06 Apr 2018, 7:18 pm
06 Apr 2018, 7:25 pm
06 Apr 2018, 7:43 pm
06 Apr 2018, 7:44 pm
06 Apr 2018, 8:07 pm
06 Apr 2018, 8:17 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
06 Apr 2018, 9:03 pm
Kiprobalhato wrote:
because making s**t foods more expensive isn't going to make healthy foods cheaper.
No. But making unhealthy foods cost closer to, the same, or more than healthy foods will likely make more people choose healthier foods. That’s the whole point & I wholeheartedly approve.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.lostonearth35
Veteran
Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,826
Location: Lost on Earth, waddya think?
06 Apr 2018, 9:14 pm
Oh yeah, this will absolutely work. 
06 Apr 2018, 9:25 pm
lostonearth35 wrote:
Oh yeah, this will absolutely work.
^^^
How about posting something of substance next time?
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
06 Apr 2018, 9:29 pm
EzraS wrote:
They have done this in Seattle. $1.75 per ounce. That's a ridiculously high charge. Seattle isn't that huge of a city and people can just go over to neighboring cities to avoid it.
Kern's Nectar variety pack $11.99 + $6.03 City of Seattle Sweetened Beverage Recovery Fee = $18.02
The problem I see with this is the ol slippery slope of what's next? And if tax starts at $1.75, how high will it go?
It's said the tax will directly impact small businesses in a negative way and it also targets the working class.
Kern's Nectar variety pack $11.99 + $6.03 City of Seattle Sweetened Beverage Recovery Fee = $18.02
The problem I see with this is the ol slippery slope of what's next? And if tax starts at $1.75, how high will it go?
It's said the tax will directly impact small businesses in a negative way and it also targets the working class.
Nope. The tax is only one one hundredth of what you think it is. It’s written right there in the pic: 1.75¢ per ounce, not $1.75 per ounce. The example math adds up, though.
Sin taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, cannabis, and now sugar are a good thing IMO. They help offset the healthcare, lost productivity, and other societal costs incurred by the products they’re attached to.
As a consumer, these unhealthy vices should only be consumed in moderation anyways, so I’m okay with high taxes on them. And if I have the time and desire to drink, smoke, or eat a lot then I accept that I have to pay to play.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.06 Apr 2018, 9:56 pm
06 Apr 2018, 9:59 pm
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
lostonearth35 wrote:
Oh yeah, this will absolutely work.
^^^
How about posting something of substance next time?
How about being polite?
06 Apr 2018, 10:34 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
07 Apr 2018, 12:02 am
A few months ago I drank a can of Dr. Pepper. That’s the first and only time I’ve drank any pop in the last ~5 years. The f**k if I care if they charge $10 a can. 
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.07 Apr 2018, 12:13 am
goldfish21 wrote:
EzraS wrote:
They have done this in Seattle. $1.75 per ounce. That's a ridiculously high charge. Seattle isn't that huge of a city and people can just go over to neighboring cities to avoid it.
Kern's Nectar variety pack $11.99 + $6.03 City of Seattle Sweetened Beverage Recovery Fee = $18.02
The problem I see with this is the ol slippery slope of what's next? And if tax starts at $1.75, how high will it go?
It's said the tax will directly impact small businesses in a negative way and it also targets the working class.
Kern's Nectar variety pack $11.99 + $6.03 City of Seattle Sweetened Beverage Recovery Fee = $18.02
The problem I see with this is the ol slippery slope of what's next? And if tax starts at $1.75, how high will it go?
It's said the tax will directly impact small businesses in a negative way and it also targets the working class.
Nope. The tax is only one one hundredth of what you think it is. It’s written right there in the pic: 1.75¢ per ounce, not $1.75 per ounce. The example math adds up, though.
Sin taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, cannabis, and now sugar are a good thing IMO. They help offset the healthcare, lost productivity, and other societal costs incurred by the products they’re attached to.
As a consumer, these unhealthy vices should only be consumed in moderation anyways, so I’m okay with high taxes on them. And if I have the time and desire to drink, smoke, or eat a lot then I accept that I have to pay to play.
You're right, I read the price wrong. However, how is Kern's Nectar which is made with whole fruit; No high fructose corn syrup; 100% natural, an unhealthy vice? You really don't think it being raised from $11.99 to $18.02 is too high? And do you think that amount isn't going to increase? Or that other "unhealthy vices" will never be added to the list? Also if soda pop is going to be equated with tobacco, alcohol and cannabis, doesn't that also mean there should be surgeon general warning labels and a minimum age attached to it like the others?
07 Apr 2018, 12:24 am
goldfish21 wrote:
A few months ago I drank a can of Dr. Pepper. That’s the first and only time I’ve drank any pop in the last ~5 years. The f**k if I care if they charge $10 a can.
I don't drink sugary beverages either. That doesn't mean I don't see potential problems, even if they don't affect me personally. What if they want to start taxing something you do use like the internet? People pay income tax and sales tax, and that should be enough tax, without adding individualized item taxes. I think it sets a bad precedent.
My guess is the next item to be individually taxed will be gasoline. And I supposed the liberal reply to that will be, "good, it will force people to take public transportation and force them to ride bicycles which will make them healthier and best of all it will save the planet". The keyword being; force.
