Sugary Drink Tax Proposal

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12018 posts) -

San Francisco joins sugary drinks fray with tax proposal has the details of a 2 cent per ounce tax for drinks with added sugar. People think that Republicans are the only ones that want to dictate what people can and can't do, yet here we are. This isn't a joke article like the other one posted about recently.

Would you keep drinking sugary drinks if this tax were passed?

#2 Posted by MonsieurX (29173 posts) -

Just a way to get more money,but not as a good way.

People will still buy sugary drinks

#3 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7719 posts) -

Its just a sin tax, nothing more.

#4 Edited by BranKetra (47773 posts) -

Will healthy drinks be taxed two cents less per ounce in exchange?

#5 Posted by Jimn_tonic (819 posts) -

Silly, and will do nothing.

raise taxes on the people who make the sugary drinks so they will have to increase prices, that will be on par with healthy drinks. then people will be able to take money out of the equation when they compare the two. or even better, create tax incentives for people who make healthy drinks, and get a similar result

#6 Edited by Makhaidos (1611 posts) -

Silly, and will do nothing.

raise taxes on the people who make the sugary drinks so they will have to increase prices, that will be on par with healthy drinks. then people will be able to take money out of the equation when they compare the two. or even better, create tax incentives for people who make healthy drinks, and get a similar result

Such a good solution. It's a shame that nobody in charge will listen to it.

#7 Edited by Makhaidos (1611 posts) -

@WhiteKnight77 said:

People think that Republicans are the only ones that want to dictate what people can and can't do, yet here we are.

Who's dictating what people can and can't do here? Adding a 2%/oz tax isn't the same as, say, telling a woman what she can do with her body or forbidding gays from marrying or voting or all the other stuff Republicans are trying so hard to ban.

#8 Posted by thegerg (14596 posts) -

Just a way to get more money,but not as a good way.

A tax is to make money?!?! You don't say...

#9 Edited by Wasdie (49531 posts) -

This isn't going to stop people from drinking big sugary drinks. Increasing education about teaching how crappy those drinks are for you would be much more efficient. I don't just mean the whole "they'll make you fat" but show people the cost of being really fat because of those. Start tying being fat to how much it costs. Start putting dollar signs behind it.

#10 Edited by HoolaHoopMan (7719 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

This isn't going to stop people from drinking big sugary drinks. Increasing education about teaching how crappy those drinks are for you would be much more efficient. I don't just mean the whole "they'll make you fat" but show people the cost of being really fat because of those. Start tying being fat to how much it costs. Start putting dollar signs behind it.

I'm not the most optimistic about the whole 'education' thing working, although it obviously needs to happen. We stock our schools full of vendor machines after all, and every time we try and revamp school lunch menus with a few healthier alternatives people get their panties in a bunch.

#11 Posted by Wasdie (49531 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

This isn't going to stop people from drinking big sugary drinks. Increasing education about teaching how crappy those drinks are for you would be much more efficient. I don't just mean the whole "they'll make you fat" but show people the cost of being really fat because of those. Start tying being fat to how much it costs. Start putting dollar signs behind it.

I'm not the most optimistic about the whole 'education' thing working, although it obviously needs to happen. We stock our schools full of vendor machines after all, and every time we try and revamp school lunch menus with a few healthier alternatives people get their panties in a bunch.


Don't color me too optimistic about it either but it beats the hell out of a insignificant tax.

#12 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3727 posts) -

This should be universal with a higher tax.
anything from discouraging people from putting that garbage in their bodies.

#13 Edited by iampenguin (223 posts) -

I say they should go for it.

#14 Posted by Barbariser (6717 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@Jimn_tonic said:

Silly, and will do nothing.

raise taxes on the people who make the sugary drinks so they will have to increase prices, that will be on par with healthy drinks. then people will be able to take money out of the equation when they compare the two. or even better, create tax incentives for people who make healthy drinks, and get a similar result

Such a good solution. It's a shame that nobody in charge will listen to it.

Wrong.

Simply raising taxes on the companies that make sugary drinks will do nothing WRT prices on sugary drinks. Drinks themselves are already priced at a profit-maximizing level, and lobbing a random tax on the companies that make them will not affect that price level. It'll simply eat away at profit margins (so, I guess it would work for raising revenue). Taxes on sugary drinks themselves, on the other hand, do impact the price levels.

QFT. Contrary to popular opinion, direct taxes (e.g. income and corporate gains tax) have no effect on prices.

#15 Posted by ristactionjakso (5664 posts) -

O it's ok since the repubs arent doing this......

#16 Edited by Cynical_Buzzard (224 posts) -

I support this tax, it will benefit the state and hopefully it's citizens.

#17 Edited by foxhound_fox (87329 posts) -

Something better would be to end the subsidization of high fructose corn syrup and give tax breaks to people who buy healthy food.

#18 Edited by mattbbpl (10557 posts) -

@coolbeans90 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Jimn_tonic said:

Silly, and will do nothing.

raise taxes on the people who make the sugary drinks so they will have to increase prices, that will be on par with healthy drinks. then people will be able to take money out of the equation when they compare the two. or even better, create tax incentives for people who make healthy drinks, and get a similar result

Such a good solution. It's a shame that nobody in charge will listen to it.

Wrong.

Simply raising taxes on the companies that make sugary drinks will do nothing WRT prices on sugary drinks. Drinks themselves are already priced at a profit-maximizing level, and lobbing a random tax on the companies that make them will not affect that price level. It'll simply eat away at profit margins (so, I guess it would work for raising revenue). Taxes on sugary drinks themselves, on the other hand, do impact the price levels.

QFT. Contrary to popular opinion, direct taxes (e.g. income and corporate gains tax) have no effect on prices.

Right. Glad to see it posted by someone on this board.

Soft drinks aren't even close to be cost constrained so such a tax wouldn't have a noticeable impact on prices.