It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tax Soda To Fight White Privilege And Delusions Of The Progressive Mind

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2017 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Seattle's first gay mayor has dropped out of his reelection bid due to allegations of abusing young boys. But his plan to tax soda to fight white privilege (yes you read that correctly) will still be heard by the city council in June. Critics have said he is not Americas most progressive mayor. Determined to prove them wrong, he drops this load of garbage.


Seattle's Ed Murray has packed so much conflicted social justice into a simple soda tax no one in the Emerald City is quite sure what to make of it.

After it was suggested to him his proposed two-cents-an-ounce tax on soda sweetened with sugar would be borne disproportionately by the poor and people of color, Murray lowered the levy and included all sweetened drinks, including diet soda.

If it doesn't doesn't explode from the sheer weight of its daffy intentions, the City Council is expected to consider the proposal sometime in June.


Just wait, it gets better. Why include diet soda?


Diet drinks, Hizzoner reasoned, were more likely to be consumed by "upper middle class white people." It had become for him "an issue of equity," a way to tackle "white privileged institutionalized racism."


HAHAHAHA! You want to know why the left keeps loosing so many elections? Look no further that this guy right here. Diet soda is racist! Upper class white people drink that stuff.

Right now at this very moment, next to me is a man of color, drinking...wait for it....A diet pepsi!




Murray had originally proposed the soda tax during his state of the city address in February. He said he hoped to raise $16 million in its first year to fund everything from an additional year of early public education to subsidies for food stamp recipients to shop at farmers' markets.


Aren't food stamps already a subsidy? So now the subsidies need subsidies. How about we just focus on helping people get a damn JOB!


While confusing these pristine motives with a diet soda tax on privileged whites, Murray was still unable to stop mau-mauing beverage makers, accusing them of adopting tobacco industry tactics targeting communities of color with a product "that only undermines the health of young people."


Yes the Soda companies are out to kill people in poor communities, you know, because of white privilege.

The white people are drinking the diet soda so they'll be ok, we'll just sell the crap sodas to the poor brown people. Does he really think this is what is being discussed in the Coca Cola board room?


The people of Santa Fe were apparently unwilling to endure all of this false posturing, roundly rejecting a soda tax referendum Tuesday. City leaders had also dangled educational services funding for lower income families as a sweetener, so to speak. Fifty eight percent of voters rejected it. Voters in lower income districts voted most heavily against it.


The People you claim to represent are smarter than you.


The supposed elitism of the tax turned many voters off, as did the financial intervention of billionaire Michael Bloomberg who donated $1 million in favor of the soda tax. One anti-tax activist told the Albuquerque Journal after the election that the city should try taxing tofu instead.

Murray's case for a soda tax won't be helped by the disastrous results from cities that have gone ahead with these kinds of soda taxes. As Reason has reported, Philadelphia's soda tax—which went into effect in January—has seen price hikes of 30 to 50 percent along with job losses in the beverage industry. Philly.com has reported that one of the city's largest drink distributors said it will cut 20 percent of its workforce, while an owner of several ShopRite stores said he will cut some 300 jobs.


But that's ok right? They can just subsidize the subsidies and give these people that just lost their jobs a free government ride. Tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend. At least they're taking on that white privilege.


Similarly situated businesses and residents in Seattle are already pushing back on Murray's proposed soda tax. The local Teamsters Union has already come out against it with their Secretary-Treasurer saying that his union "will not support a tax that will put hardworking middle-class Americans out of a job, no matter how well-intentioned the tax may be."


You know it's bad when the Teamsters come out against you.


Local business owners have pushed back as well. One burger joint in the city put up a sign reading "Hey Mr. Mayor, $5 sodas? Your pop tax sucks!"

Slightly more polished sentiments were echoed by Lewis Rudd—CEO of Ezells Fried Chicken, a Seattle area chain—in a press release put out by anti-soda tax group Keep Seattle Livable For All. "Why would our City Council want to proceed with a massive tax on our diverse small business community and our city's low-income families? There has to be a better way to raise revenue than hurting our most vulnerable residents and business people," his statement reads.


Thank God it seems like the people of Seattle know this is stupid. But it might not matter:


Seattle's mayor and its city council—which contains a registered Socialist—are notoriously tax happy, and the glittering promise of an extra $18 million in revenue per year may be enough to ignore the mounting opposition.


Socialism yaaaaay!

Full Article




posted on May, 10 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder




You want to know why the left keeps loosing so many elections? Look no further that this guy right here. Diet soda is racist! Upper class white people drink that stuff.


I do not think he say that or that that can be read from his statements. What he does say is that not exempting diet soda from the soda tax makes that tax hit more evenly throughout demographics.

But putting it that way makes it much harder to argue against it of course.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:04 AM
link   
You never go full retard.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Dont really poor people with diabetes from a life of fast food, drugs, newport cigarettes, and high stress drink diet soda too? I know quite a few of them that are a bit older then I by about 20 years and from what I can see race isn't a factor. Taxing diet soda would **CK over a lot of poor people. HAHA if they wanted to tax white privilege they should try the tanning salon, I don't know too many colored folk that use them.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

Another people tax. How about a rich people tax? The same rates as us.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

Are there any other more important issues than soda?



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

You would think so right? But this soda issues has cost people in Philly their jobs. So it may not be important to you but it's pretty damn important to those people.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I think Social Justice Warriors compete to see who can introduce the most 'TARD' of ideas to collapse Civilization.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

This was posted a couple days ago. Murray never said that.

See here.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Hmm I missed that thread. Thanks for the heads up.



edit on 10-5-2017 by FauxMulder because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

As a liberal, I believe that we should have an open dialogue with Conservatives rather than demonize them. Sadly this view is only shared by a few others.

There are some of us that are sick and tired of fellow liberals demonizing white Christian males and Conservatives.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

It did hear back from the author. He pointed me to the video from which I transcribed Murray's actual words. What the Reason writer did was to take a snippet from the beginning of the presser when Murray was speaking and then mashed them up (out of sequence at that) with other bits from an answer to a question at the end, during the Q&A part (14+ minutes later).


Their recommendations were clear — we must be proactive about supporting Seattle public schools with front-line programs that put equity first. To put "equity first" means not letting white privilege institutional racism upend the future of our children of color.


While he's not using the term "white privilege" correctly, in the proper context, he's actually talking about educational disparities which he quantified by citing a Stanford study showing a 31% gap between reading levels of black and white third graders in Seattle public schools. I don't think that anyone would argue that the gap exists. He should have just said "institutional racism" perhaps, though that also tends to trigger some people because it contains the word "racism."

The other bits come from an answer given to a question at the end of the presser (after other people had spoken). A lot of the verbiage was dedicated to talking about how sugary drinks are a leading cause of obesity and therefore constitute a healthrisk and how the tax (like in other places) is primarily meant to deter consumption. Because of that, a reporter asked Murray why diet drinks had been added to the tax (since they contain no sugar). Here you can see where the rest was lifted from his response:


It's an issue of equity. Umm. Again the data tended to show that diet soda tended to be drinked — you know — tends to be more upper class white people. And the sugary uh — high sugar soda — and like tend to be in minority communities.


I personally think these sorts of taxes are stupid but the point was made in a Seattle Times article (with data to back it up) that people at the lower end of the economic scales, a demographic which we can all agree has a disproportionate minority membership, actually consume more regular soft drinks, etc and less diet. If you're a person who thinks a soda tax is a good idea in the first place and the proceeds are being used to fund programs intended to resolve disparities affecting the low income, predominately minority community, that fact might give you pause to consider the efficacy of the tax.

So the proposal was updated to include diet drinks. Anyway, you can see that he took words out of context, from different parts of the presser, and glued them together in a new arrangement to give his heavily biased interpretation. I'm fine with rabble-rousers given opinions/interpretations. What bothered me was his misleading use of quotes to make it seem that the man had something which he did not in fact say.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
It isn't about our health and welfare, it is about an extra tax, one they can collect from everyone, rich and poor alike. We keep getting tax breaks on income taxes, but people do not realize, the money is still being collected to run things. The government hides taxes all over the place, and people are unaware.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

I'm an old school liberal myself, but this mayor is a dumpster fire.

Let's assume his thesis is accurate: IF old, wealthy, white people are more prone to diet-soda than everyone else, wouldn't the better plan be to subsidize their intake of said beverages, encouraging their overconsumption and hastening their departure?

The worst thing about self-identified progressives is they suck at chess and poker.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Yea I can see where the snippets were taking out to paint a bigger picture. Regardless I find it interesting that he would use those words at all in the presser and open himself up to this type of criticism. Who even thinks about what races drink what soda? Its a ridiculous train of thought. And seeing as most people agree the tax is stupid to begin with and only hurts low income people, you would think they would quit pushing this in cities around the country.
edit on 10-5-2017 by FauxMulder because: Grrrrrrrrrrrr



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

Why there isn't a tax on white people is beyond me.

There should be a skin color tax because privilege.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: FauxMulder

Why there isn't a tax on white people is beyond me.

There should be a skin color tax because privilege.



A simple across-the-board melanin-based tax rate is all that's really needed.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I call for a fair-tax! Everyone pays based on how much skin they have, indexed to BMI. :p



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
A Skin Tax.

And no Coppertone loopholes!



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: FauxMulder

Why there isn't a tax on white people is beyond me.

There should be a skin color tax because privilege.



I'm not white! I'm more like linen or bone, maybe cream


edit on 10-5-2017 by FauxMulder because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join