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.

 

First Tobacco ... Now Soft Drinks ...

page: 5
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   
All of these subtle taxes will eventually drive people to be dependent on Uncle Barry for their everyday needs. (Nationalized Healthcare, manufacturing and Banking) When jobs run out, the govt. won't need to mandate "volunteerism". People will just enlist in Barry's citizen corps (GIVE act) in droves just to have a job and earn a meager pittance.




posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
These taxes have nothing to do with whether what you are smoking or eating or drinking have anything to do with your health.

The medical industry is one of the biggest there is,they raise their prices so high,you would think they worry about finding themselves short of customers.

Not quite.

It is about profits.

It is about corporations.

Eventually the wreckless pursuit of profit,while totally ignoring environmental damage,societal damage,damage damage damage.....

What do you figure will be left for you to get what you need to survive when your world is so polluted that you can't even eat safe veggies from you own damn garden?.

The corporations and governments own the best land,we built our houses and roads on the rest.

Welcome to the American nightmare people.

Your stupid lazy asses allowed it to happen.

Sorry,but it is the truth,face it.

Refuse to do business with anyone but local farmers.

Tell the government to fk off.

Take it back,but you won't,you're too weak and scared from eating and drinking all that crap the corporations sell you to keep you that way.

Don't drive.

Grow your own food.

Refuse en masse to enjoy anything,any way other than your own terms.

Leave business and government out of your life,except for the very bare minimum required.

If you really look at it,you don't need either of them at all,that is why you are led to falsely believe you are so dependent on them.

DORKS.

Just buy a bag of sugar,thats what you are addicted to anyway......

Just an observation...all these subtle taxes wouldn't be such a problem,if we all got a subtle pay increase once in awhile,would they?.
There is a lot more wrong here than having to pay more for your sugar or aspartame fix.
Wake Up!!!.
Just buy a bag of sugar,thats what you are addicted to anyway......

Just buy a bag of sugar,thats what you are addicted to anyway......

Just buy a bag of sugar,thats what you are addicted to anyway......

Just buy a bag of sugar,thats what you are addicted to anyway......


[edit on 10-4-2009 by chiponbothshoulders]

[edit on 10-4-2009 by chiponbothshoulders]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Okay, first, this is just an article in The New England Journal of Medicine. And while one of the authors is NY City's Health Commissioner, this isn't some law being passed, or even a proposal that's on the table. This is two men discussing the merits of doing such a thing which is a long way from becoming some policy of the current administration's.

And shame on those of you using this to demonize Obama because you don't like him. What does HE or even his administration have to do with this? Use some logic people.

And furthermore, sin taxes aren't a new idea. The Governor of NY in 2008 had an item in his budget for taxing sugary drinks. SF in 2007 debated doing it. In 2006 there was a similar debate in various science journals. In 2002 there was a proposition in LA for a soda tax. In texas there's no tax on foods, but sodas are taxed. I think this can be found in other states too.

In fact, here's a list of states that have taxes on sodas already:

www.cga.ct.gov...


We all agree that 'sin' taxes are bad. I think most people do. I don't smoke, I quit 25 years ago, and I think no one should smoke, but I think the tobacco tax is bull. Either let people smoke, or ban it. Seems a passive aggressive way of handling the matter. I feel the same way about the taxes on alcohol too.

But they aren't new, they aren't some idealogy of the new administration, and for the most part, people don't approve them, so they get implimented in sneaky ways, such as making junk foods excluded from the food tax exemptions.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
While they are correct about the obesity thing, they are going about it all wrong. And they know this. I believe this is about money as well, plain and simple. Since when does cost make people cut back on something? At least, those whom they are tageting with this tax are going to be the last to stop buying it. Thus failing its supposed purpose.

As far as diet drinks, yes, they are a lot 'better' for you in the calorie sense (No, whoever said you 'burn it off faster,' that's just not true). 150 versus 0? Some people drink 3 or 4 of those a night. That's upwards of 500 calories, which is a load.

But the diet does have sweetners which are still very iffy, and link to other issues. So it's not good to drink too many of any of them.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by chiponbothshoulders
 


I make my own lemonade and ice tea with filtered water. They taste great and are made just the way I like them.

I don't use aspartame. I use saccharin. For a real sweetner I use honey in coffee sometimes.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I was reading this thread and something started nagging me about this obvious resent trend. I kept thinking that our gov't is slowly eliminating our soceities pleasures or call it 'stimuli'.

I remembered way back in the late 70's,early 80's when religious cults were really prolific, they were trying to figure out how these groups were able to recruit people to see things their way. The 'Hara Krisna(?)' used a diet of bland foods such as a lettuce salad and bread for weeks to basically make you brain dead or better said, de-programmed, and then re-programmed you into the way of their thinking. It's called 'Passive Brainwashing'! Look it up-

Although I haven't found exactly what I was looking for concerning this one cult, I came across this article which is very interesting and a ton of info. I'll highlight just a few paragraphs as there is so much info. If you start thinking of what has transpired in our recent past, we are slowly and deliberately getting brainwashed into what the few what us to do

educate-yourself.org...

Steps in the Decognition Process
Once the initial conversion is effected, cults, armed services, and similar groups cannot have cynicism among their members. Members must respond to commands and do as they are told, otherwise they are dangerous to the organizational control. This is normally accomplished as a three-step ˜ Decognition Process.

Alertness reduction
Step One is alertness reduction: The controllers cause the nervous system to malfunction, making it difficult to distinguish between fantasy and reality. More subtle is the "spiritual diet" used by many cults. They eat only vegetables and fruits; without the grounding of grains, nuts, seeds, dairy products, fish or meat, an individual becomes mentally "spacey."
(Disclaimer: This poster is implying why all the treehuggers and bunny huggers are the way they are.LOL)

Programmed Confusion
Step Two is programmed confusion: You are mentally assaulted while your alertness is being reduced as in Step One. This is accomplished with a deluge of new information, lectures, discussion groups, encounters or one-to-one processing, which usually amounts to the controller bombarding the individual with questions. During this phase of decognition, reality and illusion often merge and perverted logic is likely to be accepted.

Thought Stopping
Step Three is thought stopping: Techniques are used to cause the mind to go "flat." These are altered-state-of-consciousness techniques that initially induce calmness by giving the mind something simple to deal with and focusing awareness. The continued use brings on a feeling of elation and eventually hallucination. The result is the reduction of thought and eventually, if used long enough, the cessation of all thought and withdrawal from everyone and everything except that which the controllers direct. The takeover is then complete. It is important to be aware that when members or participants are instructed to use "thought-stopping" techniques, they are told that they will benefit by so doing: they will become "better soldiers" or "find enlightenment."

Does any of this start to relate on whats slowly going on?

True Believers and Mass Movements
Before ending this section on conversion, I want to talk about the people who are most susceptible to it and about Mass Movements. I am convinced that at least a third of the population is what Eric Hoffer calls "true believers." They are joiners and followers...people who want to give away their power. They look for answers, meaning, and enlightenment outside themselves.
Never underestimate the potential danger of these people. They can easily be molded into fanatics who will gladly work and die for their holy cause. It is a substitute for their lost faith in themselves and offers them as a substitute for individual hope. The Moral Majority is made up of true believers. All cults are composed of true believers. You'll find them in politics, churches, businesses, and social cause groups. They are the fanatics in these organizations.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Continued...

"Yes Set"
First, let me give you an example of distracting the left brain. Politicians use these powerful techniques all the time; lawyers use many variations which, I've been told, they call "tightening the noose."

Assume for a moment that you are watching a politician give a speech. First, he might generate what is called a "yes set." These are statements that will cause listeners to agree; they might even unknowingly nod their heads in agreement. Next come the truisms. These are usually facts that could be debated but, once the politician has his audience agreeing, the odds are in the politician's favor that the audience won't stop to think for themselves, thus continuing to agree. Last comes the suggestion. This is what the politician wants you to do and, since you have been agreeing all along, you could be persuaded to accept the suggestion. Now, if you'll listen closely to my political speech, you'll find that the first three are the "yes set," the next three are truisms and the last is the suggestion.

"Ladies and gentlemen: are you angry about high food prices? Are you tired of astronomical gas prices? Are you sick of out-of-control inflation? Well, you know the Other Party allowed 18 percent inflation last year; you know crime has increased 50 percent nationwide in the last 12 months, and you know your paycheck hardly covers your expenses any more. Well, the answer to resolving these problems is to elect me, John Jones, to the U.S. Senate."

Embedded Commands
And I think you've heard all that before. But you might also watch for what are called embedded commands. As an example: On key words, the speaker would make a gesture with his left hand, which research has shown is more apt to access your right brain. Today's media-oriented politicians and spellbinders are often carefully trained by a whole new breed of specialist who are using every trick in the book--both old and new--to manipulate you into accepting their candidate.

The embedded commands was interesting in which was brought up during Obama's campain about how he used mass psychosis during his speeches.

Some may feel that I got a little off topic but I don't believe so. Being that ATS is a conspircy site, I feel that the gov't is slowly trying to get total control of the masses through slow, deliberate and calculated ways.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by geo1066]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by AccessDenied
 


I am responding to this before I finish the thread so if this has been answered I apologize in advance. I live in the good old "tax 'em to death NY" and the revenue generated is supposed to be going toward health care costs! An Obesity tax, of all the stupid things!

If they would stop filling our food with garbage additives, taking the natural nutrition out of food and filling it with lab generated vitamins, and allowing this garbage to be marketed so heavily to the kids! My kids never tasted any of that crap when they were little and trust me it was a war!

Though I have not remained as vigilant as I was a year ago, I want to share this with you. I lost over 100 pounds simply by refusing to eat ANY PROCESSED FOOD! It took me just over a year to do this. Once my system was cleaned out from the crap I felt great. I visited a friend and they had made one of those boxed pasta salads, chock full of garbage. I was so sick that I thought I had food poisoning. I called my doc and she told me that for me to ingest that crap with a system free of chemicals was the reason I was so sick.

Imagine, I got violently ill from eating what most Americans think is good food. Why not fix the fraud in the food industry if they want a healthier public. red



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   
This is how it starts - and I say this with complete certainty after over a decade of having a Labour government in the UK who are just like old labour governments with their programmes of tax and spend.

No rise in income tax?

Well whoopee flippin doo - not much good when there have been well over 150 other taxes implemented.

Stealth Taxes are what you can expect for the foreseeable future.

Of course they will try and spin it so that they can say "it's for your own good" but in reality it's to raise money for pet projects and to erase past mistakes in fiscal policy.

A new world order is indeed here - and it's modelled on the EU policy of tax and spend.

This is not necessarily a bad thing if the money goes into social programmes, but I suspect that will not be the case - or if it is, minimal impact at best.

So let me ask this question: Would people rather pay a few extra taxes and have universal social healthcare, or would they rather pay insurance premiums and then take the chance that the insurance will actually pay out?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I think that would be great, anything to stop US from drinking that garbage. I say make a soft drink cost more than a pack of cigs. Drink fluoridated water its good for your teeth. I just can't see the big pharma supporting this as they have a nice crop of type 1 diabetes coming in that will need tons of supplies over the length of their lives. What is that new saying on CNN, never miss a good crisis. Better yet why not just tax fat people? We could all do an annual weigh in and you pay tax based on your BMI. Oh your 20% fat looks like you owe xx number of dollars.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Soft Drinks and Tobacco should be taxed heavily, they both are unhealthy for you.

lol I laugh when smokers get all riled up, find something more productive and healthier to do to get rid of stress, like exercise.

Stop being fat and lazy.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
[edit on 10-4-2009 by antimatter21]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by antimatter21

"Bigger Government to Make Food Safer Isn't the Answer, Critics Say
President Obama's new FDA head has begun laying out a plan to better protect America's food supply. But some are skeptical that another government agency to help overhaul a floundering agency is the best solution."





www.foxnews.com...





although I don't drink sodas or watch TV I can't believe that we are letting them tax us like this. We really are at a crucial point in Human existance, we have the opportunity to free ourselves, really free ourselves. But it starts at the community level. They say it's for our health, that is the biggest load of crap i have ever heard. If it were truly for our health then they wouldn't have made, marketed, and brainwashed us into drinking that horrid poison. People think that soda is ok because "they themselves" haven't gained weight. Thats rediculous, see they have seperated us from our true selves and have inserted an illusion. I was an aircraft mechanic--as well as many other occupations--and I have "used" soda for many different things, like to get all the corrosion and battery acid build up off of a battery, to clean stained toilets, lets see, to get stains off of clothing the list goes on, but the facts remain the same. This stuff is not good for any of us so lets not buy anymore and their tax can go the way of the hamster.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   
I actually agree with this tax, Soda is terrible for your body....It can lead to osteoporosis, diabetes, kidney damage and tooth decay.

Worst part is unlike cigs and alcohol kids and teenagers can buy this stuff and pollute their body with it, with health care about to be nationalized I am not paying for other peoples poor diet and stupidity.


[edit on 10-4-2009 by TheInformer]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 




Thanks man. I suppose I should stop worrying about sounding like a prick. The partisan crap is just that. I'm forty years old. I stopped blaming my parents for my life a long time ago. Bush was just a figurehead. Just like they ALL are.

I paid ten grand in income taxes to the feds last year. I paid four grand to the state. I stil owe more. I'm taxed on about 60K a year. After child support and taxes, I really bring home about 20. I make thirty bucks an hour and bring home 13 friggin bucks an hour.

It would be great if a sugar tax would offest those taxes a little bit, but they won't!! It's just MORE. Always MORE. They wonder why people cheat.

I could choose to spend my money on crack and whores. When that money is gone I guess I could steal other people's money and use THAT on crack and whores. I don't.

I choose to work for a living, support my family and damn it, I like to enjoy a dr. pepper.

They tax us at every turn. To be honest, it infuriates me when I have to give so much to a government that would just as soon write me off as collateral damage than give a crap about how difficult life can be sometimes.

I've got a great idea....a Million Man March to the whitehouse....except this time, they have to feed us...and give us some dr. pepper...and let us camp out on their, I mean OUR property...

If they want to tax us to death, let's just all quit working. We can use the PC at the library to post...we can drink water from public fountains and eat all of the blooms off the cherry trees.

What really sucks is that they will be quite cozy in their little govt. built bunkers when the SHTF.




posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity
I for one am quite positive it is not soft drinks that cause obesity. A body burns that up in no time. The problem is processed food.Those who drink soft drinks tend to also eat a bunch of this crappy food. The skinniest people I know all drink a ton of regular soda and eat little processed food.

That said, it is diet sodas that could actually be a bigger problem. Our bodies know how to process sugar and corn syrup but fake sugars are another issue.


Im going to have to respectfully disagree with you on your first statement. In moderation, its not too bad, but moderation is a funny thing. one of the people i work with is REALLY big. each day he brings in a 12 pack of diet dr pepper. EACH DAY. I stole an extra recycling bin from home and it fills up much quicker than the one in my apartment, and Im an alcoholic who drinks beer almost every night for the past 5 years.

it really goes well with your diet soda statement. He is a vegetarian to boot, but since ive known him he has only gotten bigger.

I wish people knew that exercise is MUCH better at waking you up than a can of soda.

as a smoker I say, tax em. of course im from NC and our ciggs are still 40 a cartoon for camels. of course i also have to agree with schro-dog in the fact that I dont want big bro telling me what i should or shouldnt buy, but if it means more people will have to drink water, THE WORLDS BEST WEIGHT CONTROLLER, then i say go for it.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Wow.

Our prices will soon match those of Canadas, excluding all the benefits that THEY get (free healthcare etc).

I am not against high tobacco prices, but I am against the taxes on them...even though I never spoke out against it because I do not smoke.

Here is a quote I copied from a signature of an ATS member here. I take no credit for it, sorry I do not know who had it or who said it.
___________________________________________________________
'First, they came after the communists, and I held my tongue, for I was not a communist.'

'then, they came for the Jews, and I held my tongue, for I am not a Jew'

'then, homosexuals, and still I held my tongue'

'by the time they came for me, there was nobody left to raise their voice'
__________________________________________________________

I am not fat but I occasionally drink pop.

I finally feel for those who do smoke...and I apologize to those who I said to stop smoking just because of new taxes on tobacco.

Life is just like poker...whoever controls the most money, has the most power.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Tobacco is indeed bad for people, as well as sugar, its hard to argue against that.

Highly taxed tobacco will seem to create more criminal activity around it, now a pack of smokes is an even more prized, valuable commodity.

Looks like we'll have to grow our own.

Sugar seems to be everywhere, and in everything. "Low fat" foods for instance, somehow seem to have lots of sugar added. This seems like a conspiracy as the brand promise of "Low fat" hints at "healthy" and perhaps "weight-loss" when it is just the opposite. Sugar is almost immediately stored as fat.

Sugar has no nutritional value, and is addictive. It makes you hungrier. I was on a low fat diet for years, and havent lost a pound, but gained. After a year of eliminating only sugar and carbs from my diet, I found myself 50 pounds lighter from only that.

If sugar were more expensive than say, Splenda, there might be a big difference in the general population due to the absence of ubiquitous sugar.

I wonder how powerful the sugar lobby is in Washington? My guess is: plenty.

The problem with the Democrat solution to everything (Raise taxes) has a drawback.

They enjoy the high taxes on petrol, but now that people are using less, they see that tax revenue is also less. How to rectify this? Place satellite tracking on our vehicles to charge us by the mile.

Bigger government, more taxes, further intrusion on our personal freedoms.

The same will happen when fewer people buy tobacco and sugar.

Furthermore, the big increase on Tobacco tax and the proposed one on sugar is a huge, unprecedented tax hike for citizens earning less than $250,000 and one of many broken promises by Presidente BO.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Companies price them cheaply in order to make them more accessible to people of low income, and, in general, people who are financially irresponsible. There are people who basically live off of high fructose corn syrup, which definitely needs to stop. High fructose corn syrup is terribly addicting, and chronic consupmtion may lead to impaired judgment, or even feasible deniability about it detrimental effects.

Instead of taxing soda, they should simply tax the use of high fructose corn syrup. They would get a lot more support that way.

And, actually, sugar causes more harm than aspertame. You'd be surprised. Americans don't want to believe it.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by DohBama
 


You explained it perfectly.

More taxes, we do less.

We do less, they do not get their increase so they tax more.

And the cycle continues.

I am going to finish the night with some Skynyrd, drinking a nice cool soda. And yes...my night starts at noon.

Star for you.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join