Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Soda Tax

merica soda tax sin tax coke soda pop

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

Poll: Is this ok?

Is this ok?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#26 w0nderwall

w0nderwall
  • 568 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 07:08 AM

A 10% tax won't help with cutting obesity or health problens imo, they'll just continue chugging while shelling out extra cash to do so. 



#27 Elindoril

Elindoril
  • Weeaboo Trash

  • 9,188 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 07:14 AM

Everyone drinks diet coke to avoid tax.

Everyone loses weight because DIET.

Obesity problems solved in America.

Spoiler


#28 Shannon

Shannon
  • 💦🌺 water type ♓✨

  • 1,618 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 08:06 AM

I guess my opinion doesn't totally count in this thread because I don't drink soda (been like six months since I've had a drop of it) but I'm hoping that since this has already been voted on and will definitely go into effect, at least some good will come out of it. Fingers crossed it makes unhealthy extreme-soda-drinkers rethink their habit.



#29 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴


  • 9,417 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 08:08 AM

I guess my opinion doesn't totally count in this thread because I don't drink soda (been like six months since I've had a drop of it) but I'm hoping that since this has already been voted on and will definitely go into effect, at least some good will come out of it. Fingers crossed it makes unhealthy extreme-soda-drinkers rethink their habit.

I think every opinion counts when it comes to voting.



#30 Shannon

Shannon
  • 💦🌺 water type ♓✨

  • 1,618 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 08:18 AM

I think every opinion counts when it comes to voting.

Of course - but I'm not from California and didn't vote on this measure. I just hope some good comes out of it since it's already passed.



#31 masxed

masxed
  • 698 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:11 AM

I voted no because I see nothing good coming from it and imo that is usually the case with taxation. Cigarette smokers don't usually stop smoking because of the tax. Alcohol and cigarette taxes just seemed to be another way to get more people working jobs. If someones addiction becomes pricey what do they do? Usually they start trying to make more money! If they could just easily stop because of a price change they probably wouldn't count as actual addicts. Perhaps alcohol, cigarettes and soda taxes are all fundraisers for people to blow each other up in the middle east while the citizens of the US get drunk, go to their 9-5, smoke a cigarette, crack open a coke and say "Ahhh the land of the free"?  :lol2:  (don't take this too seriously guys, it's supposed to be funny)

 

 Anyhow I also hope for some good to come from this! Just like Cohle I don't drink soda, I decided the issues aren't worth the taste and water still does the trick for me. :D 



#32 Hawk

Hawk
  • hawk·ish·ly

  • 9,682 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:33 AM

Why single out soda?  Why not target everything with HFCS?

 

I voted no to it being okay.  



#33 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3,638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:47 AM

I voted no because I see nothing good coming from it and imo that is usually the case with taxation. Cigarette smokers don't usually stop smoking because of the tax. Alcohol and cigarette taxes just seemed to be another way to get more people working jobs. If someones addiction becomes pricey what do they do? Usually they start trying to make more money! If they could just easily stop because of a price change they probably wouldn't count as actual addicts. Perhaps alcohol, cigarettes and soda taxes are all fundraisers for people to blow each other up in the middle east while the citizens of the US get drunk, go to their 9-5, smoke a cigarette, crack open a coke and say "Ahhh the land of the free"?  :lol2:  (don't take this too seriously guys, it's supposed to be funny)

 

 Anyhow I also hope for some good to come from this! Just like Cohle I don't drink soda, I decided the issues aren't worth the taste and water still does the trick for me. :D

 

 

"In support of 12 of the 18 conclusions, the experts agreed that there was sufficient evidence of effectiveness of increased tobacco excise taxes and prices in reducing overall tobacco consumption and prevalence of tobacco use and improvement of public health, including by preventing initiation and uptake among young people, promoting cessation among current users and lowering consumption among those who continue to use."



#34 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴


  • 9,417 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:48 AM

I smoked more after the tax when into effect, because I was stressed about the amount of money I was spending on it.



#35 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3,638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:49 AM

Why single out soda?  Why not target everything with HFCS?

 

I voted no to it being okay.  

 

Good point. I wonder if the tax will apply to Hi-C and other extremely sugary fruit "juices".


I smoked more after the tax when into effect, because I was stressed about the amount of money I was spending on it.

 

Ah, in that case, completely ignore the study conducted by 20 experts I just cited.

 

Spoiler



#36 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴


  • 9,417 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:50 AM

Good point. I wonder if the tax will apply to Hi-C and other extremely sugary fruit "juices".


 

Ah, in that case, completely ignore the study conducted by 20 experts I just cited.

 

Spoiler

I quit eventually.



#37 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3,638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:51 AM

I quit eventually.

 

:thumbsup:

 

Same, but it was because I moved somewhere where the tax was far higher.



#38 CaptainDantes

CaptainDantes
  • 1,094 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:52 AM

I don't really like it. Leave the "taxes" for things that actually matter. Just because you drink sugary soda doesn't mean you live an unhealthy lifestyle

#39 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3,638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 10:53 AM

I don't really like it. Leave the "taxes" for things that actually matter. Just because you drink sugary soda doesn't mean you live an unhealthy lifestyle

 

You might be "interested" in this link



#40 CaptainDantes

CaptainDantes
  • 1,094 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 11:00 AM

You might be "interested" in this link


Bahaha, "thanks."

#41 masxed

masxed
  • 698 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 11:11 AM

 

 Interesting. I don't like that particular pages lack of elaboration and the use of the term "experts" when we live in a day and age where anybody can be labeled an expert if they want. But I can certainly see the possibility of this being true. From the perspective of the city I live in and the people I know it doesn't seem to match up at all, but that's a narrow perspective anyways so it doesn't matter. :)



#42 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3,638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 11:45 AM

 Interesting. I don't like that particular pages lack of elaboration and the use of the term "experts" when we live in a day and age where anybody can be labeled an expert if they want. But I can certainly see the possibility of this being true. From the perspective of the city I live in and the people I know it doesn't seem to match up at all, but that's a narrow perspective anyways so it doesn't matter. :)

 

Here they are, if you're interested:

 

FJ. Chaloupka, Chair (USA)
N. Nargis (Bangladesh; University of Dhaka, Dhaka),
L. Joossens (Belgium; Belgian Foundation against Cancer, Brussels)
L. Nguyen (Finland; National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki)
L. Clancy, L. Currie (Ireland; Tobacco Free Research Institute, Dublin)
S. Gallus, C. La Vecchia (Italy; Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milan)
F. Godfrey (Luxembourg; The Union (IUATLD), Weimerskirch)
C. Van Walbeek (South Africa; University of Cape Town, Cape Town)
E. Fernandez (Spain; Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona)
S. Delipalla, AM Perucic (Switzerland; World Health Organization, Geneva)
Z. Onder (Turkey; Bilkent University, Ankara)
A. Gilmore, (United Kingdom; University of Bath, Bath)
E. Blecher, (USA; American Cancer Society, Atlanta)
TW. Hu, (USA; University of California, Berkeley)
D. Levy, (USA; HBSA of Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton)
H. Ross, (USA; American Cancer Society, Atlanta)
J. Tauras (USA; University of Illinois, Chicago)


#43 Oninna

Oninna
  • 299 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 01:51 PM

A 10% tax won't help with cutting obesity or health problens imo, they'll just continue chugging while shelling out extra cash to do so. 

I agree with this. The tax might be a good idea to raise revenue, but it's not going to do a bit to combat obesity.



#44 SheOfTheEnderworld

SheOfTheEnderworld
  • The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist

  • 3,838 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 05:50 PM

I think taxation is idiotically beyond control. Heh there's even a "rain tax" in Maryland. Seriously, you can't make this crap up.



#45 Speedracer

Speedracer
  • The Triforce of Herp

  • 771 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 06:05 PM

I think taxation is idiotically beyond control. Heh there's even a "rain tax" in Maryland. Seriously, you can't make this crap up.

I thought that was a joke until I googled it



#46 SheOfTheEnderworld

SheOfTheEnderworld
  • The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist

  • 3,838 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 November 2014 - 06:07 PM

I thought that was a joke until I googled it

 

It's largely why the person running to replace O'Malley lost bigtime in the recent election for governor...the state government here is BEYOND tax-happy.



#47 Padme

Padme
  • Tofu Tatas

  • 1,665 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 November 2014 - 12:16 AM

I voted yes but I much prefer positive reinforcement through rewarding people for making good choices. People tend to lash out when they think their being punished imo.

 

I think cigarette taxes are sort of different to this in that those were imposed and aimed at lowering youth smokers.

 

I also understand the train of thought where people want HFCS subsidization removed but I wonder the repercussions of removing the subsidization would be...  :/



#48 Florg

Florg
  • 711 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 November 2014 - 06:07 AM

A 10% tax won't help with cutting obesity or health problens imo, they'll just continue chugging while shelling out extra cash to do so. 

 

It's helped in regards to cigarettes, granted it was coupled with campaigns to fight it but smoking (especially in teens) has gone down



#49 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴


  • 9,417 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 November 2014 - 09:37 AM

I voted yes but I much prefer positive reinforcement through rewarding people for making good choices. People tend to lash out when they think their being punished imo.
 
I think cigarette taxes are sort of different to this in that those were imposed and aimed at lowering youth smokers.
 
I also understand the train of thought where people want HFCS subsidization removed but I wonder the repercussions of removing the subsidization would be...  :/

I think it would cause the price of most food to go up and people wouldn't understand why. (Because corn is in literally everything here. Corn is in salt here. Let that sink in...) I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily though. The United States spends the least of their money percentage-wise than any other nation on food. My main concern with removing subsidization of corn and other similar products is that I feel it would hurt farmers and we really need farmers in our lives.



#50 Padme

Padme
  • Tofu Tatas

  • 1,665 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 November 2014 - 11:26 AM

I think it would cause the price of most food to go up and people wouldn't understand why. (Because corn is in literally everything here. Corn is in salt here. Let that sink in...) I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily though. The United States spends the least of their money percentage-wise than any other nation on food. My main concern with removing subsidization of corn and other similar products is that I feel it would hurt farmers and we really need farmers in our lives.

 

Ya that's pretty much the entire thought I was going on. I've read a couple books with sections on corn in them. USA = corn. You need farmers and most farmers can't produce anything besides corn because they have no place to sell it since a lot of their elevators only purchase corn. Most of them don't even grow corn that's meant for table consumption. It's corn that is grown literally just to process the hell out of it. 





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: merica, soda tax, sin tax, coke, soda, pop

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users