Saint Gareth to the rescue again

August 24th, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

With the furore over his cat campaign fading from memory, is about to try telling us what we should be eating.

Dr Morgan’s past activities have included confirming the cause of climate change, deciding which fish to catch and eat, proposing solutions for the country’s welfare and tax policies, and voyaging to the Antarctic to raise awareness about issues in the far south.

At the start of this year, he strode purposefully into his attack on the country’s cats, and will soon try to sort out the nation’s eating habits.

Where would we be without Gareth to solve all our big issues for us. Is there any issue at all he isn’t an expert on?

According to New Zealand Doctor, Dr Morgan and Mr Simmons are “set to challenge the food production, processing and marketing industries as well as health professionals, policymakers and the Government”.

The book will urge a tax on foods that don’t reach two stars for health and quality in a nutrition-profiling system to be agreed by health officials, industry and food standards authorities.

How about a tax on books that don’t meet quality standards?

Denmark of course led the world with a tax on food, as Gareth proposes. The tax lasted around a year before being scrapped as a miserable failure which failed to change any eating habits, encouraged cross-border trading, endangered jobs and was a bureaucratic nightmare for producers and retailers. I expect that means it will soon become policy of Labour or Greens in NZ!

Tags: ,

40 Responses to “Saint Gareth to the rescue again”

  1. Black with a Vengeance (1,868 comments) says:

    Why are you so nasty and spiteful DPF?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. bhudson (4,741 comments) says:

    Gareth’s priming himself to be a Greens candidate next year

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. wat dabney (3,840 comments) says:

    The book will urge a tax on foods that don’t reach two stars for health and quality in a nutrition-profiling system to be agreed by health officials

    This measure will be supported by all those who advocate water fluoridation, if they are to be consistent.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Yoza (1,926 comments) says:

    It seems utterly stupid to expect the tax-payer to pick up the tab via the public health system for corporations that foist toxic waste disguised as processed food onto an unsuspecting and under informed public.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Scott Chris (6,178 comments) says:

    Farrar’s war on Morgan continues. Did he snub you at a party or something David?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    You’ve got to love the tall poppy syndrome in this country. I don’t know whether what Morgan is doing is of any value or not, but the fact he is getting out there and trying is great. Its a pity a few more people didn’t make an effort and at least try rather than do nothing but criticise those that do.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Kea (13,559 comments) says:

    Scott Chris, you forgot to say something about the issue ? I am surprised you have clocked up 5,169 posts on Davids site, given the visible distress his views cause you.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Kea

    It would be a bloody boring site if all it was is a ‘DPF mutual admiration society’, don’t you think?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. George Patton (352 comments) says:

    Poor Gareth….

    But not as poor as Gareth Morgan Kiwisaver investors, who suffered underperformance in his fund while a big bull rush occurred on the NZX.

    Gareth of course had a very good reason for such underperformance. His answer was it was wrong to compare his fund to that of others, and refused to participate with a major investment research house if such comparisons were going to happen.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/4096739/KiwiSaver-performance-analysis-rubbish-says-Morgan

    Oh well, at least he’s a great soccer coach.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Kea (13,559 comments) says:

    Judith, Morgan is using his wealth and influence to impose his views on those less able to respond. He has suggest increasing taxes will make life harder on the poorest members of society while he sits there with his millions.

    I think the Morgan means well, but the fact his he is a geek who does not really understand people. He is an intelligent guy who does not “get it”.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. holysheet (467 comments) says:

    I used to think he spoke sense about the economy. But all his recent utterance are just crap.
    Can some one ask him what happened to “Happy Feet” the penguin that was last heard from in the deep southern ocean. I am sure he would know the answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    “Gareth was probably once a nice little boy, whose mother was also doubtless about his future, but today suffers from obsessive attention-seeking syndrome. The subject arose recently over drinks, producing a general consensus that his problem could be solved by acquiring a mistress.”

    – Bob Jones

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Michael (913 comments) says:

    Will eating cats be okay?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. dime (10,213 comments) says:

    Lets hope North Korea dont let him back out

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Paulus (2,707 comments) says:

    Hallelujah for Gareth !

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Anthony (768 comments) says:

    As someone who is always blogging his quiz score, I would have thought DPF and Gareth are not that different?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Its just that when you get really wealthy you have all the time in the world to poke your nose into esoteric shit that 99.9% of us do not have the time to or give a flying fuck about.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    What is it with us here in New Zealand ?
    Are we really this sad ?

    Alan Wilkinsons quote from Bob Jones @ 11.54 is spot on.
    Problem for Gareth is, it doesn’t matter how much money his sprog made for him
    no sheila will take him on.

    For inexplicable reasons the NZ media will report this shithead, conjure with
    his thoughts, follow him on his holidays, analyse his musings, seek his opinion…..

    And, it seems some people hang on his every thought.

    This is just so fukin sad.

    The Kardashians make more sense than this prick.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. slijmbal (1,236 comments) says:

    “Denmark of course led the world with a tax on food, as Gareth proposes.

    what’s ironic is that they wanted to tax fat and the latest thoughts point the finger for the vast majority of eating related health issues at sugars, starches and processed foods. Fat does not appear to be the monster it has been painted as. So, a double wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Yvette (2,763 comments) says:

    Perhaps Gareth could drop a little money into independent research realeted to certain foodstuffs.

    One would think that if science was so bloody clever they could have figured out by now if
    1] soft drinks are bad for you because of the sugar content, or
    2] sugar substitutes are 100 times sweeter, and it is not the calories of the sweetener itself, but the insulin reaction it engenders in the blood once it is consumed that causes the conversion to fat of any surplus calories already consumed.

    All the fucking science available has done little to sort out values for processed food – sugar and salt especially.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Yoza (1,926 comments) says:

    So Kiwibloggers seem more than happy for society generally to bear the cost of the unhealthy shit corporations pump into our most gullible.

    Yvette :

    One would think that if science was so bloody clever they could have figured out by now if
    1] soft drinks are bad for you because of the sugar content, or
    2] sugar substitutes are 100 times sweeter, and it is not the calories of the sweetener itself, but the insulin reaction it engenders in the blood once it is consumed that causes the conversion to fat of any surplus calories already consumed.

    Science isn’t clever or stupid, science is just science.

    What has been observable is that those primary schools that had barred lollies, chippies from being consumed in school grounds and fatty foods from bought lunch menus noticed a marked improvement in the behavior of the children.

    If there was going to be a tax imposed on unhealthy food it should be imposed on all food that has been processed, even if that processing involves nothing more than freezing the food. Then it should be up to the manufacturers or distributors to apply for an exemption on a case by case basis with a priority given to domestically processed foodstuffs.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. BlairM (2,340 comments) says:

    I’ve never seen someone more utterly ruined by coming into money. Once upon a time Morgan was a relatively sensible fellow who could be relied on to espouse generally centre-right type views. But that’s what happens when people get money they don’t earn properly. They feel guilty, and from that guilt comes a duty to “save the world”, whether the world wants to be saved or not.

    If Morgan wants to “give back”, the best gift he could give us is his silence. Buy a big fuckoff mansion out in the wilderness with a helicopter pad, and for the love of God, just leave us “unenlightened” ones alone!

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. wreck1080 (3,999 comments) says:

    You know , I used to respect Gareth Morgan as some of the things he had to say about the NZ Investment industry were spot on.

    But, jeez, money has given him brain damage.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    “If there was going to be a tax imposed on unhealthy food it should be imposed on all food that has been processed, even if that processing involves nothing more than freezing the food.”

    Well, that’s a convincing demonstration that the whole concept is bonkers along with its advocates.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Yoza (1,926 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson (1,683) Says:

    “If there was going to be a tax imposed on unhealthy food it should be imposed on all food that has been processed, even if that processing involves nothing more than freezing the food.”

    Well, that’s a convincing demonstration that the whole concept is bonkers along with its advocates.

    That’s pathetic, even by your standards, Alan. The whole paragraph is required to achieve the advocated context: “If there was going to be a tax imposed on unhealthy food it should be imposed on all food that has been processed, even if that processing involves nothing more than freezing the food. Then it should be up to the manufacturers or distributors to apply for an exemption on a case by case basis with a priority given to domestically processed foodstuffs.”

    That way it would not be up to the tax-payer to prove whether a food was unhealthy; the onus would be on the manufacturer or the distributor to prove the food they were hawking was healthy enough to be allowed a tax exemption.

    Now run along and build another strawman to attack.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    My God, you are seriously bonkers, Yoza. The taxpayer will pay in spades – as consumers – as well as constructing another monstrous bureaucracy. You truly have not the slightest clue

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Kea (13,559 comments) says:

    It is incredible socialists like Yoza are suggest central government put the price of food up.

    I hope this guy is Labours spokes person on food :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. hj (7,165 comments) says:

    Gareth Morgan: scourge of the rent seekers. A true reformer; head and shoulders above the self-interested Bob Jones..

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. hj (7,165 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson (1,684) Says:
    The taxpayer will pay in spades
    ……………………………….
    but we do (as with alcohol): we pay they have super yachts.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Ed Snack (1,940 comments) says:

    Just imagine how utterly stupid this is as an idea. Some years ago they promoted, at schools especially, the “Food Pyramid”. At the base were those things we were “supposed” to eat a lot of, carbohydrates. That “advice” has caused the deaths and sufferings of tens of thousands and more from obesity and diabetes; and Gareth Fucking Morgan wants to repeat that !!?! Fuck the fool, he’s an A grade count corrupted by lucking his way in miilions of unearned money.

    And as for Yoza and people like him, YOU are equally guilty for condemning all those people to avoidable dieases by misplaced advice. You thought you knew better, but you knew worse. Sucks to be an authoritarian, or would if you ever suffered the consequences of what you wish upon others.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    @hj, are you plonked? You are certainly incoherent and make about as much sense as Yoza’s half-witted utter nonsense.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Yoza (1,926 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson 6:34 pm

    My God, you are seriously bonkers, Yoza. The taxpayer will pay in spades…

    That is the point I am making, Alan. The tax payer is already “paying in spades’ through the health system. We are effectively subsidising corporations to poison large swathes of the population with pseudo-food. If these corporations can prove the muck they are marketing to our kids is healthy, then fine, they won’t pay an extra tax on it. If they cannot then they will contribute to our health system through the extra tax they will be forced to pay; and the junk they are hawking will, as a consequence, be a more expensive option than the healthier alternative.

    Its called a win-win situation. The producers of healthy food are rewarded as their products become more affordable than the unhealthy option and the health system wins as the producers of unhealthy foods contribute a greater share of the health budget.

    I am trying to type as slowly as possible, just so you can keep up.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    Yoza, all food is healthy. It is diets that are unhealthy. That makes your whole concept farcical.

    Is that clear and simple enough for you?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Yoza (1,926 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson 9:33 pm

    Yoza, all food is healthy. It is diets that are unhealthy.

    Heh, when all is lost start speaking in tongues. Great thinking, Al.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    Sorry, thought you understood English. Bad mistake. Get back to us when you have learnt it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. orewa1 (410 comments) says:

    Gareth is an example of the “trickle up” theory – he thinks his son’s talents and well-earned fame automatically trickle up a generation.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. SPC (5,664 comments) says:

    It would be more sensible for

    1. public health publicity campaigns against unhealthy choices. Reducing diabetes and the consequences of too much salt – hyper tension/blood pressure etc will lower treatment costs.

    2. campaigns to get food producers to reduce sugar and salt content of their products. Greenpeace offers a model for how such campaigns can force producers to improve their act.

    For example sports drinks are very high in sugar and what is done to the so called super food beans in the low cost product from Watties is dangerous. One can of beans has near the full days intake of salt 2000mg and 30g of sugar (3/9th the days intake) – yet provides only 2/9th of the days kilojoules/calories. The sugar and salt level in the more expensive varieties is half this, so there is an adverse health impact on those who make the cheaper option. An impact that places costs on the health system.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Aidy (7 comments) says:

    SO no catty remarks from DPF about Saint Bob Jones, tiresome gobshite of the right, who even apparently has an opinion on the tiresome gobshitiness of Gareth Morgan

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Alan Wilkinson (1,933 comments) says:

    @Aidy, surprised the Left has time to bitch about the right at present. Shouldn’t you be tearing each other to bits as usual over the next Dear Leader?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Kimble (3,955 comments) says:

    It sad when economists leave their profession behind in a gratuitous attempt to be popular.

    Does anyone think the Gareth Morgan of the 80’s and 90’s would have advocated a tax subjectively imposed at the whim of unaccountable individuals?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote