England to pay parents to walk to school
Filed under: Opinions
My son's school is a little over three miles from our house; according to Google Maps, it would take about an hour to walk there. Unfortunately, we don't have that kind of time in the morning nor could the kids handle such a trek and still have a productive day of learning. Nonetheless, walking to school is, if practical, a great idea. It saves money, reduces traffic congestion and smog, and provides exercise -- something we all need. In England, however, it may soon be something else as well: a source of income.In a plan to reduce obesity, the government wants to pay people for exercising, including walking their kids to school. The Department of Health found that nearly ninety percent of parents whose children are overweight or obese failed to realize there was a problem. Parents would receive vouchers for sports equipment and healthy food as a reward for exercising.
The program also includes "unprecedented" agreements with the grocery stores Tesco and Asda to provide discounts on healthier food choices. "Ten million people visit their corner shops every day and 36 million shop at Asda and Tesco each week - the fact that grocers and supermarkets are on board means we can really influence what goes into our shopping trolleys," said Health Secretary Alan Johnson. "It's unprecedented for supermarkets to join the Government and pledge to cut prices on healthy food."
It seems to me that there is a lot of benefit to the program although I'm sure there will be plenty of criticism for "wasting" taxpayers' money. Still, since an overweight and obese citizenry is far more expensive to support, I suspect that -- if it works -- this program will actually save the government money. What do you think?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
- My daughter (14 yrs) was just kicked out of her Girl Scout Cadettes troop. Her offense? Having ADD (not hyperactive) and she wasn't picking up on a tr...
- Is it legal to claim relation to a person ? ( OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE FOR MONATERY GAIN) TO BE ILLEGAL ?
- Would you request up front payment from foreign nation and a recurring debt with the united states











ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
11-13-2008 @ 4:34PM
c_rousseau05 said...Nice idea, I wish that the grocery stores here in the US would give discounts on healthy food. I have to pay a LOT more to eat healthy. It really hurts my pockets each week to buy the good stuff and sure, it's worth it but it would be nice to be rewarded for choosing wisely, you know? My biggest reward is my health and the health of my family, but still, it would be nice to help reward my pocketbook. Good job England!
Reply
11-13-2008 @ 5:07PM
LS said...And where would that money for the discounts come from?
11-13-2008 @ 5:22PM
c_rousseau05 said...Well it could start by buying all local produce only, no imports. I try that by mostly shopping at the farmers markets, and it helps a LOT but I can't always do that because they only hold certain hours. The rest i'm guessing from taxpayers like myself and my husband, I dont mind. Give a little to get a little. People like to make a huge deal about tax money but as long as it's going to something that benefits everyone, not just a certain few "freeloaders" to be frank about it, then why not?
11-13-2008 @ 4:32PM
LS said...Are they going to pay people to stop smoking, too? How about paying them to stop drinking? Tanning? Working overtime and building stress? Where does it end?
HOW is it the government's responsibility to restrict what you eat, and how far you walk each day? Exactly when does PERSONAL responsibility kick in?
And yes, I think there *should* be an outcry about wasting taxpayer dollars. Because that's what it is. I can tell you, I am no skinny minnie. But. I walk a good three miles a day, take my vitamins and eat healthy foods. And yet, I'm overweight. I should probably walk more, and eat less. And my mother-in-law? Size six on a "fat" day. She eats like a bird, and her "exercise" is a senior citizen tennis match once a week. She has low bone density, is anemic, and arthritic. She is sick every other week, and is regularly popping pills for this malady or that ailment. Expense-wise? She is FAR more expensive than I am. And yet, I would be the one to be hammered by the English Government for being a "drain" on society, because of my size, because fat people CAN'T be healthy.
God! I just LOVE Socialism, don't you? I think that's really the way THIS country should be run. Because it's Just. So. FAIR!!!
Reply
11-13-2008 @ 5:59PM
Karen said...LS, you are completely right to be angry about how people in the U.S. act like there's no such thing as being both fat and healthy. As a semi-chub myself, I've had doctors tell me my joint pain or heart palpitations would go away if I lost weight -- neither of which happened, of course. As if being thin were the solution to everything.
However, I want to point out a couple of things. First, you would probably get the vouchers -- not cash -- under the U.K. program, since you are active; nowhere does it say anything about whether people need to lose weight at all. Your mother-in-law might qualify, based on her tennis game, or might not.
Second, your mother-in-law may be more expensive to care for medically, but at least some of that is due to her comparatively advanced age. My mother was "fit and fat" (and not even that fat, really) for most of her adult life, with hardly a trip to the doctor; that changed when she hit 60 and discovered she has diabetes and high blood pressure. Her thin sister had some medical issues early on, but has no comparable, expensive, chronic medical conditions now.
And finally, the U.K. government has more than a theoretical stake in the health of its citizens because of the public health system. Yes, it's socialism, but that's their system. Nobody is trying to impose anything like that in the U.S. (though personally I wish they would so that I could go back to freelance writing without losing my health insurance), and even if they did create such a system here, I bet it would include incentives to stop smoking and drinking.
The original story is pretty interesting. The only objections cited were from small businesses that didn't want to commit anything financial to the plan. And since any customer of the participating supermarkets would apparently get the same discounted price on foods deemed healthy, I don't really see a downside.
I'm glad to see these arguments raised, though; despite my mother's experience, I still believe that some people can be fit and fat (though not people whose first-degree relatives have Type 2 diabetes -- I've got to be careful).
11-13-2008 @ 6:04PM
LS said...Your local grocer buys stuff in bulk so the price is lower. Generally speaking, purchasing locally does benefit the local economy, but it does not cause prices to be lower.
As for raising your taxes to lower the cost of groceries? HOW does that even make any sense? You're still paying the same amount, probably even more, because the government can't stop at "just a few cents". Frankly, I'd rather pay a dollar an apple than five cents in taxes to a government that has proven over and over again that it absolutely CANNOT manage finances.
And as for your idea of taxing people so that it "benefits everyone"? Mostly, those taxes just benefit the government and their own pet projects. Need proof? Read the actual text of our recent $700m bailout - part of that money went to subsidize the manufacture WOODEN ARROWS (children's toys) and imported rum. And now they're crying that the initial $700m wasn't enough. Yep... that's fiscal responsibility for sure!
Sorry. BAD idea. You want cheap produce? Dig some dirt, and plant some seeds.
Reply
11-13-2008 @ 6:05PM
LS said...Sorry, forgot to hit the "reply" button before that comment. It was in response to C_rousseau, in comment #5.
11-13-2008 @ 11:59PM
penny said...This is socialized medicine at its finest here. Try reading about what they did in S. Korea, yes they paid for the gym membership but everyone now carries around a card that gives them only a certain monthly allowance for "unhealthy" foods. I for one am responsible for my own food choices and of course take care of my children's food choices. I don't want government telling me that I can't buy those Hostess cupcakes I crave once a month because I was running late one night and ate in a drive through and now my monthly allotment is gone. Please don't get me started on Socialized health care, I did my research for school (medical) and found it to be a poor choice for any country let alone this one. I am sure I will have plenty of people telling me I am wrong and what a wonderful idea it is and like a comment above stated they could freelance without concern but do your homework before jumping on this bandwagon.
Reply