Soda tax

[TheBYUGuy]

Because you couldn't just stop at fast food. Most of the food you eat in fine restaurants is just as unhealthy as fast food, if not moreso.

And there's usually a lot more of it on your plate than what you would get at a drive-thru window.

[RC Vikings]

And there's usually a lot more of it on your plate than what you would get at a drive-thru window.

And once again you are taxing those who can least afford it.

[TripletDaddy]

I'm saying it's only possible to tax across the board if you want to try to address the correlation between fast food & increased health care costs as well as suggesting that thinking bad dietary habits that don't manifest problems immediately aren't a problem is a position to reconsider.

ok. also, based on what I seeing in this thread, I forget the audience.

proposed fast food taxes are not across the board taxes on anything that is purchased within the walls of a fast food restaurant, folks. of course not. that is part of the effort to develop this sort of tax....what sorts of saturated fat content, what caloric levels, etc.

Also, it very well may NOT stop at fast food establishments, But that is where it will definitely start. The majority of the country (esp the uninsured and the ones driving the rise in health costs) has access to fast food on a daily basis. Not so much with fine french dining that fattens your waistline.

[JohnnyLingo]

And once again you are taxing those who can least afford it.

Bingo. It's a direct strike at low- to middle-class individuals and families.

But if it makes them healthier, well, just sack up and take your medicine, everyone. The government knows what's best.

[Donuthole]

And there's usually a lot more of it on your plate than what you would get at a drive-thru window.

Not really true at fine dining establishments, but your point is well taken. It's not like people at Chuck-A-Rama are filling up on steamed veggies and water.

[falafel]

I haven't read every single reply in this thread, but I think taxing fast food and or soda to pay for the health care plan is ridiculous. Why should obese people/diabetics (if that's who its aimed at) have to pay for health problems that are completely unrelated to obesity/diabetes? Why should fast food companies and soda manufacturers have their products taxed while alcohol producers and cell phone manufacturers don't?

[TripletDaddy]

I haven't read every single reply in this thread, but I think taxing fast food and or soda to pay for the health care plan is ridiculous. Why should obese people/diabetics (if that's who its aimed at) have to pay for health problems that are completely unrelated to obesity/diabetes? Why should fast food companies and soda manufacturers have their products taxed while alcohol producers and cell phone manufacturers don't?

alcohol is taxed. as are cell phones. what are you talking about?

[falafel]

alcohol is taxed. as are cell phones. what are you talking about?

To pay for health care? I don't think so. Oh, and by the way, fast food and soda are taxed already too. I'm not talking about that kind of tax.

[Pheidippides]

I haven't read every single reply in this thread, but I think taxing fast food and or soda to pay for the health care plan is ridiculous. Why should obese people/diabetics (if that's who its aimed at) have to pay for health problems that are completely unrelated to obesity/diabetes?

This is what I meant when I was talking about quibbling with the earmarking. However, taxing it to combat obesity and obesity-related issues is something that I am not only in support of, but is something that I have heard preached from the Rameumptom of Economics at BYU.

[JohnnyLingo]

...but is something that I have heard preached from the Rameumptom of Economics at BYU.

Damn liberals. All my kids are going to BYU-I.

[falafel]

This is what I meant when I was talking about quibbling with the earmarking. However, taxing it to combat obesity and obesity-related issues is something that I am not only in support of, but is something that I have heard preached from the Rameumptom of Economics at BYU.

But do you think it would work? Would people really stop eating fast food b/c of the tax? And like someone already said (RC?) this seems to affect poor people disproportionally. What will these people eat? Aldi saltine crackers (on 33 cents a box!)? And if fast food places start offering better foods, will the tax be lifted on those items? who's going to oversee all of this?

It all sounds like a giant mess to me.

[beelzebabette]

proposed fast food taxes are not across the board taxes on anything that is purchased within the walls of a fast food restaurant, folks. of course not. that is part of the effort to develop this sort of tax....what sorts of saturated fat content, what caloric levels, etc.

Are you intentionally misreading to ask me be more clear. If so, I should probably thank you.

Across the board as in the members portion of the including or applying to all categories or members definition. You know, like across-the-board pay hikes. Across-the-board application of the tax. High metabolsim teen that can eat whatever he wants without gaining weight pays the same tax on french fries as an obese person.

[beelzebabette]

...And if fast food places start offering better foods, will the tax be lifted on those items? who's going to oversee all of this?

It all sounds like a giant mess to me.

Which is why I like the original question of a soda tax paid by the ounce at the source not the point-of-sale.

[JohnnyLingo]

Which is why I like the original question of a soda tax paid by the ounce at the source not the point-of-sale.

"At the source" as in "by the manufacturer"?

[Pheidippides]

But do you think it would work? Would people really stop eating fast food b/c of the tax? And like someone already said (RC?) this seems to affect poor people disproportionally. What will these people eat? Aldi saltine crackers (on 33 cents a box!)? And if fast food places start offering better foods, will the tax be lifted on those items? who's going to oversee all of this?

It all sounds like a giant mess to me.

Having had the opportunity to go through the budgets of the "poor people", I am convinced it would. Eating regularly at McDonald's is a convenience choice, not a cost choice, per se. The same amount of money can be spent on normal groceries, but people refuse to cook.

These same people are also the same people, btw, who end up being a burden on society from a medical perspective in many cases - i.e., they have obesity issues but no way to pay for them, so you and I have to do it instead.

I think the argument that it impacts them disproportionately supports my position rather than undermines it.

I am not speaking in the abstract, but rather thinking of a few situations that I have been involved in that anecdotally support the statistics I have seen and the reasoning behind the proposals. That is why I am so convinced.