The Fat Tax

[richi1173]

Well, if you have not heard, the Federal Government is proposing to increase their tax on soft drinks.

I think, as an ex soft-drink gulper, its a great idea. A substantial proportion of the populace has consistently shown its inability to control themselves when drinking soft-drinks, its time that they get some outside help.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_usa_healthcare_financing.html

 

[Neffi]

I think, as an ex soft-drink gulper, its a great idea. A substantial proportion of the populace has consistently shown its inability to control themselves when drinking soft-drinks, its time that they get some outside help.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_usa_healthcare_financing.html

I really laugh at shit like this. "It's bad for you so the government should step in and force you to know what's good for you." The logic is bullshit and it's just an easy way to justify the otherwise unjustifiable.

The tax itself I don't agree with. The government doesn't need to and shouldn't suck profits from every available (metaphorical) orifice. The argument that "a substantial amount ..." / "it would bring in substantial..." aren't arguments at all, they're apologies.

I'm in no way against taxes and they're definitely an important thing, but taxing everything taxable is a joke. Taxing drinks for being soft drinks is especially stupid.

Neffi is currently drinking and enjoying a can of Pepsi cola.

 

[richi1173]

I really laugh at shit like this. "It's bad for you so the government should step in and force you to know what's good for you." The logic is bullshit and it's just an easy way to justify the otherwise unjustifiable.[

Why is it bullshit? A substantial proportion of the populace has shown that they lack the responsibility necessary to stop drinking soft drinks, or even reducing their consumption of soft drinks. Should we let it go on, despite the increasing health costs?

Its the same thing with cigarettes and alcohol. Should we not cover the health costs produced by these items?

 

[Neffi]

Why is it bullshit? A substantial proportion of the populace has shown that they lack the responsibility necessary to stop drinking soft drinks, or even reducing their consumption of soft drinks. Should we let it go on, despite the increasing health costs?

So you see forcing their hand as a viable alternative to simply promoting better health and awareness through eduction and/or advertisement?

It's not like it's hard. A TV commercial, a billboard, a speech. Hell, we already use the schools to shape Patriotic Americans, why not use them to shape Healthy Americans too?

Should we not cover the health costs produced by these items?

That on the other hand is a good argument and something I didn't consider. I don't however support it outright still. I think stretching the blanket so far in this respect is a bit overboard.

 

[richi1173]

So you see forcing their hand as a viable alternative to simply promoting better health and awareness through eduction and/or advertisement?

We have been doing that for years. It has not worked.

Children at school are constantly taught in Physical Education class to stop drinking soft drinks because it will lead to diabetes and high-blood pressure. It has not worked, because people dismiss it as easily as they dismiss the constant warnings about alcohol and cigarettes.

Banning it would be stupid, making it more expensive over time would be a viable solution.

 

[Neffi]

We have been doing that for years. It has not worked.

Children at school are constantly taught in Physical Education class to stop drinking soft drinks because it will lead to diabetes and high-blood pressure. It has not worked, because people dismiss it as easily as they dismiss the constant warnings about alcohol and cigarettes.

Banning it would be stupid, making it more expensive over time would be a viable solution.

I was never taught not to drink soda at all. And rightfully so; the logic that in excess it's harmful so avoid at all costs is horrible. That aside, I've been to several schools in both major cities (NYC) and hick-towns and I've never seen anything in the way of solid promotion of positive health covering anything remotely close to soft drinks. I can't remember ever being told not to eat McDonalds, not to drink soda, etc. I've certainly never been told anything more helpful, like WHY I shouldn't do so, which is what needs to be taught, not just the "IT'S BAD MKAY" situation with drugs and alcohol education (which is why they fail).

the constant warnings about alcohol and cigarettes

Alcohol isn't nearly as bad as its demonized to be. Its biggest problem is that it's inconvenient. Sure, it can cause health problems, provided that you've already got the problem of addiction.

Cigarettes shouldn't be categorized with alcohol. Alcohol is just fine in moderation and not directly harmful to other unless taken complete advantage of by idiots. Cigarettes on the other hand will slowly degrade the body and directly harm others in close proximity.

 

[Neffi]

which is what needs to be taught, not just the "IT'S BAD MKAY" situation with drugs and alcohol education (which is why they fail).

I'm sorry, let me clarify this a little. The current model of education on drugs and alcohol is a mixture of "IT'S BAD DON'T DO IT" and outright false propaganda. DARE representatives all across the country blatantly lie to students about the dangers of drugs. I was told if I smoke pot I'll go insane and cut my face off with scissors. The problem with relying on non-information and false-information is that nobody's going to listen to the former and people can figure out by experience (direct and indirect) that the latter bullshit.

 

[Ozymandyus]

It's a great idea in my opinion. It's a horrible shame that healthy food is expensive as hell and unhealthy super processed high calorie food is cheap as hell. If we have to subsidize healthy foods and tax unhealthy foods to make it work, that's just how it should be.

 

[Otokogoroshi]

Don't you pay an extra... .02 cents per can with this tax?



The amount aside I'm fine for this. The soda companies make money hand over fist and there have been lots of ads and efforts made to say "put the fucking can down and go for a walk fatty" (never that blunt... maybe they should be)

I do not support raising the tax on these expressly for the purpose of getting people to stop it or to gradually hike the price till people can no longer afford them. Both are dumb. People have the right to drink themselves fat if they like.


HOWEVER these same people drinking themselves fat also put a strain on our health care system and should be expected to help balance out the costs.

Maybe some effort should be spent to put a little paragraph on each can explaining a few facts about weight management. The more calories you take in than you spent... = weight gets put on. The average person only needs X calories a day. Over that = you put on fat. I don't know... people are dumb...

However we are wired to want to put on the weight for hard times.... those times just don't really happen anymore.

 

[Neffi]

our health care system

A lack thereof. I can support pro-healthcare taxes when we actually have a respectable healthcare system.

 

[irmerk]

Taxing consumables such as soda just for the sake of influencing people to stop seems a bit radical and unfair. Everyone should be able to choose what they consume. The issue with health costs does not have to do with the soda tax, but rather support for health care for others. The majority of people supporting health care that covers such costs are willing to do so; it is a question of what people are willing to support covering health wise. You should not start of assuming we should cover anything with health care and then tax everything that contributes to any degree of its costs that can possibly be reduced.

I see that the tax would not really change the price that much, but the principle of the matter is the point. I hate seeing all these fat fuckers around here literally drinking soda for every drink throughout the day; they do not even drink water. I would not want to support a tax trying to force them to stop, because it is their choice. However, as said before, since it is their choice, we should not force a different choice but rather educate people to be better prepared for choices.

The only way I could see supporting a tax of a consumable as such would be if it actually harmed everyone or a large group of people. The only person it harms is the one choosing to drink it (Like I already said, the majority of people would be supporting to pay for the related health care costs). Maybe if it had some ecological impact due to the vast demand on the resources or some shit.

Still, any way you make the scenario, the fairest and most humane way seems to be educating rather than forcing, especially since it fixes itself for future generations and will be much more likely to encourage healthy habits outside the realm of soda.

 

[Ozymandyus]

There are a few problems here:

Soda is incredibly inexpensive and incredibly unhealthy (and incredibly well advertised billions of dollars are spent a year trying to associate it with happiness)

Healthier drinks like fruit juices and vegetable juices and even bottled water cost much more and are not as well advertised or as widely available.

Companies have no incentive to care about the health of people when they make decisions on how to price and market things. The government does have this incentive. Their only way to help balance these problems is to subsidize healthier products like milk and tax unhealthier things like soda, tobacco, and alcohol. It cuts consumption and it raises a lot of money that can be used to fight the problems caused by our own inability to ignore short term gains for future health and reward. Win-win.

It's a no brainer for me. I wish companies had our best interests at heart and promoted healthier food at lower prices, which is fully achievable if we would just sink the investment into it that is instead sunk into mass producing and repackaging and rebranding high fructose corn syrup in different ways. Since that will never happen - this is our only option.

 

[WolfAU]

While I agree that alot, if not most people consume soft drinks as their 'default' beverage, which is pretty stupid... I am opposed to the government turning into fascist health nazi's, dictating what people can and can't do simply because of potential for misuse... It's a very dangerous attitude to have in terms of a population (that they need to be coddled and protected from themselves).

There are more mature ways for the government to address this problem... get people into the habit of having a clean water bottle and water filters which you can fill up with free, clean water (not heavily chlorinated disgusting water like alot of the stuff), then convenience and 'cheap bastard' will win out in favour of health... particularly at places like fast food joints.

If the government wants to take a stance like that I'd prefer they heavily tax saccharin (an artificial sweetener), the stuff is toxic. Also alot of people I know who consume large quantities (ie a girl I know who drinks 5 coke cans a day) are quite healthy and not overweight.

Healthier drinks like fruit juices and vegetable juices...

Fruit juices are usually quite bad for you, and alot of processed vegetable juices are as well. Also there is social cost to bottled water that makes mass consumption of bottled water a highly undesireable option.

The problem with bottled water is that its something freely available, and its a recipe that cant be marketed, trademarked or improved apon, so companies will always try to market very complex mixtures like Coke.

I also think it should be made clear what the revinue would go towards (maybe it is I haven't read the article).

 

[Synystyr]

Its a stupid tax, as all of them are, pure and simple. It doesn't really matter if OP stopped drinking soft drinks, its clear it had nothing to do with the taxes. Its just another way to keep the government's gears oiled. What if I don't want to pay the soda tax, what are you going to do about it?

 

[ahdkaw]

Earth to League of Reason! Come In Please!

Sugar is a drug and a killer, why shouldn't it be taxed? Because you want to get high on sugar for less? Sorry, personal freedom arguments don't work here! :lol:

 

[Synystyr]

Earth to League of Reason! Come In Please!

Sugar is a drug and a killer, why shouldn't it be taxed? Because you want to get high on sugar for less? Sorry, personal freedom arguments don't work here! :lol:

Man I hope my sarcasm filter is broke, you're not serious are you?

 

[WolfAU]

The abundance of smilies would tend to indicate he's not...

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I support a tax on soft drinks, and fast food, and junk food... but only if those taxes go DIRECTLY to improving nutrition for the folks who need it. And, maybe we could stop subsidizing corn farmers as a way to drive up the price of corn syrup.

 

[irmerk]

I support a tax on soft drinks, and fast food, and junk food... but only if those taxes go DIRECTLY to improving nutrition for the folks who need it. And, maybe we could stop subsidizing corn farmers as a way to drive up the price of corn syrup.

I guess I agree with this. Still, I feel uneasy about the government doing it unless the majority of the country actually want it. Meh, whatever, I still agree with it.

Earth to League of Reason! Come In Please!

Sugar is a drug and a killer, why shouldn't it be taxed? Because you want to get high on sugar for less? Sorry, personal freedom arguments don't work here! :lol:

As with Synystyr, are you fucking serious?

 

[GoodKat]

It's a great idea in my opinion. It's a horrible shame that healthy food is expensive as hell and unhealthy super processed high calorie food is cheap as hell. If we have to subsidize healthy foods and tax unhealthy foods to make it work, that's just how it should be.

People drink soda primarily because it tastes good. For this to be effective, the tax would have to be high enough to overcome the soda's flavor, you would literally have to make it so expensive that people can't enjoy drinking it, and even then, the effectiveness of such a tax would decrease as the consumer's income rises.