Should governments creative disincentives for eating junk food?

At some point, as Canadians age and health care costs continue to climb, Canadians are going to have to debate about the government's role legislating healthy lifestyles.

Last month, the City of New York went ahead and passed a rule banning sales of sodas and other sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces at restaurants, concession stands and other eateries.

[ Related: New York City health commissioner: scold or lifesaver? ]

According to the Associated Press, they've also barred artificial trans fats from restaurants, and will soon start to give talks at hospitals to newborn mothers about the benefits of breast-milk over formula.

Closer to home in Canada, several provinces have banned 'junk food' in school cafeterias and vending machines.

The rationale, in the schools at least, is that child obesity rates are at a staggering number and obese children become obese adults that end up costing our healthcare system proportionately more.

But what about adults? Should governments in this country create disincentives for adults who choose to eat unhealthy foods?

[ Related: Ontario parents outraged over proposed 'pizza day' ban in schools ]

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation doesn't think so.

In response to a suggestion to implement a tax on sugar-sweetened soft drinks by an Alberta based health advocacy group, last week, the CTF has taken a strong stand against any junk food levy.

"Of course it can be difficult to choose the organic kumquat juice over the Big Gulp at 7-Eleven, especially considering the organic option is likely five times the cost of the soft drink, but the key word in this is 'choose,'" the CTF's Derek Fildebrandt notes on their website.

"The proponents of the nanny-state all too often seem eager to surrender choice on the alter of what's good for us."

Filderbrandt also disputes that a tax on sugar drinks would decrease consumption citing evidence from Denmark which introduced an unhealthy food tax in 2011.

"[Denmark's food tax] has failed to prove any positive health benefits and has only served to damage its economy," he noted on the CTF website.

[ Related: Saskatchewan MP uses military march as motivator for healthier lifestyle ]

"The country has seen no change in the consumption habits of its citizens. Rather, the tax has caused an estimated 2,400 job losses in food manufacturing and has seen Danish businesses hurt by consumers simply doing their shopping in neighboring countries."

Regardless of whether junk food taxes are successful, the question remains whether government's have an obligation — given our public healthcare system — to encourage healthy eating habits through bans or taxation.

What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments below.