Would you like a side of morality judgment with your Big Mac? Lawmakers in New Jersey are thinking about treating fast food the way they treat cigarettes or liquor and charging a "sin tax" for your chili cheese fries and deep-fried apple pie. The extra revenue is a possibility for funding New Jersey's hospitals.

The state Senate president opposes it, stating, "That's a tax on poorer people and people with kids." Er, sorry, no. People eat at fast food restaurants because it is cheap and people in lower socio-economic brackets might also eat there because their neighborhood has a Taco Bell and a KFC but no grocery store. If it's too expensive, they will either stop eating fast food or just eat it anyway (using money they would have normally used for other essentials). Or by nature of capitalism, another enterprise will pop up and take advantage of this opportunity for selling to this demographic. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

As for a behavior deterrent, is there really a reduction in drinking or smoking caused by the sin taxes already in place? No, not really. Also, while you can't argue that fast food is not the healthiest nutritional choice, I question the idea that the majority of illnesses treated in hospitals are directly linked to consumption of fast food. The lawmakers are implying causality by going after fast food joints to pay for the hospitals and not, say, better schools or teacher pay.

Also, I'm really perplexed by the logistics of such a tax. If fast food is a sin because it is unhealthy, does that apply equally to a Whopper as it does to, say, a small bowl of Wendy's chili, arguably a great nutritional choice that is chock full of fiber, veggies and protein. What about the little cups of fruit you can buy at some fast food places? Or the salads? Would those be taxed as well? Also, what constitutes fast food? Is Fazoli's fast food? What about Boston Market? Subway? Starbucks? 

To be clear, I am not personally opposed to paying a fast food tax (which might surprise you, if you could see all of the fast food wrappers in the back of my car right now) but I really have an issue with the philosophical ramifications of such a tax. The government serves the purpose of punishing offenders for their crimes. A sin tax implies that you're doing something wrong but you can buy absolution by paying a certain percentage or up charge. Is it within the function of the government to make morality judgment on the behavior of the governed? Quite honestly, I prefer to make these choices for myself.

I've often wished that food were priced by the calorie, with nutritionally dense foods like steamed chicken breasts and spinach salads costing less than a dollar and slices of cheesecake or packages of Oreos costing $20. This is kind of the reverse: instead of lowering the prices of healthy fare, the cheap crappy food is just priced closer to the nutritional nosh.

What do you think about the idea of an extra tax on fast food? Does it make sense? Could the money be better spent on free gym memberships for the poor? Does the slippery slope then also make you question taxes on lifestyle elements such as cable and big screen HDTVs? Should people who bike or walk to work get tax relief? Would it work better if these lifestyle taxes were reward-based rather than involving monetary punishments, like for instance, maybe people who bike or walk to work should get tax credit? What do you think?

The comments are supersized for extra value.