Here come the Food Police again

[whell]

They want to tell you how to eat and drink, but its none of their damn business.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/05/...ver-16-ounces/

[JJIII]

Like people won't just get two. Geez!

[d-ray657]

Impose a surcharge on the sugary drinks, just like there has been a surcharge imposed on tobacco. Let the users of those products contribute proportionately to the increased health costs caused by their use.

Regards,

D-Ray

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Impose a surcharge on the sugary drinks, just like there has been a surcharge imposed on tobacco. Let the users of those products contribute proportionately to the increased health costs caused by their use.

Regards,

D-Ray

Yep. That's exactly what his eminence, Ronald Reagan, would do. Impose a user fee on things to correspond to their societal costs. Of course, it would be called fee and not a tax.

[whell]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Impose a surcharge on the sugary drinks, just like there has been a surcharge imposed on tobacco. Let the users of those products contribute proportionately to the increased health costs caused by their use.

Regards,

D-Ray

Yes, that's possible. But you know that once that door has been cracked open, all manner of taxes on all manner of stuff for all manner of "good intentions" will be the result. Also, most of these products are sold at small businesses. You want to drive an additional level of accounting and expense on these folks, just to fund the liberal cause celeb?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yep. That's exactly what his eminence, Ronald Reagan, would do. Impose a user fee on things to correspond to their societal costs. Of course, it would be called fee and not a tax.

Can you list a single example of a "fee" that Reagan was responsible for an was levied at the retail store level, point of purchase?

[piece-itpete]

You realise that smokers die younger and are therefore cheaper

Plus at least in Ohio the majority of cigarette taxes go to the general fund.

Pete

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Yes, that's possible. But you know that once that door has been cracked open, all manner of taxes on all manner of stuff for all manner of "good intentions" will be the result. Also, most of these products are sold at small businesses. You want to drive an additional level of accounting and expense on these folks, just to fund the liberal cause celeb?

These same small business already sell cigarettes and beer (and are happy to do so).

That said, we should either heavily tax every "empty calorie" processed food product (snack foods, cookies, chips, Twinkies, etc.) or nothing at all.

[piece-itpete]

Not the twinkies!!!



Pete

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

These same small business already sell cigarettes and beer (and are happy to do so).

That said, we should either heavily tax every "empty calorie" processed food product (snack foods, cookies, chips, Twinkies, etc.) or nothing at all.

Yes, the markup on alcohol and cigarettes are huge. The markup on a soda less so. The markup on a twinkie, not so much.

Although I do LOVE the idea of:

- an underground black market for Big Gulps and Twinkies
- New Yorkers jumping over to Jersey to buy their Starbucks