Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama Open to 'Sin Tax' on Soda

page: 12
46
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
All those pro-tobacco taxing lobbyists, we're already paying 160% tax for our cigarettes. MORE THAN ENOUGH!!!!!!!! LET IT GOOOO.

Far as soda, I don't drink soda anymore, as its very unhealthy, but I don't agree with it. Its just another way to separate the rich and poor. SURE GIVE MORE TO THE ONES WHO WILL BE LEAST EFFECTED /sigh

And this prez. said he wasn't going to institute more taxes on those who make




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I stopped eating junkfood and drinking soda long ago,I realised it made me feel terrible when I ran out one day,I was hungry but felt really good.

Nowadays,if I want to feel like crap,I go out and get some junkfood and wash it down with a soda or two.

It reminds me why I don't miss it much at all.

I have stuff to do ,and don't want to waste all that time on the toilet.

Maybe the companies that make this garbage should be paying more to make it,and the gov should make sure the cost isn't passed onto the consumer.

That would be progress now,wouldn't it?.

You are all caught up in a game,quit playing it.

Stop buying what they are selling,and they go out of business.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I bet they find that the aspertame kills more in the longrun than the corn syrup stuff does. and I bet they find that the corn syrup stuff kills more in the long run than the sugar sweetened stuff does...

I'm waiting to see if chocolate milk is on their list of unhealthy taxable items...if it is, well, think I will take a nice long unpaid vacation from work....
and I won't be paying the tax on the milk, and I won't be seeking another source for the calcium that it was providing for me....
and I certainly ain't gonna be taking their toxic martinis they call drugs!



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I am a bad pereson,I eat all kinds of nasty things:

Fruit right off the tree on other peoples property.

Clams and fish from the ocean and waterway.

BEEF,yum yum.

Tomatoes and onions and mushrooms,I especially like the psylosibon type,MMMMMM good.

In truth,eventually no one will be able to afford to eat anything unless they grow it themselves,and that is the goal.

To reduce us to an agrarian type society,like it used to be.

There is nothing wrong with this,the only problem with it is almost everyone forgot how to do it the old way.

Welcome to the New (Old)World order.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Nice. The soft drink world could use some black market action.

Cant wait until truck drivers are being beaten and killed for their haul of Pepsi.

Or kids are getting jumped and robbed for trying to buy a Mountain Dew from some older kid in a shady corner of the school.


If these slippery slope arguments continue, where will it end? will people come up with slippery slope arguments until we are all covered in slippery goo and can't even walk without slipping and falling?

-rrr



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by rickyrrr
 


That reply was hilarious. To answer it (if you were being at all serious)

We always have to think with the 'slippery slope' mentality because we can't trust the government. You give them an inch an they take a mile. There is no accountability or responsibility in their actions.

They don't disclose where tax dollars go, and they should, and it should be done in plain english for everyone to read every year...

In canada they recently made going over the speed limit 50km/h considered 'stunt driving'. A 63 year old was charged for it and had her car impounded for 7 days.

Come to think of it, that would be a good thread topic...

Wouldn't you know it, the same week, a member of parliament released a statement he wants every speed limit in the city reduced 10 km,,,

they will go on and on, another one wanted to make bicycles licensed vehicles.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by tinfoilman
You better darn be ready to debate people on the matters of health care if you're gonna be tellin us how to live because you don't wanna pay for our health care don't ya think?


Once again, I'm not telling anyone how to live.
Live however you want. Just don't ask me to pay for it.


Either they're doing it for our health or they aren't.


And you'll have to check with THEM. Not me. I'm not a lawmaker or a mind reader. But I support people taking responsibility for themselves. It's one of the conservative tenets to which I subscribe.


That's exactly my point. That's why I'm against government run health care. I don't want you to pay for it. That's why I pay for my own insurance. Because I don't want you running my life and I'm sure you don't want me running yours.

Also. there's a decent chance considering my job and not knowing yours that I could be paying for your health care and not the other way around. I don't want to have to tell you how to live to bring my costs down either.

We should just stay out of each other's lives and keep our money to ourselves so we don't have to tell each other how to live. People should just mind their own freaking business for a change.

That's what the American Dream is all about. The pursuit of happiness without having some jerk tell me I shouldn't be drinking soda. Mind your own business you busy body. I don't want you to pay for anything. I don't want your money because I don't want your nose up my butt crack sniffing it all the time to make sure I'm "living" right.

Go sniff someone else's.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
The "alleged" president wants to put a tax on soda? What of putting a tax on meat, SINce you are killing life for yourself. What are the true vices?



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Let Them Have Cans



Today, this is front page news on Yahoo.:



REUTERS-
Sen. Alex Padilla, who led a campaign requiring big restaurant chains to disclose calories in meals, said on Thursday he planned to hold hearings in November on the link between soda consumption and obesity.


The announcement came from Padilla -- who chairs the California Senate's Select Committee on Obesity and Diabetes.

Okay, so now all of us who do not have a propensity for diabetes are going to be punished for the few who do?

Never seen a pic of him. Maybe it is a problem for him. Not me.

So here's my take. Since these politicos are so hard up for money that they are after soda, lets give them what they want.

Cans.

Millions and millions of cans.

If we send them our empty cans, they can recycle them. They can have the change they want. By recycling our old cans.

Do your part. Be a good citizen. Give your cans.

Lipton Tea cans would be most appropriate.



[edit on 18-9-2009 by Chakotay]



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   
if they want to address the high obesity rate, they need to go at the source. which probably is the manufacturers that are throwing the high fructose crap into just about all of our products! our body doesn't digest that the same way as sugar, it's overworking our bodies!! they tax soda, well, the public will just go for the diet instead....aspertame and the like, more poisons to overwork our digestive system...
they are taxing us for using products that IS UNSAFE FOR USE....but not saying a danged word about the companies that are throwing the crap into our products! they are all reaping bigger profits this way, but this way is also killing us!!

what, ya think if they convince us all not to drink the sodas that the fructose in all the other crap ain't gonna have the same effect, or the aspertame and other fake sweeteners will have a better outcome?
I don't!



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
It makes more sense to tax the manufactures of soft drinks. Its all the cheap ingredients they put in them to squeeze more profit out of sales. Fructose is an example, much sweeter than regular cane sugar and less healthy.

The tax on the consumer is only implemented to draw the most money. Why blame the consumer for what the manufacturers are at fault for?

I assume in some years, a soft drink will be water with a hint of flavoring that cost several dollars per bottle because of the health tax.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: eManym
There is no difference between taxing the manufacturer and taxing the consumer, because any tax will be added in to the price.





new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join