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.

 

Congress wants to tax sugared drinks

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Congress wants to tax sugared drinks


www.nofoodtaxes.com

Like bears to honey or zombies to brains, politicians find something irresistible about soda taxes. President Obama recently told Men’s Health magazine that he thinks a “sin tax” on soda is “an idea that we should be exploring.” San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom moved to impose a fee on stores for selling sugary drinks, only to admit that his plan was probably illegal. In December, New York Gov. David Paterson proposed a 18 percent tax on full-sugar soda to help cover a budget shortfall. After a public outcry, he claimed he was just raising awareness about childhood obesity. But he wa
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   
A year or so ago many thought the gigantic taxes levied on smokers were just fine. Well big brother is coming up with another way to get in your pocket which affects everyone. Is there no stopping the control and abuse this government is dealing out?

During these difficult economic times, we cannot afford another tax increase, especially one that won’t work.

The proposed national tax on soda, juice drinks, and flavored milks will have a negative impact on American families struggling in this economy.

We can reduce obesity and promote healthy lifestyles at the same time. Through education about solutions that rely on science, economic realities and common sense – not discriminatory taxation.



www.nofoodtaxes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Bombeni
 


What's so bad about this? I mean yea I don't want the feds over taxing but if there's anything they should over tax, it's things like soda and cigs.

The world would be better off without soda. It's not something anyone ever needs to drink. Although I don't like the term "sin tax", I surely don't mind them taxing something like soda. The only people it will effect are the people drinking too much soda, which in this case it might help them cut down. Two birds with one stone.

P.S. I drink way too much soda. 20 oz of mountain dew every morning and at least one more later in the day. I have no problem with this idea.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
They also need to tax beer at a dollar a bottle/can, liquor at 15 a pint, and wine at 30 a quart/liter.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ItIsWhatItIs
What's so bad about this?


Well, to begin, Congress has no legal authority to punish a segment of the population based upon behavior they find 'unacceptable' or 'immoral' for whatever reason, or to discriminate against those who are overweight. Not that it has ever stopped them before, mind you.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The cigarette tax was just the conditioning, it got people thinking in the mindset of "punish those who hurt themselves" and it helped solidify the idea that we should have to pay extra for things that aren't necessities.

Taxing soda, like taxing cigarettes, isn't going to stop obesity, it's just going to make everyday items that much more expensive to everyday people.

We already pay more in taxes than most medieval peasants.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I guess this means that the sugar drink industry isn't putting enough money into the pockets of congress. This is probably a scare tactic to nudge them into lobbying harder.

Just my 2-cents

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Aggie Man]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
If this goes into affect people are going to decide to dump soda into the ocean instead of tea. Instead of dressing up like Indians, we'll dress up like Arabs. Arabs are hated by the US government just like Indians where.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by vor78

Originally posted by ItIsWhatItIs
What's so bad about this?


Well, to begin, Congress has no legal authority to punish a segment of the population based upon behavior they find 'unacceptable' or 'immoral' for whatever reason, or to discriminate against those who are overweight. Not that it has ever stopped them before, mind you.


Who are you trying to fool? The Govt can punish a segment of population all right. Let's say the segment that stages god fights. Or that segment that is known as MS-13. The segment that uses hard drugs -- now, that's more the point.

Ingesting carbonated high-calorie syrup laced with phosphoric acid (i.e. soda) is pretty much same as ingesting poison.

I say put a $3 tax on each can.

We are in the middle of obesity epidemic and people are foolish enough to complain about restoring sanity to our food intake pattern?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Bombeni
 


If they are really serious about this scheme being for the benefit of the citizens health and not just to make money for the Federal Government, they should subsidize food that is good for you, such as vegatables, fruit and fish . That may make a real difference to peoples weight



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
It is way past the time to tax soda with high sugar. They are just plain dangerous to those drinking them. People in the US are obese and the tax may just help in the long run. Not far behind should be non-essentials like chips, cookies and the like. They have no real nutritional substance to them.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Try reading it again. I said they have no legal right to ban a behavior purely on the basis of morality. They do have the legal right to ban behavior that causes injury or death.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
If I lived in the US and they taxed sugary sodas I wouldn't notice. I only drink water and milk nothing else and I'll tell you its amazingly healthy. I too only eat meals with real food no snacks nothing only once in a while!

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Danna]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor78
They do have the legal right to ban behavior that causes injury or death.


like eating to much food? driving? playing sports? owning a gun?

seeing as the government make the laws, i'm pretty sure they can give themselves the legal right to do anything they want.

the government will tax anything and everything so long as it doesn't adversely effect the rich. they'll keep floating this idea until the media don't have a panic attack at the mention and, at that point, they'll make it policy.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
or maybe- just maybe- the lazy americans should get off their fat asses and do some exercise!
cmon i mean when you eat 6 donuts in the morning but drink a diet soda to counteract that and sit at a desk all day i'm sorry but it doesn't work
then on your way home you stop at walmart and drive around the parking lot for 45 minutes until you find a space that is 4 spots from the store to save you walking- but you are going to walk over a mile in the store anyway?
then you go to the drive thru at mcdonalds and get a supersize meal instead of just walking in
then you go to the drive thru at the bank instead of walking inside
the problem with americans is WE ARE FING LAZY!!!!!
with the exception of medical reasons noone should really be fat
get off your ass eat healthy food and get some exercise
don't eat your mcdonalds for dinner and then lay on the couch and watch american idol then go to sleep and start a non exercise day all over again



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


Like I said, they'll do it whether they have a constitutional right or not. Just look at what they've done to the 2nd amendment.

The point is, a person's junk food habits are their own personal choice. They're not hurting anyone but themselves and that's their decision to make, not the government's.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Why tax the healthier of the 2 options? I mean those drinks sweetened with other stuff are complete poison. Sugar at least is natural.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Why tax the healthier of the 2 options? I mean those drinks sweetened with other stuff are complete poison. Sugar at least is natural.


Why indeed.

My thoughts are that this is a ploy to steer more people towards drinking diet sodas, and hence ingesting more endocrine (chakra) disrupting aspartame.

This in turn will keep more people in the pharmaceutical loop.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
whats wrong with you ppl you realy think every one who drinks soads is over weight??? man im 6 foot tall and weigh a mear 175 and would just love to gain a few soads cake pie give me give me lolol.
i have 6 boys 4 of wich are as skinny as rails .
dirnking soads makes you fat (GIVE ME A BRAKE)
tax it tax it they could tax brussel sprots and youd still say oooo but to much iron isent good for you.
(the kids would back that lololol)
the one guy said we now pay more in taxes then 15 centry pesents did .
well gess what hes right .
in the 15 centry you would have lived in a village ran by a fudial lord (count duke what ever anyway you lived in his county You got a place to live food clothing protrection(mostly from bandents)
and taxacation was apx 50% of every thing you created (no cash needed)
SAY YOUR A BLACK SMITH you repair or make swords for the lord of the mannar 20 hours a week the other 20 hours you could charge every one else.
Not a bad life the only big difference now a days is all the gagets we CANT live without. Boy id sure miss aircond



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
As a smoker, I'm all for taxing the hell out of sugar.

I'd like to see a dollar an ounce tax on alcohol.

SOB's picked on us smoker's - let's spread the misery around.

And fat. I think fatasses should be taxed as well. Those fatasses accelerate the deterioration of our roads, bridges, office furniture, and create stress cracks in our public sidewalks.

Oh yeah. Ugly people should be taxed to death. All they do is breed little ugly people, and it's really unpleasant at times in restaurants or other public places to have their ugliness ruin the scenery.

Stupidity is another. Taxing stupidity is where the government could really clean up. I mean, the stupid tax would hit our President and Legislators the hardest, but think of the windfall of funding if they taxed stupidity.

The national debt could be wiped out in three weeks.

Yeah. As a smoker, they stuck it to me.

I'd love to see some other misery.



[edit on 19-10-2009 by dooper]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join