Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sugar Tax?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    but they let prohibition go
    beautiful
    yeah you are

    Baby if you time travel back far enough you can avoid that work because the dust won't be there. You're too pretty to be working that hard.
    lol

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by JWBooth View Post
      We pay them because the state threatens us with violence if we do not.
      And that is what grieves me the most.

      Originally posted by bloodorchid View Post
      but they let prohibition go
      Because they made more money.

      M.

      Comment


      • #18
        I live in a state that sales taxes food (I believe there are 11 states that do this). I draw the line everywhere, once my income is taxed. I paid the taxes when I earned it. Paying value added/sales tax is merely putting a gun to my head when I purchase something with my already taxed earnings.
        Yeah, they tax groceries in NC too.... and want to raise those taxes so the "poor pay their share". There is also legislation to tax services including health care because apparently we need to make that more expensive for people. I agree we need to pay taxes, but I wish it was just in the form of one bill per year.

        http://maggiesfeast.wordpress.com/
        Check out my blog. Hope to share lots of great recipes and ideas!

        Comment


        • #19
          I will be happy with that idea. My mother -in-law stopped smoking when prices of cigarettes went up. My husband no longer speeds when price of gasoline went up. Dairy is already ridiculously priced in Canada, and no access to the raw one, so making decision to exclude it is so simple. If sugar/soft drinks/candies are taxed, maybe my husband will stop asking me to buy diet soda for him (I do not like having it in the house even if I do not drink it).

          I believe that food should be more expensive, that will make me more selective in my choices & maybe even make me eat less (that would be the day!)

          And I am happy that I pay taxes, though I wish I had more say in how they are used by the Government. But, if I truly wanted it, I would be politically more active. I am lazy, so I just let others decide.
          Last edited by Leida; 06-05-2013, 07:39 AM.
          My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
          When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by KimchiNinja View Post
            Why don't they just turn sugar off?

            It didn't work, so just stop doing that.

            Sort of like agriculture in general, once humans start a bad idea they can't just let it go.
            Once you start a government program, good luck shutting it down.
            Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
            Starting Weight: 294 pounds
            Current Weight: 235 pounds
            Goal Weight: 195 pounds

            Comment


            • #21
              my issue is if they tax suggar fruit would be supper expoencive whilst soda ans shit with chemial sweaner would be even cheaper ... NOT the direction we need to go ... I say no taxes but if they must then put a proccessing/chemical tax on all the junk frankenfoods
              04/23/2012 Max Weight : 448 lbs
              01/01/2014 Initial Weight : 428 lbs
              06/23/2015 Current weight : 288 lbs
              12/31/2015 Goal weight : 208 lbs

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by BigChris View Post
                my issue is if they tax suggar fruit would be supper expoencive whilst soda ans shit with chemial sweaner would be even cheaper ... NOT the direction we need to go ... I say no taxes but if they must then put a proccessing/chemical tax on all the junk frankenfoods
                What?
                Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
                Starting Weight: 294 pounds
                Current Weight: 235 pounds
                Goal Weight: 195 pounds

                Comment


                • #23
                  ie the gov would clasify normal real sugar continaing items as taxable yet chemacal varents would still be ok
                  fruit has a lot of sugar so would cost more if a sugar tax was implmented yet splenda-soda wouldn't be taxed.

                  we need to tax the artifical lab made stuff not the natural

                  but the system is so corupt no mater what tax weas enacted ---corporate profites would twist it to there advantge which would continue to f over the public.
                  Last edited by BigChris; 06-05-2013, 12:59 PM.
                  04/23/2012 Max Weight : 448 lbs
                  01/01/2014 Initial Weight : 428 lbs
                  06/23/2015 Current weight : 288 lbs
                  12/31/2015 Goal weight : 208 lbs

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BigChris View Post
                    ie the gov would clasify normal real sugar continaing items as taxable yet chemacal varents would still be ok
                    fruit has a lot of sugar so would cost more if a sugar tax was implmented yet splenda-soda wouldn't be taxed.

                    we need to tax the artifical lab made stuff not the natural
                    When people say tax sugar they generally mean actual sugar or artificial sugar, not sugar in fruits
                    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
                    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
                    Current Weight: 235 pounds
                    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I don't really have a problem with taxing sugar (although, as someone else said, stopping the subsidies might be more effective). What I have a problem with is the precedent it sets. Most people agree that sugar is bad. But how long before they're taxing saturated fat? Meat? Dairy?

                      The solution is not to slap people with taxes or other penalties. The solution is to provide real information in ways that the everyman can understand it to make educated decisions. If they still want to eat crap- fine. But at least at that point it is a deliberate choice.
                      http://cattaillady.com/ My blog exploring the beginning stages of learning how to homestead. With the occasional rant.

                      Originally Posted by TheFastCat: Less is more more or less

                      And now I have an Etsy store: CattailsandCalendula

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I understant what "people" generaly mean but we all now that is NOT how the system will be implamented.. be asured they will find a way to screw the "people" over and make it something no one ment for it to be.
                        04/23/2012 Max Weight : 448 lbs
                        01/01/2014 Initial Weight : 428 lbs
                        06/23/2015 Current weight : 288 lbs
                        12/31/2015 Goal weight : 208 lbs

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by BigChris View Post
                          I understant what "people" generaly mean but we all now that is NOT how the system will be implamented.. be asured they will find a way to screw the "people" over and make it something no one ment for it to be.
                          They're all too busy chasing gun disarmament and immigration atm to know their plans
                          Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
                          Starting Weight: 294 pounds
                          Current Weight: 235 pounds
                          Goal Weight: 195 pounds

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by BigChris View Post
                            I understant what "people" generaly mean but we all now that is NOT how the system will be implamented.. be asured they will find a way to screw the "people" over and make it something no one ment for it to be.
                            While they will no doubt be screwing over people in favor of big monopolies, they won't be taxing fruit according to its sugar content.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by drssgchic View Post
                              ...What I have a problem with is the precedent it sets. Most people agree that sugar is bad. But how long before they're taxing saturated fat? Meat? Dairy?

                              The solution is not to slap people with taxes or other penalties. The solution is to provide real information in ways that the everyman can understand it to make educated decisions. If they still want to eat crap- fine. But at least at that point it is a deliberate choice.
                              My fear as well, if they tax sugar, well then what is next? We've already seen NY City enact law to limit the size that a soft drink can be; to me that is the Fathers Knows Best government meddling that i want to avoid.

                              I'm less certain there is much more we as a society need to do to force via law how real information is provided to the consumer about what is in their products and the dangers within. After some degree of nutritional labeling there has to be a point that if the consumer needs more detail to make a decision, then it is on them to go figure it out.

                              Fast food for instance, most if not all have the nutrition info on their wrappers/boxes or if not there available in store via list for review. That basic macro nutrient info is enough for anyone to deduce that if they eat it, they are eating junk which while it will provide them calories to burn it will do little else to benefit then nutritionally.

                              What else does a consumer absolutely need to know in order to understand that Big mac is a Big Mistake? Does the label also need to detail out the risks of eating food at that specific macro nutrient combination?

                              Or that a can of Coke is a can of liquified sugar; Does the label also need to detail out the risks of high sugar consumption?

                              My answer to the above two sample questions is NO. The labels as they are now is sufficient for that level of understanding by the consumer. A tax wont make them understand anything any clearer; it will just make the consumer poorer and the government richer.

                              Now deceptive labeling practices, that is whole different argument and anything I said here has nothing to do with that completely separate topic.
                              Follow my progress at ->Journal: My Body Revival



                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by eKatherine View Post
                                While they will no doubt be screwing over people in favor of big monopolies, they won't be taxing fruit according to its sugar content.
                                Yeah, this is not a "sweetness tax" but a SUGAR tax, as in "added refined sugar"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X