lifestyles in general. It would make more sense in a socialist nation like the UK, to instead of banning junk food, subsidize more pure unadulterated foods heavily, making it widely available to everyone, and so to attack the problem from its roots, and in doing so I am sure that every penny that is spend on providing the population with good foods, would be saved with interest overtime on much lower overall healthcare cost.
Is anyone over there in parliament postulating such dynamic solutions for public debate? I mean if you are going to embrace socialism then at least try to operate from some basic level of reason, and common sense!
