Seatle sin taxes soda

originally posted by: ketsuko


So who's next to get taxed do you think?

I'm thinking that if you live in the city and have a lot size that could support tiny housing for the homeless, the city will bring an extra property tax on you, but you can get it wavered if you actively house the homeless on your land. That's what I think.


What I don't get is why hasn't anyone in the local news digging into this whole tax thing and seeing whats really going on? King 5, Q 13, and Komo are always so big on doing this kind of reporting but here they've fallen short. Right now they've taken to rehashing a story last year on human trafficing and prostitution, but nothing on where this money will be really spent.

Case in point, it looks to me (and I invite anyone to read the link I posted earlier from the Mayors office) that if the tax reveanue falls short, than the only group that will still have it's money will be the study group.

So let's say that 0 money is raised, and the tax is a complete failure. This tax study group will still receave it's money + expansives while the other "benifactors" of the tax will be put on hold.

Any supporters of the war on drugs or the new war on opiats . Welcome to what you have done.

What if you drink diet pop?

a reply to: nwtrucker

The state does have it's tax differences, such as a state income tax and all food is taxed 6 cents on the dollar.
ID vs WA Taxes

It's not like there wasn't a bill introduced for taxing sugar drinks statewide:
All Washington soda drinkers could be taxed

The new soda tax in Seattle might be just the beginning as an effort to take the tax statewide continues in Olympia. House Bill 1975 was introduced last February. It’s floated around the finance committee ever since, not moving any further. But on Jan. 8, a resolution was passed to reintroduce the bill. It is strikingly similar to Seattle’s soda tax law, referencing the health effects of sugar consumption, from tooth decay to obesity. It also notes minorities see twice as many advertisements for sugary drinks.

Source

This bill would tax diet drinks as well. Source mentions that same as the Seattle bill that a study should be conducted to determine what impact it has. It would be 2 cents per ounce, vs the 1.75 cent tax with the Seattle bill.

I don't see a statewide tax sitting well throughout the populace, despite I believe less and less people drink sugary drinks now days, there's still a strong Libertarian leaning presence in the state. The tax on bottled water was intervened- see here.



Being that food in general isn't taxed, sugar/junk food is an allowable exemption:
Wa beverage taxability

a reply to: dreamingawake


And once again King County (Seattle) rules all of Washington.

Portland will soon be starting Carbon tax...we all knew it was coming. They will add more tax to gas and electricity, heating fuels etc...

a reply to: Xtrozero


Yep, and I'm just waiting for Alternative Energy fines like some areas of Florida has. Anything to get money out of the local economy and into the economy of the politician's pockets.

originally posted by: Guyfriday
There's a lot of dietary notes being tossed around in here, but what does any of that really have to do with this tax? Some of you here really sound like you're ok with a governing body falsely taxing people "For their own good". have anyone here taken the time to see what is really going on here, or did the non-sense about "sugar good/bad" confuse everyone?

Slave race showing how well they have lost their soul. Simple as that. This is, was, a conspiracy site and yet the majority of replies, if not all, are about sugar and not the government doing what is best for their chattel. The chattel have been effectively lead into the world of "god damn it I can't control myself, look after myself or even think for myself so tax please..." Brilliant. Even worse, this situation you have laid out is "tax THEM for their own good" and it isn't driven by the city idiots by they chattel themselves!

The minute the conversation devolves into the merits of the tax you know you have lost and need to jump off the cliff to avoid those who are about to suggest your way of thinking needs to be taxed. As far as I can tell, the population has embraced the idea that the answer to every single problem is for you to give the government money when you do something wrong, when you think wrong, act wrong or need something and then, through the magic of agency, the government will take a taste and... well usually nothing to help you personally at all.

Stat: 100,000 people die a year from medial prescription errors according to big pharma themselves. Lousy stat math says WA count is 2000 a year. Look for for a tax soon on medicine to help deal with the deaths the med people cause, up is down, war is peace....

a reply to: Guyfriday
Probably going to happen, then there's the carbon tax. Just another day in corporate Washington State.


With Inslee's proposed carbon tax:

Source

“So, yes there will be impacts on fuel and energy prices, but we expect these to be modest and fully within the range of what would be expected by normal price fluctuation,” said Lauren McCloy, a senior energy policy advisor in Inslee's office.

Source
On top of the already high gas and electricity prices.

And of course exemptions and credits for the oligarchy.

It's estimated the tax could result in a residential electricity price increase of about 5 percent, a residential gas price increase of about 10 percent; gasoline prices could rise between 6 to 9 percent by 2035, according to policy officials briefing reporters Tuesday.

Seatle sin taxes soda

Isn't there a harbor near there that somebody can throw some soda into ...

a reply to: AttitudeProblem

You all have absolutely no right to protest. You had no problem doing it to smokers and drinkers. Suck it up and pay your fair share!

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks


This will be my last posting in this thread since nobody is looking at the facts behind this tax. Look people, A mayor that was under suspicion of sexual misconduct (later resigned due to these allegations being true) tossed out a tax idea that was labeled at the time as "A White Person tax", in an attempt to distract people from his misdeeds. After he left office, the city council goes ahead and passes this tax under the statement that they need the money to help out their citizens. This same city had made so much money off of tax revenue the year before that they went on a weird spending spree and handed out bonuses and pay offs like candy.

The issue here isn't if sugar is bad, or smokers had it worse, or even that it rains in the PNW, it's that this is nothing more then a (not even blind) cash grab by an increasingly corrupt city council that not only restrains the local law enforcement from doing their jobs, but also incite riots and promotes homelessness as away of life. This seems to be lost on most posters in this thread, and that is exactly way this type of stuff happens. No matter how much everyone likes to talk about this type of corruption, it seems that everyone would rather sit back and be distracted by the nonsense of the day and avoid the issues that are destructive to a free world.

sad, very-very sad.

a reply to: Guyfriday

I mostly agree. Most topics beyond page 3(or 1 in smaller threads) delve beyond the main topic- sugar concerns would make for a good thread. Though, it may have be done already on it's own. Also that people are mostly unfamiliar with the state issues-minus the handful or more of us who post from the state.

Yes, the city council, not even the citizens implemented the tax, yes that is the main issue. With the calls for the statewide tax similar to this one, who gets to vote?

a reply to: Guyfriday

And the cash grab on smokers thru the master settlement agreement and ruinous taxes to the point where the government makes more in taxes than the cigerette companies do in revenue is somehow "different"

Carbon taxes are somehow "different"

Lets face it, this is all part of the globalization plan which includes the destruction of the middle class. Ruinous taxation is all part of it.

We need to organize and start taking down some NGO's that proport to be charities (I am talking MADD, Cancer Societies and various other charities). All of them are misusing statistics to give the government the excuses they need to introduce taxes.

At some point we have to have a discussion about public health and their intrusion into private health.

This is far bigger then 1 politician.

The sugar tax was introduced in far more than one city and is a standard for the UK.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The worst part about tobacco is the additives.

And getting additive free tobacco in the retail is ridiculously priced.

Id much rather see industry regulated than people regulated. Natural tobaccos and no sin tax seems the inly sane option.

Still...the tar isnt particularly good for you. But until additives are removed im cynical on the cancer link. Asuming theres not a study ive missed

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks


Personally the tobacco tax is kind of a scam, but I can kind of see the point behind the smoking tax. I don't see people getting secondhand diabetes from somebody eating sugar.

Now as for this sugar tax in Seattle Wa, people need to see whats happening in the city to see what's going on here. This was an unneeded tax by a city that has been blindly apporing new taxes on any and everything they can within the limits of their city, but since Seattle and King County (which is the county where Seattle resides) has so much say in state affairs, the Govenor is now thinking about this cash grab accross the state.

People haven'tt aken the time to see how the money will be mandated for use, nor have many people understood that this tax created a council to over see how the tax is being used. this council has a set buget that gets it's monay even if the tax doesn't collect enough funds to suport it. Again I need to point out that last year the city of Seattle collected so much from taxes that it had a massive surplus to use. There was no point or justification for this tax which the city passed without voter approval.

The basis of this sugar tax came about as a feel good idea (if you can call naming it "A White People Tax" feel good) to distract the people of Seattle from the misdeeds of their sexual predator mayor. The city council decided to pass the tax just so they can get another source of revenue for their very large "Rainy day fund" which gets used to pay off people that could press charges against the city for things like;

Sexual harassment complaints
Wrongful death cases
Bonuses for city officials
city council perks like "fact finding missions" (aka fully paid vacations for city officials)

It perplexes me as to why people are just letting this slide, but as I stated before most people are just distracted by the nonsense of the day, rather than exposing these abuses.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



That does seem to be the case. A lot of people smoked for years without any health issues before additives were added. Even now getting a high quality cigar is healthier than those vaping devices. It's just that most people can't afford a good cigar, but everyone and their kids can buy a vape stick

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To bigfatfurrytexan and guyfriday

Your mind is still not seeing it. If "scientists" aka "epidimiologists" can do a study and prove the tobacco is bad not only for the person who smokes but also for the person in the same room as the person who smokes (second hand smoke) and also for the person who enters the room after the smoker is gone (third hand smoke).....

and just when more revenue is needed, can "prove" that sugar causes obesity and diabetes....

and just when more revue is needed, can prove that alcohol causes cancer

and just when more revenue is needed, can prove that salt causes heart attacks....

and just when more revenue is needed, carbon dioxide causes global warming....

and can convince the government that action must be taken in the form of a tax to reduce consumption.....

ALL this without knowing what actually causes cancer, obesity, diabetes, heart attacks and global warming......

what makes you think that they are not lying about tobacco, sugar, alcohol, salt, carbon entirely?????

a reply to: Guyfriday
Exactly, they do need to see what has happened especially if it can gain traction with politicians who are painting it in a good light, it can be a model for others places. Counties that have these Seattle big wig money grubbers as current politicians/ city council promising things but taxes must be raised, need t be told off.

My county did that by voting down a prop due to a failed promise about a similar project as well as one caught illegally trying fund the cause. The problem is as they did with the initial project by not even asking to go ahead with the now failed project. I'd like to see the same with the statewide soda tax, if voters have a say so. As I'd wager that the majority of the sate would say no to it.

I know the thread is over but there's an interesting update: Businesses and business leaders are seeing the affect of the tax and they are not happy. Here's to the good fight