Discussions
The New "Fat Tax". Will You Pay It?
Posted by tcinvestor • 9/20/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: coke, fat tax, health care, obesity, pepsi, sin tax, soda, taxes
Recently, more health research and obesity prevention professionals have stepped up support for a new form of sin tax that is gaining momentum toward being a "Fat Tax" in which a levy of 1 cent per ounce would be added to soda's and soft drinks. This will lead to a 15-20% increase in the price of a bottle of coke, pepsi or other soda's.
1.)Will it help stem the obesity epidemic?
2.)Will it will save money on health care?
3.)Do You think it will pass in 2010?
livesmartbook.blogspot.com/2009/09/fat-tax-is-coming.html
User Comments
-
What? Nobody gives a crap about this new tax? Guess everyone will still be drinking sugary crap and paying the extra $$. I don't drink soda so it is a non issue for me. As a preventative measure I doubt it will have much success in making significant changes but it will no doubt raise some much needed cash for the coffers.
-
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I definitely don't "give a crap". No one needs soda, so I couldn't care less what it costs to get it--everyone is always free to make the choice as to whether it's worth it or not.
-
-
I would definitely support it if I were rewarded for being thin and not consuming fatty sodas or whatever-
Ooops. Sorry TC - moving this misplaced post below MX's question...
-
-
I don't think it is either bad or good.
Depends on where the tax dollars are being spent.
If goes for health care - then fine...
But I haven't seen cigarette taxes paying for healthcare yet.
So - why tax more without representation.
Show me where the MONEY IS GOING.-
That is a valid point. Where is the $$ going?
-
What do you mean by "without representation"?
-
MX - by that I mean (in this situation):
The taxation dollars do NOT always go to the funds that they were supposed to go to.
For example: all the dollars collected via DMV/property taxes/business taxes for road maintenance have NOT always gone to road maintenance.
Somehow the represented tax reason (what they say it should go for when the tax itself is created) - is not always what happens with the funding that comes from those taxes.
I have seen it happen - have you not?
Somehow that money pool gets "magically" earmarked for something else.
Be it some clause - or some lucky break of another cause - it does NOT always go for the reasons specified.
For example: All the money from Cigarette taxes ---- can you tell me where it has gone?
If they implement a soda tax - well - fine - where is the money going to go EXACTLY... down to the penny.
Now - are we (the people) Represented?
Depends... IF you consider Americans represented properly or improperly.
At times, I find it is BOTH.
I am a patriotic American - but at times I do find our Government and taxation and laws to be under represented or illogical - and sometimes just plain stupid...
In other words America, right or wrong - IS MY AMERICA - and she's a Beaut and I love her. But that doesn't make me blind to things that need to change in my humble opinion. -
@WW, 2nd comment: Yeah I know what you mean. I think what might be a better system would be having independent non-profit organizations that handle the proceeds of targeted taxes. This way, it's not in the hands of the treasury and thus can't be used for what the treasury would use it for. -
@jeremy. That is an interesting concept. Sounds like a pretty good suggestion as long as the non-profit is legitimately operated.
-
@WW. It is true that often funds generated do not go toward the cause for which the policy was put in place. This is policy that needs to be addressed and contentiously improved.
-
-
I've given this much thought...junk food is cheap because it can be made abundant. This 'fat tax' could deter people from overeating if the food is made more expensive.
Who knows?-
Sounds good in theory but when evaluated in actual practice it has not changed peoples habits. People end up just paying the extra $$. This is the case with a few states that have already incorporated this tax.
-
-
i couldn't really care less - I don't eat junk food or drink pop.-
Good for you. Smart move.
-
-
What about diet soda? Would that be taxed?-
Personally Diet Soda is AWFUL for you. That Aspartame and Nutrasweet stuff is awful on your liver... My body can't process Nutrasweet - (I'm PKU) anyhow - it's bad stuff...
-
I know, I was being silly
-
Maybe they will add an extra 10% for diet drinks. ;-)
-
-
Why don't they just tax stupidity? That would solve a lot of problems.
-
That would work too.
-
LOL..That is a novel idea.
-
-
I don't mind it. I haven't drank soda for 10 years.-
What if they tax Hi-C? Guess that would mean war for you.
-
-
It is unfair to target a product like that. Plenty of people who are not overweight drink soda why should they be penalised.
The truth is that people are already paying fat taxes. In the US they pay increased premiums on their health insurance (if they can get it at all), they pay for it in missed days at work through ill health, decreased mpg in their car, bigger grocery bills, all kinds of ways.
A few pennies on a bottle of pop is just phaffing around at the margins. The only way that it could be justified would be if the money raised was used for health education. But why target soda when targeting the meat industry would be far more appropriate? Because taxing beef in the US would not go down very well (understatement) so there would be no political will for that. -
I love the term sin tax. it gets people all riled up. this is going to be unpopular, because our sexually repressed society likes to substitute the fleshly desire of gluttony as a substitute for others.-
Do Gnomes pay taxes?
-
-
If they tax junk food and use the money to subsidize fresh, healthy food purchases, then I'd be all for it. If they tax "health" water, "energy" drinks, and sodas equally, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But targeting one small aspect of the problem is just pointless. It won't make a difference and who knows on what the money will be spent. Certainly not on gym memberships for the overweight or improving the walkability of suburbia. -
The charletans who tax us must not be allowed to get away with this... -
I am sooo tired of so call vice taxes. Puts the tax burden on the people that can least afford and a wrong headed approach to rev. generation. -
What I understand of the fat epidemic in USA, is that one of the reasons for it is that low income households can't afford eating healthy, or don't know how to cook. So unless the healthier option comes more affordable as the price of unhealthy option goes up, I can't see it having much of an effect ad a direct result at least. -
I dunno...what are my handles gonna cost me? -
To be honest, I haven't given the fat tax much thought. I just thought I'd comment because I'm surprised that so many of the commenters here say they don't drink soda. That's great!!! Sodas are so bad for our health and I wish they'd stop promoting it so much at fast foods. Our children in schools would be so much healthier if they'd stop drinking sodas outside of school. -
If the tax is put in place, I think that to be effective to some degree, the amount of tax being paid would have to be printed in large print on each can or bottle of pop otherwise it will not deter at all because it will simply be another cost of living increase.
All funds collected should also be used for health care and in particular, mostly prevention.
I think that if this was put in place, the beverage industry would also start adding large print calorie information more frequently on those drinks that are lower in calories to aid in promotion.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
