On the heels of the American public being hit with a massive tobacco tax increase, we now have this:
In a commentary released today (ahead of print) by the New England Journal of Medicine, Yale’s Kelly Brownell and New York City’s health
commissioner, Thomas Frieden, argue that taxing sugary drinks could go a long way toward putting a brake on obesity. It won’t make fat people slim.
But it could slow or prevent plump consumers from ballooning into obese individuals, they argue.
Brownell and Frieden are not proposing a little tax. They’re advocating something that would really catch consumers’ eyes on each grocery or
restaurant receipt: perhaps a penny per ounce purchased. Each 32-ounce bottle of sugar-sweetened Coke, Mountain Dew, lemonade, sweetened tea or fruit
punch, for instance, would rack up a 32-cent tax. A carton of 12-ounce cans would cost an extra $1.44.
ScienceNewsPlease visit the link provided for the complete story.
New York City’s health commissioner has written an article advocating “hefty” taxes on sodas and sports drinks containing sugar. Such a
tax, the article said, could be the biggest boon to public health since tobacco taxes.
The commissioner, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, and Kelly D. Brownell of Yale University, his co-author, argue in the New England Journal of Medicine that a
tax of a penny per ounce could reduce consumption by more than 10 percent and raise $1.2 billion a year in New York State alone.
NYTPlease visit the link provided for the complete story.
For all those amongst us that thought that outrageous tobacco taxes ware a good idea principally because you didn't smoke, allow me to introduce you
to the chickens knocking at your door, I believe it is roosting season.
What does this mean?
It means that we are being programmed to accept to pay more for things that the government deems "not good" for us.
And before you say, well it's only one cent per can, what difference does it make? Let me remind you that tobacco taxes were also at first very
Once this process begins there surely is no end to it.
Think off all the other products that could be taxed in such a fashion under this shaky premise, really, think about it.
Also think about the fact that they're not talking about taxing aspartame which likely causes a lot more harm than sugar.
We are looking forward to the government legislating all our choices for us.
Smokers and drinkers knew it first, now the rest will know.
[edit on 9 Apr 2009 by schrodingers dog]