justincredible
Honorable Admin
37,969
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
justincredible
Honorable Admin
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 10:57 AM
I see that Seattle has added a 1.75¢ per ounce tax on sugary beverages (see meme thread) starting on Jan 1. These planners don't seem to understand economic incentives. People that are apt to buy sugary beverages likely aren't going to stop (some will, sure), they will take their money outside of the city, and likely start buying a portion of their other groceries outside of the city as well. If I were a grocer outside of the city limits I'd be pretty happy with this new tax.
justincredible
Honorable Admin
37,969
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
justincredible
Honorable Admin
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 10:58 AM
ernest_t_bass
12th Son of the Lama
26,698
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
ernest_t_bass
12th Son of the Lama
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 11:54 AM
posted by gut
Now, a sugar tax is arguably as justifiable as alcohol or tobacco taxes.
No. Just no.
justincredible
Honorable Admin
37,969
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
justincredible
Honorable Admin
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:03 PM
I'll certainly agree that taxes on income are much worse (read: the worst).
MontyBrunswick
Senior Member
1,065
posts
Joined
Mar 2015
MontyBrunswick
Senior Member
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:22 PM
The only positive argument for a sugar tax is to dump the revenue generated back into health related programs.
Unfortunately, that rarely happens and it tends to be a revenue generator for cities that are broke. See: Chicago
I'm willing to bet that while sales of sugary drinks fall in cities where a sugar tax is passed, the overall rate of obesity remains unchanged.
MontyBrunswick
Senior Member
1,065
posts
Joined
Mar 2015
MontyBrunswick
Senior Member
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:28 PM
posted by Spock
nutrient dense food like gatorade.
Lol
justincredible
Honorable Admin
37,969
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
justincredible
Honorable Admin
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:29 PM
posted by MontyBrunswick
Lol
justincredible
Honorable Admin
37,969
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
justincredible
Honorable Admin
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:31 PM
Dr Winston O'Boogie
Senior Member
3,345
posts
Joined
Oct 2010
Dr Winston O'Boogie
Senior Member
Fri, Jan 5, 2018 12:47 PM
posted by Heretic
Yep. I remember once going to Cleveland during the college years and getting educated on their "sin tax" on alcohol by having to pay extra for beer (not a huge amount more, but for a college student, every extra dollar matters!) at some store. And let's face it, it's BS for any gubment to try to steer people away from certain products by over-taxing the shit out of them as part of an attempt to generate more revenue, so if they're going to do it for a couple things, then fuck it...do it to the shitty sugar drinks and shitty fast food, too.
Best to not do it for anything, but if you're going to do it for something, let the pop-guzzlers feel the pinch and not just us boozers! If you want the tl;dr version.
The good thing is how Cleveland has been able to spend much of its sin tax - on subsitdizing the Browns and their stadium. What a joke.
O-Trap
Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
O-Trap
Chief Shenanigans Officer
posted by ernest_t_bass
No. Just no.
How is it different?
posted by BoatShoes
Not an argument. Sugar consumption and its associated health problems is a larger cause of premature death than either alcohol or tobacco.
As I recall, diabetes complications kill more people each year than any effects from tobacco or alcohol.
posted by gut
Unfortunately, sin taxes are a "negative externality" of social welfare programs. But just wait until we go to single payer and then Big Gubmit starts dictating where healthcare research dollars are spent.
Also, I don't believe any taxes like this really have anything to do with discouraging behavior....even if there is actually merit, it's nothing more than a way to justify a tax increase. And the effectiveness in either case (health or revenues), is probably a distant second or third to the political agenda.
Agreed.
And quite frankly, even if the reason was entirely to discourage behavior, is it really a justified purpose of taxation to act as a social manipulator?
ernest_t_bass
12th Son of the Lama
26,698
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
ernest_t_bass
12th Son of the Lama
posted by O-Trap
How is it different?
I don't like any of them.
O-Trap
Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
O-Trap
Chief Shenanigans Officer
friendfromlowry
Senior Member
7,778
posts
Joined
Nov 2009
friendfromlowry
Senior Member
posted by O-Trap
As I recall, diabetes complications kill more people each year than any effects from tobacco or alcohol.
Explain this one to me. Cancer is the second leading cause of death and lung cancer is the most common. How do you get lung cancer? A small percentage get it environmentally, but by and large it's from smoking.