It's coming...

[somebodysomeone88]

I know this isn't snus related, but a lot of the time I'm seeing people talk about what else should be taxed instead of tobacco... Well... Talk is starting... Apparently talk of taxing soda, as well as fast food is coming about in attempts to fun anti-obesity campaigns, as well as revamp healthcare...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124208505896608647.html

http://www.livescience.com/health/090512-soda-tax.html


(And again I know this isn't snus health related, I just found it interesting in correlation to previous discussions, if you feel this topic belongs somewhere else or not on the forum at all I apologize.)

[somebodysomeone88]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNF619OSF4.DTL

"It makes sense for the government to help people to make the right choices, and it makes sense to use dollars from charges on sweetened beverages on health programs," he said.

I just don't like the way that's said...

[sagedil]

On the other hand. given the connections between things like sweetened soda and obesity, and the cost to ME if YOU are so fat you damage your health, it makes a lot of sense.

If I didn't have to pick up the tab, that would be one thing. But I do.

Why I have never opposed "reasonable" taxes on things like tobacco. Obviously, what is "reasonable and the details matter much. But philosophically, I am not opposed to taxing things that create a drain on society, or cost society.

[RRK]

The government is best which governs least.

[texasmade]

The government is best which governs none.

[stubby2]

Soda is one thing, but leave the beer alone please.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/29348554.html

The responses from the politicians crack me up. They're not touching this one.

[tom502]

Sugar and flour harm social health more than alcohol and smoking.

[RobsanX]

They don't want you to cut down or quit using these products. They just want the tax money!

Same goes for tobacco:

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/loc...cc4c002e0.html

[Big L]

I have no problem paying taxes that are reasonable (what is reasonable is up for debate) I have a HUGE problem with the government "helping me make the right choices" I am an adult and can make my own choices without Big Brother.

[snusjus]

They don't want you to cut down or quit using these products. They just want the tax money!

Well said. In the near future, "unhealthy" foods are going to get taxed. This will not make at-risk individuals switch to healthier food alternatives, it will just make the fat-cats (no pun intended) in the government reap the benefits from bad food.

Its easy for the government to scapegoat certain goods that are deemed "unhealthy". This ridiculous tax increase on legal goods is going beyond tobacco and alcohol. These are scary times. At least they won't tax bread... as long as its low-carb and whole grain. :?

[lxskllr]

I'm for it. Once all these do gooders get their pleasures taxed, maybe people will wake the hell up and things will change. The government needs to get out of the parenting business. I don't need any more than the 2 I was issued at birth.

[sagedil]

I have no problem paying taxes that are reasonable (what is reasonable is up for debate) I have a HUGE problem with the government "helping me make the right choices" I am an adult and can make my own choices without Big Brother.

But the issue is, who has to pay for your "bad" choices. If I do, and the costs to society of obesity and such are pretty well known, I have a problem with that. So if a tax is used to help pay for those costs, I really have NO problems with that.

Like gasoline taxes, used theoretically to pay for the roads I drive on. The more I drive, the more I should pay. I really don't see this as much different.

[lxskllr]

I have no problem paying taxes that are reasonable (what is reasonable is up for debate) I have a HUGE problem with the government "helping me make the right choices" I am an adult and can make my own choices without Big Brother.

But the issue is, who has to pay for your "bad" choices. If I do, and the costs to society of obesity and such are pretty well known, I have a problem with that. So if a tax is used to help pay for those costs, I really have NO problems with that.

Like gasoline taxes, used theoretically to pay for the roads I drive on. The more I drive, the more I should pay. I really don't see this as much different.

How far do you take that? Should there be a tax on climbing ropes and carabiners? How about flip flops? It's very easy to stub a toe and require stitches while wearing them. Of course we can't leave out the motorcycle riders. There's only 2 kinds of bikers... Those that have laid their bikes down, and those that are going to. I don't think a $1,000 per year tax is out of the question since they're so dangerous and all ;^)

[sagedil]

Most of those examples don't even come close to impacting the cost of providing health care the way obesity does. If they did, then yes, I would be OK, but they don't.

On a related note, I love how a number of states have handled helmet laws. A bunch have repealed their laws requiring helmets. BUT, in order to not wear a helmet, you must have proof you have adequate health insurance so when you do bust your head open, the state isn't on the hook. A cop stops you and you aren't wearing a helmet, you must have proof on you that you have insurance. A great compromise IMHO

[lxskllr]

Why should I subsidized motorcyclists? Insurance companies make their money by gambling that more people won't need their services than will. Motorcyclists cost the insurance companies more money, therefore costing me more money ;^)