Soda tax is being discussed again

[rugertoter]

If soda is killing people, it needs banned. Not taxed.

Or maybe, just maybe, the Feds can mind their own business yet again.

This! ^^^ I agree.

 

[zippy23]

who cares? no one on here is(should be)voting for those two clowns anyways. They want to tax everything. thats all you need to know.

 

[HoughMade]

Honestly, diabetes is a huge cause of death in the US. The stats show that one of the reasons is the HUUUUUGE amount of soda that we drink. I don't have a problem with it honestly. I need to quit drinking the **** anyway.

I hope to heck we're being trolled.

 

[OakRiver]

Need a new revenue stream? Just say you're doing it for their own good.

 

[AA&E]

Maybe someday the government will realize that it isn't their responsibility to inject themselves into every damn facet of the citizens life? No, probably not.

 

[JettaKnight]

Of course it is a revenue stream.

Unless you get a soda stream!

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Wouldn't simply getting rid of corn subsidies be the way to increase the price? That would get gov't out of it altogether and raise the price of the soda. If she's against that, then she's just lookng for a revenue stream.

Free-market capitalism for the win!

 

[Sling10mm]

I don't care what people put in their body, as long as it's not hurting anyone else- it's their choice. We have taxes on cigarettes and booze, so why not soda? It's not like it's a food or anything nutritious.

I agree with your first sentence, but the rest of your comment, not so much. I'm sure someone who doesn't shoot wouldn't mind an excise tax on your guns and ammunition….. I mean, it's not food or anything nutritious. Soda and candy are already subject to sales tax, thus already distinguishing them from foodstuffs.

 

[miguel]

 

[HoughMade]

Mr. Pibb. Specific and obscure.

Anyhoo, if it weren't for the 1st Amendment problems, I'd call for a ban on talking about Kale.

 

[BogWalker]

Miguel, I think you left off the last line: "if you hate yourself and your tastebuds".

 

[Sling10mm]

Yummm, prune flavored soda...

 

[CindyE]

I agree with your first sentence, but the rest of your comment, not so much. I'm sure someone who doesn't shoot wouldn't mind an excise tax on your guns and ammunition….. I mean, it's not food or anything nutritious. Soda and candy are already subject to sales tax, thus already distinguishing them from foodstuffs.

I'm not sure I agree with it either, I'm just wondering how/where do we draw the line?
Guns and ammo are healthy and nutritious, or they could be...if you hunt.

 

[KLB]

I'm not sure I agree with it either, I'm just wondering how/where do we draw the line?
Guns and ammo are healthy and nutritious, or they could be...if you hunt.

That one it easy. The .gov stays out of it. They can cut spending instead of always looking for more ways to allow me to keep less of my money.

 

[Double T]

You guys asking if I'm trolling, I don't think you really understand the costs associated with diabetes. It's not just insulin. It's treatment for secondary things that eventually kill them. Increased risk of infection, longer healing times, etc. The amount of people who are diabetic with sepsis from infection and then getting amputated is pretty high.

I'm not trolling. We pay excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco. And cars. We are literally taxed on everything. Complaining about paying a tax on soda seems silly at this point. If it makes poor people poorer then people have their priorities out of whack. It is pretty funny to see people on facebook with the newest iPhone and then taking pics of stuff to sell, or selling the phone, because they can't make rent Doesn't matter what, priorities are ****ed anyways...

I smoke. I pay taxes. I ***** and moan, but everyone complaining about medicare/medicaid spending being outrageous who are against this does not make sense IMO. IF they use the money to go towards Tx of diabetes and diabetic teaching, I can get behind it. But then I also know most type II diabetics are fairly non-compliant who have these issues, so they might as well spend it elsewhere.

 

[eldirector]

It is just a difference is fundamental position.

I don't believe the government should be taxing vices any more than they tax anything else. I believe individuals should be responsible for their own health care, not the government.

You should not be taxed over and above a standard sales tax for your cigarettes. If you get lung cancer, that is your problem, not mine.

You should not be taxed over and above a standard sales tax for soda. If you drink so much of it that you are a lard-ass with rotten teeth, diabetes, and other health issues, that is your problem, not mine.

I have absolutely no issue with contributing to charities that help support the truly ill. I take issue with a notable percentage of my net worth taken to support people who make bad decisions.

 

[miguel]

Miguel, I think you left off the last line: "if you hate yourself and your tastebuds".

Yummm, prune flavored soda...

Haters!

Hey, I am always regular!

 

[HoughMade]

If the question arises: "should we raise taxes on....."?

No need to finish the sentence. The answer is NO. In fact, we need to cut a bunch of taxes and make the gvt, make do with less.

...and yes, I understand the costs associated with diabetes.

No tax increases. None.

 

[indiucky]

If the question arises: "should we raise taxes on....."?

No need to finish the sentence. The answer is NO. In fact, we need to cut a bunch of taxes and make the gvt, make do with less.

...and yes, I understand the costs associated with diabetes.

No tax increases. None.

Once again the working man's country lawyer cuts to the chase and nails it...

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

If the question arises: "should we raise taxes on....."?

No need to finish the sentence. The answer is NO. In fact, we need to cut a bunch of taxes and make the gvt, make do with less.

...and yes, I understand the costs associated with diabetes.

No tax increases. None.

I agree. But digging a little deeper, I'd suggest, the proper response would be to answer that question with another: should the government be involved in that activity in the first place?