What do you think of the proposed soda tax?

[OceanAnnie]

They may or they may not.

Without seeing the legislation, we don't know whether those other sugar-laden drinks would be similarly taxed. Further, the decision is not generally between a soda and some sugar laden food. It is generally between a soda and some other drink. Higher prices for sodas compared to non-sugar-laden drinks will no doubt cause many people to chose the latter. Perhaps they will also eat a brownie, but that beats drinking a soda and eating the brownie.

It's multiple, moving targets. Too many targets for one beverage to be the solution. Much different than cigarettes.

 

[mickeymedic]

I haven't read the second page of posts yet, but just had to comment on this poster. (Bolding mine)
Yes soda manufacturers are lobbying hard against this proposed tax. I work for Coca-Cola, it has been on our newsline for about a year now. Everyone is being educated on what it could do to our business, ie. livelyhood. And yes, everyone is stressing about people decreasing their soda intake. Think about it, we make money on take home packages, 2 liters, 12 packs, 20 oz. bottles. Say a 2 liter is $1.29 and this tax makes it upwards of almost $2.00, with the ecomony people aren't gonna buy it! It is a luxury, when folks have to cut back, luxuries go first.
Ok I will step down off my soapbox now, sorry it was so long!

Thanks for your response! Apparently I have been living under a rock - 'cause I had not seen any news about any outcry by the soda manufacturers. Although, I must admit, I get most of my news online - I don't usually have time to watch network TV.

I appreciate your perspective on this. I am a huge coca cola junkie - and I really don't want the price of my beloved drink to go up. I hope for both of our sakes that this tax doesn't happen. But if/when it does, you can rest assured that I will still be supporting your livelihood 100% as I can't seem to give up my coca cola habit.

 

[sbell111]

Bolding mine.

And I find it hard to believe that the "Evil" sodas will be a quick fix to the problem of kids not getting enough exercise. If the government goes through with is tax, it will be all sodas and it will be my livelyhood at stake. Not the obese families and kids sitting in front of the TV all the time...but me and mine, a family that hardly ever purchases sodas to begin with. So I'm a little touchy on this subject.

With all due respect, without your divulging exactly how your livelihood is attached to the sale of sodas, it is not useful to enter your 'livelihood'; into the discussion.

I have little doubt that higher prices on sugary sodas will result in bigger sales of diet sodas, bottled water, ice teas, and juices. Coke and Pepsi will be OK.

 

[N.Bailey]

One little thing about studies that I always found interesting is, unless you know what every step of the process of conducting said study was, they really mean little.

Take for example gun laws in Australia. The studies tout that both homicide and suicide deaths BY GUN have dropped X amount of times per year. What they fail to tell you however is, both the homicide and suicide rate have always continued rising in spit of gun legislation, and that deaths by gun have been increasing every every year since the implementation of said law. That suggests that more guns are entering the country illegally over time and that it's only the "bad" guy that has them now, so no more personal protection.

Another example. Take the study in England that speaks of the homicide rate (by population index) into consideration and compares it to the US. Well, unless you know that a death is NOT considered a homicide in the UK UNTIL a conviction is obtained, what does it really mean when comparing it with US, where a homicide is considered a homicide the 2nd a coroner deems it to be one?

A 3rd example. In Europe they tout that rapes aren't as prevalent as they are in the States. Well, guess what? When it damn near has to be stranger rape to be pursued and prosecuted (many woman don't even come forward because they know nothing will be done), that greatly lowers that study rate, doesn't it?

Now, unless you can give me the specifics on this particular study, I won't be giving it any weight. Any study can produce the desired results and that's been proven a 1000 times over.

Sorry, I'm not willing to give up my personal liberties to make the US government bigger just because. Coke and Pepsi are not responsible for the obesity problem and I think anyone feeling they should carry the burden alone should have their job put on the line and see how they feel about it when it hits home for them. I am not wishing anyone ill, I just would like you to see a bigger picture.

 

[Charitycase20]

Firstly, anyone calling soda a livelihood needs to rethink alot more than taxes. QUOTE]

And I find it hard to believe that the "Evil" sodas will be a quick fix to the problem of kids not getting enough exercise. If the government goes through with is tax, it will be all sodas and it will be my livelyhood at stake. And yes Coca-Cola is my livelyhood, I have been an employee for going on 11 years here and although no company is perfect, it is a job and in these times I'm thankful to have it! The obese families and kids sitting in front of the TV all the time it won't affect unless they make that choice...but me and mine, a family that hardly ever purchases sodas to begin with it would be a huge problem! So I'm a little touchy on this subject.

Sorry double post for some reason.

 

[rszdtrvl]

Governor Gregoire in Washington state wants to tax BOTTLED WATER.

I don't care either way about the soda tax, but when you tax something that your body needs to survive (aka : water), then I think it is ridiculous.

My mom is hoarding cases of bottled water. I think she said that she has 5 of them (5 x 24/bottles). I only have 3, so I am doing a bit better, LOL.

She wants to tax them $.01/oz. So that inexpensive $2.77 case of bottled water would now be almost $8.

http://www.examiner.com/x-7460-Spok...Christine-Gregoire-wants-to-tax-bottled-water

 

[TDC Nala]

would they tax DIET Coke? They keep going on about the sugary drinks, Diet Coke has no sugar and no calories.

If they don't then whatever, because that's all I drink.... There's some twit assemblyman up in New York trying to get salt banned from restaurants now so more of this is coming.

And I don't think it's the water that Washington's governor is looking to tax, it's the bottle. I would price a Brita filter.

 

[N.Bailey]

Firstly, anyone calling soda a livelihood needs to rethink alot more than taxes.

Second, that is a gross misuse of a Ben Franklin quote IMO. We're talking soda here.

Yes, the government is looking to generate revenue, simply because its warranted - the deficit we're in isn't going to get fixed over night. so certain things that people do/consume are easily taxable. its a part of life - and maybe - had all those big business tax credits provided by the previous administration not happened, things like soda wouldnt be considered taxable.

plus the kids are getting fat, so... hello misdirection

I think you're missing the point. Soda itself is not a livelihood, but how many people do you think are employed by just the top 2; Coke and Pepsi? It is their livelihood that I speak of. I'd bet they total more than the number employed within the company you work for. This is probably why they are being targeted.

The 2nd is not a misuse of Franklin's quote. The government is asking us to give up a liberty by forcing us to pay a tax on an unhealthy product to PROTECT us. That is exactly what Franklin speaks to. "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

There are a LOT of issues that we face in this troubling economy. Asking Coke and Pepsi bear the blunt of that is absurdity at it's finest.

 

[Charitycase20]

With all due respect, without your divulging exactly how your livelihood is attached to the sale of sodas, it is not useful to enter your 'livelihood'; into the discussion.

I have little doubt that higher prices on sugary sodas will result in bigger sales of diet sodas, bottled water, ice teas, and juices. Coke and Pepsi will be OK.

I'm not being rude or argumentative here. If it comes across that way I apologize. But as an employee of Coca-Cola, if profit goes down, they cut jobs...and unfortunately since I'm from such a seasonal area, they would/could probably start here to save money. That is what scares me about this tax. And yes it may result in bigger sales of water, ice teas (sugared may be taxed) and juices but these products also cost more to produce so the profit margin isn't as much to stay competitive for the customer.

 

[sbell111]

Firstly, anyone calling soda a livelihood needs to rethink alot more than taxes.

And I find it hard to believe that the "Evil" sodas will be a quick fix to the problem of kids not getting enough exercise. If the government goes through with is tax, it will be all sodas and it will be my livelyhood at stake. And yes Coca-Cola is my livelyhood, I have been an employee for going on 11 years here and although no company is perfect, it is a job and in these times I'm thankful to have it! The obese families and kids sitting in front of the TV all the time it won't affect unless they make that choice...but me and mine, a family that hardly ever purchases sodas to begin with it would be a huge problem! So I'm a little touchy on this subject.

Sorry double post for some reason.

Does Coca-Cola not profit every time someone takes a swig of Desani? or Smartwater? Glaceau? Odwalla?

 

[OceanAnnie]

Governor Gregoire in Washington state wants to tax BOTTLED WATER.

I don't care either way about the soda tax, but when you tax something that your body needs to survive (aka : water), then I think it is ridiculous.

My mom is hoarding cases of bottled water. I think she said that she has 5 of them (5 x 24/bottles). I only have 3, so I am doing a bit better, LOL.

She wants to tax them $.01/oz. So that inexpensive $2.77 case of bottled water would now be almost $8.

http://www.examiner.com/x-7460-Spok...Christine-Gregoire-wants-to-tax-bottled-water

That's the first I've heard of that! Why tax bottled water? What's the rationale for that?

would they tax DIET Coke?

If they don't then whatever, because that's all I drink.... There's some twit assemblyman up in New York trying to get salt banned from restaurants now so more of this is coming.

Oh it's NY. I read about the ban on salt in restaurants.

 

[FireDancer]

I don't think the tax will have much of any effect on obesity. If someone wants to do something about their weight they don't diet or cut out one problem food. Losing weight, especially if you are the point of obesity, requires a lifestyle change. If someone wants to make that change they will, if they don't they won't.

The thing that makes and keeps people fat is in the mirror, not in the soda isle. I do think pop is about the worst thing you can consume, diet or regular, but the people who choose to drink it will continue to drink it. The calories saved with diet pop are offset by the additional unnatural chemicals that are in it. Maybe a very small amount of people will stop drinking it because of the tax, but there is no way of saying they will spend that money on a healthy alternative. If someone wanted to by healthy foods they already would be doing so.

I do wish taxes were more use-based then income-based but this isn't even that. It isn't going to be offset by a tax reduction anywhere else, it is just one more tax.

 

[N.Bailey]

From what I understand, Gov. Rendell wants to tax all sugary drinks, not just soda. So, juice that isn't 100% fruit juice, chocolate milk, sugary soda. The tax will be MORE than 6%. Diet drinks will not be taxed more than the standard 6%.

I still feel that the health of Americans (or Pennsylvanians in our Governor's case) is not the top priority here. I feel that the goal is to find the best way to make a buck, by digging deeper into our pockets. People will still buy these things, tax or no tax. They've (meaning the Government) pretty much "got us", and they know it!

They are asking us to implement a Federal tax on soda (and possibly these others products, I've not read the bill). I was just pointing out that while someone in Canada may pay 5% (and things are more expensive there so they probably are paying more in the end), we are already paying 6% and they are now wanting a Fed tax.

You're right, it's about money and money only.

 

[sbell111]

The 2nd is not a misuse of Franklin's quote. The government is asking us to give up a liberty by forcing us to pay a tax on an unhealthy product to PROTECT us. That is exactly what Franklin speaks to. "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

There are a LOT of issues that we face in this troubling economy. Asking Coke and Pepsi bear the blunt of that is absurdity at it's finest.

The reason that it is a misuse of his quote is because the establishment of a tax on soda does not infringe on any of your rights.

 

[eliza61]

"Several of the nation's leading health experts are calling for a tax on soda as a means of curbing America's obesity-epidemic.".

There are articles out there about it. Laden with politics. Lets leave the politics out. Please answer only from an obesity-epidemic standpoint.

ETA- I think people should be responsible for their own weight, without penalty.

I voted yes. not because I like taxes but because I'm on a real food movement.

Soda is just about the worst thing for a person can put in their bodies, it's also probably the cheapest thing to buy. In a fantasy world it would be nice if every one took responsibilty for their own health but in the real world, America is super obese, high rate of diabetes, high blood pressure. Plus we're killing our young kids with process food and sugar.

Unfortunately we generally don't make changes until it hurts us in the pockets. Look at gas, before we hit the 4.00/gallon point we were a fun lovin SUV, truck driving country. When gas prices began to hurt that's when everyone had a V-8 slap in the head moment.

Yes, I definitely know it's hard, I'm the girl who is trying to wean ourself off of coke. LOL

 

[TDC Nala]

That's the first I've heard of that! Why tax bottled water? What's the rationale for that?

Plastic water bottles. Bad for the environment when discarded. Especially since you can easily get water without the bottle. That's the logic they're putting behind that one.

Water bores me, so I don't drink it much - I do understand from those who keep an eye on such things that water is probably the only thing I should drink, but it's still boring. I'm also on this thing where I refuse to pay money for water when I can get it everywhere without paying extra for it.

 

[sbell111]

I'm not being rude or argumentative here. If it comes across that way I apologize. But as an employee of Coca-Cola, if profit goes down, they cut jobs...and unfortunately since I'm from such a seasonal area, they would/could probably start here to save money. That is what scares me about this tax. And yes it may result in bigger sales of water, ice teas (sugared may be taxed) and juices but these products also cost more to produce so the profit margin isn't as much to stay competitive for the customer.

I can't imagine that the production of Desani could possibly be more expensive than the production of soda. It is water, after all. They are not making the water, they take it from the tap, run it through a filter, and put it in a bottle. Assuming that they also filter the water that they use to make Coke, it must be cheaper to make Desani than Coke.

 

[N.Bailey]

Does Coca-Cola not profit every time someone takes a swig of Desani? or Smartwater? Glaceau? Odwalla?

My bad, I thought this was a capitalistic society. Whatever was I thinking?

 

[N.Bailey]

That's the first I've heard of that! Why tax bottled water? What's the rationale for that?



Oh it's NY. I read about the ban on salt in restaurants.

Because it's about generating funds!

 

[SAHDad]

That's the first I've heard of that! Why tax bottled water? What's the rationale for that?

Probably something along the lines of this:

Bottled water is bad for the environment.
We have to save the environment for the children.
Besides, it is just a little tax, and we promise to use it to save the environment. Or something.

Just a variation of the soda tax, really.