But the tax is set to be fully repealed on July 1. Its abolition was one of the first acts of Premier John Hogan, who took office in May. He said it was contributing to affordability issues in the province.

Very short-sighted decision.

Obesity costs the Canadian Healthcare system billions of dollars every year:

One-third of Canadian adults will be obese by 2025, costing the country $33.7B annually

A report from the World Obesity Federation predicts that more than 10 million Canadians will be obese or overweight by 2025. The report estimates the global cost of treating obesity-related illnesses will be $1.5 trillion annually beginning in 2025, when an estimated 2.7 billion people - a third of Earth's population - will be overweight or obese people. For Canada, 34% of people over 18 years of age will live with obesity in eight years. Treating health problems caused by the excessive weight will cost the country $33.7 billion each year. Between 2017 and 2025, the total cost of treating

(nbhc.ca)

Modeling the cost of inaction in treating obesity in Canada - BMC Public Health

Obesity prevalence continues to rise in Canada, highlighting a growing public health concern. This study updates estimates of the societal cost of inaction in treating obesity, emphasizing the significant economic burden stemming from both direct healthcare costs and indirect productivity losses. We combined data from national surveys and published literature to estimate the 2023 national economic implications of obesity. Comparing adults with obesity (BMI ≥ 30) to those with healthy weight (25 > BMI ≥ 18.5), we assessed healthcare costs, absenteeism, presenteeism, disability pensions, mortality-related costs, workforce participation, and earnings. Canadian data were used where possible, supplemented by U.S. data, standardized to 2023 CAD$. The cost of inaction in treating obesity in Canada was $27.6 billion in 2023, including $5.9 billion in direct healthcare and $21.7 billion in indirect costs. Excess healthcare costs are driven by higher utilization of medical services. Indirect costs include approximately $8.2 billion from reduced workforce participation, $6.8 billion from presenteeism, $3.8 billion in lower earnings among employed with obesity, $2.0 billion from lost wages due to premature mortality, $682 million from absenteeism, and $268 million from disability pensions. The economic implications of not addressing obesity effectively are substantial, emphasizing the urgent need for utilizing effective chronic disease management strategies. Our findings highlight the disproportionate impact on women and the broader economic consequences, underscoring the imperative for tailored policy interventions. Investing in comprehensive, evidence-based obesity management not only enhances individual well-being but also yields significant societal and economic benefits.

BioMed Central (bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com)

Currently, most Canadian politicians are treating people like little children.

It’s time to tell people the brutal truth:

“We can end traffic jams in our city. But we are going to increase parking fees. We are going to build a bike lane network. Many drivers will be unhappy and will have to change their habits. Do you think it’s worth it?”

“We can reduce the number of car crashes. Less people will die. Less people will be injured. But the number of speed cameras will increase. A lot of speeding citizens are going to receive fines and will be furious. Getting a driver license will also become much harder for older people. Do you think it’s worth it?”

“We can make our healthcare system more financially sustainable. We can do that by increasing your income tax. Or we can increase the sales tax. Or we can tax all business owners. Or we can increase the alcohol tax and sugar tax. Which tax do you prefer? What do you think?”

“We can reduce gun trafficking. We will do it by tripling the number of inspections of trucks and cars coming from the United States. But this means longer waiting times at border crossings. The number of american tourists will be reduced. The price of some imported things may also increase. Should we do it?”

"We can significantly reduce homelessness. But we are going to build very tall buildings like in Eastern Europe blocks. We will ban cities from opposing housing projects that meet legal norms. In many neighborhoods, individual homeowners will be outraged. What do you think? Should we do it?

No pain, no gain. It’s true at the gym. But it’s also true in politics.

There are some decisions that are easy wins : cracking down on tax evasion, using open source software, stronger ethics laws.

Unfortunately, most decision aren’t easy wins. They actually require some pain if you want gains.

Time to start treating people like adults. Tell them the brutal truth.

I wish we had politicians brave enough to say they will make the hard and unpopular decisions. As it is, politicians only make unpopular decisions when it helps the business class. Federal NDP campaigned on removing the carbon tax. The Ontario NDP said they would by back the 407 and remove tolls. The only people I have seen with any ounce of courage and ambition so far are the ontario greens, but that’s probably a byproduct of their long-shot odds of getting elected.

These policies don’t happen because most people seem incapable of understanding what we are actually paying for with policies that increase affordability and access to things that are a net-negative on society like card, alcohol, and soda.

If fiscal conservatives were real, they would be the people rallying behind these ideas.

If the populace of voters can’t remember anything that happened just a couple years ago, I don’t think we can expect them to be forward thinking either. There’s little incentive for politicians to make the hard, unpopular, long-term decisions that we need to battle climate change and other challenges.