Tax on soda

[luckytxn 2,264]

Then let us tax the clothes that you wear each day! Yes great idea for you liberal tax and spend wingnuts!

I mean that just because you are poor doesn't mean you must or in fact will buy a lot of soda. That some do, and that becomes a large part of their budget is definitely a problem, but the problem is not a function of being poor so adding a tax on to it is not some evil plot to make poor people poorer.

Perhaps your problem is that low income families should not be taxed on consumer goods at the same rate as higher income people? I personally don't consider that a problem, but it seems to be what you are getting at. Now, if someone suggested taxing milk I would be more inclined to believe that it was unfair to the lower income families.

My problem is that the effect will be a larger hit against the poor as a whole. It doesn't matter that it's not the goal (e.g. an evil plot to make poor people poorer), but it will be the result. I don't see this as being an issue of low income families being taxed at the same rate as higher income people - on the contrary, it is taxing low income families at a higher rate. Excise taxes levied against certain goods which happen to make a larger part of the budget of poor people than rich people are regressive. I guess you can argue that it's not an automatic tax against the poor, but that would be like saying that a yacht tax is meant to raise taxes on yacht owners, not to effect a progressive tax.

Lets tax only the unhealthy clothes. Of course since the Nanny state is now going to decide what is healthy or not they can have studies done to determine what clothes are unhealthy. Of course looking at peopleofwalmart.com may give them a clue at this clothing we need official Federal studies to determine what is unhealthy by Washington standards and then impose them on the rest of the country. This tax could help a lot if some babe is not wearing enough clothing to protect her from the sunshine that can cause skin cancer. Then we can tax shoes and stuff as very high heels I heard are unhealthy for woman and they may need medical care to fix the foot problems that us Tax payers will be paying for now. This can be endless and if we tax enough we may be able to pay for this socialism.

[Ban Hammer 13,224]

Maybe. $0.07/can would mean that if the heavy soda-drinking family drinks a 12-pack every day, that's $25/month. Alternatively, that's just less money to buy fruit or go to the doctor's. I'm not convinced that people who drink so much soda every day will rebudget their finances in such a way to really improve their health.

nor am i

But it's not a trytomakepeoplehealthier tax - it's a punishment tax.

it's nannystateism. and i'm surprised so many are behind this tax. the government loves that type of loyalty.

[HYENA 4]

It would be more efficient to just make people pay an obesity tax annually. Make everyone go to a government doctor and get weighed, etc. Then your obesity tax can be determined and you can pay a lump sum along with your income tax return.

btw, is diet soda taxed? How about club soda? What about ginger ale if used to help soothe a bellyache?

I'm all for a FAT TAX!

Hey hasn't the fat tax been brought up in debates? LOL!

[AlHayatZween 2]

I've heard the argument a bunch of times about how poor people DO have worse nutrition because of things like fast food being cheaper, various unhealthy food sometimes cheaper than healthy. Produce and fruit are not cheap. If you think they are, then it's because you maybe always have bought at the same level you do now. But it's not cheap. It's cheaper to buy crappy food a lot of the time. I am not trying to apply that to this soda tax but you can't say nutrition and economic status don't impact each other.

There was actually a study a few months back that said exactly the opposite - that contrary to popular belief that there was no significant connection to socio-economic status and nutrition.

Its not difficult to imagine - if the wife and I go to Wendys we're looking at at least $12-$15 for one meal. For the same $$$ I can make a crock pot stew that lasts 2-3 days with enough left over to freeze.

In terms of what costs the most in grocery stores - I'm looking at things like breakfast cereals that cost anywhere up to about $4.75 for a 15 oz box (and that's no exaggeration).

Even Microwave meals that you can buy for 2 for $5 on a club card sale is still very poor economy against what you can make yourself for the same money.

Yeah, it is interesting to think about. While i agree with you fast-food is more expensive than real food, and not only that less nutritional and less satisfying (in terms that you still get hungry quickly afterward), you have to remember that at least with soda, those big 3-liter bottles of "Rite Cola" or the bootleg varieties are super cheap. Remember those sugar-water drink things that you can buy by the carton in the supermarket (it's like blue and green colored sugar water)... meanwhile real orange juice is $3.50 for a half gallon.

i just want to know why companies are allowed to manufacture all this stuff (insanely unhealthy sugar and high sodium products, highly addictive cigarettes) and once people get addicted to it, they want to make it more expensive to consume.

[Peikko 1,575]

Then let us tax the clothes that you wear each day! Yes great idea for you liberal tax and spend wingnuts!

I mean that just because you are poor doesn't mean you must or in fact will buy a lot of soda. That some do, and that becomes a large part of their budget is definitely a problem, but the problem is not a function of being poor so adding a tax on to it is not some evil plot to make poor people poorer.

Perhaps your problem is that low income families should not be taxed on consumer goods at the same rate as higher income people? I personally don't consider that a problem, but it seems to be what you are getting at. Now, if someone suggested taxing milk I would be more inclined to believe that it was unfair to the lower income families.

My problem is that the effect will be a larger hit against the poor as a whole. It doesn't matter that it's not the goal (e.g. an evil plot to make poor people poorer), but it will be the result. I don't see this as being an issue of low income families being taxed at the same rate as higher income people - on the contrary, it is taxing low income families at a higher rate. Excise taxes levied against certain goods which happen to make a larger part of the budget of poor people than rich people are regressive. I guess you can argue that it's not an automatic tax against the poor, but that would be like saying that a yacht tax is meant to raise taxes on yacht owners, not to effect a progressive tax.

Lets tax only the unhealthy clothes. Of course since the Nanny state is now going to decide what is healthy or not they can have studies done to determine what clothes are unhealthy. Of course looking at peopleofwalmart.com may give them a clue at this clothing we need official Federal studies to determine what is unhealthy by Washington standards and then impose them on the rest of the country. This tax could help a lot if some babe is not wearing enough clothing to protect her from the sunshine that can cause skin cancer. Then we can tax shoes and stuff as very high heels I heard are unhealthy for woman and they may need medical care to fix the foot problems that us Tax payers will be paying for now. This can be endless and if we tax enough we may be able to pay for this socialism.

Clothing is already taxed, don't you look at your reciepts? Of course clothing is not taxed because it's unhealthy, that is patently absurd, as is the rest of your drivel.

[Marilyn. 340]

I didn't even know that soda wasn't taxed

Edited October 6, 2009 by Marilyn.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Shoot we should also tax unhealthy thoughts. We are in the PC age so if anyone says what the Feds think is unhealthy then we should do an immediate tax. The thought police could even maybe come up with thought implants and then do a direct debit from our bank accounts for thinking any unhealthy thoughts.

[Mark&Steph 0]

I didn't even know that soda wasn't taxed

Me either. I've paid tax on pop and snack foods for as long as I can remember. I guess I've just picked the right states to live in.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Milk has a lot of fat in it, so maybe you should also tax it. It also has pregnancy hormones in it (so the cow produces more milk) which have been proven to be bad for you.

Anything with high-fructose corn syrup should be taxed too. And most meat which has antibiotics and other hormones which you shouldn't be eating on a long term basis. Then everything will be the same price as organic, and we'll all live in a liberal utopia where all food is organic (hmm where will the revenue come from?). I guess we have to legalize drugs (a lefty sacrament) and tax them too...