Soda Tax Weighed to Pay for Health Care

[Midnight Mike]

Wow, sooner or later, you soda drinkers are going to treated just like cigarette smokers, like crap :mrgreen: $1.25 for a bottle of soda followed by $3 in taxes, isn't New York considering a tax on soda as well.

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

Senate leaders are considering new federal taxes on soda and other sugary drinks to help pay for an overhaul of the nation's health-care system.

The taxes would pay for only a fraction of the cost to expand health-insurance coverage to all Americans and would face strong opposition from the beverage industry. They also could spark a backlash from consumers who would have to pay several cents more for a soft drink.

On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee is set to hear proposals from about a dozen experts about how to pay for the comprehensive health-care overhaul that President Barack Obama wants to enact this year. Early estimates put the cost of the plan at around $1.2 trillion. The administration has so far only earmarked funds for about half of that amount.

[T-Bird76]

So when this BS tax drives down the sales of soda resulting in a loss of tax revenue how is the Gov't going to pay for health care then? How about a tax on the air we breathe?

[mirrodie]

Charge the tax on SODA!

DO IT!

[Matt Molnar]

Better idea: smokers have to pay for their own health care.

[T-Bird76]

Charge the tax on SODA!

DO IT!

Better watch what you wish for they may tax the crap out your beloved wine ;)

[Mellyrose]

I do like the sound of them reducing the amount of sodium in packaged and restaurant foods. It's ridiculous how much they contain - it's almost impossible to eat healthy anywhere but home anymore.

It's a shame they can't just try to make soda healthier instead of more expensive. I guess that would deter people from buying it as well.

[Midnight Mike]

I do like the sound of them reducing the amount of sodium in packaged and restaurant foods. It's ridiculous how much they contain - it's almost impossible to eat healthy anywhere but home anymore.

It's a shame they can't just try to make soda healthier instead of more expensive. I guess that would deter people from buying it as well.

You can get healthier soda from Whole Foods or Trader Joes, but, people may not like the taste, price is slightly more expensive that Coke & Pepsi.

[cancidas]

i say do it.

[Matt Molnar]

You can get healthier soda from Whole Foods or Trader Joes, but, people may not like the taste, price is slightly more expensive that Coke & Pepsi.

I like some of those but they are a lot more expensive than the big brands. Coke and Pepsi could certainly make healthier stuff for much more reasonable prices... maybe the threat of these taxes will encourage them to do so.

[mirrodie]

Tax the wine? I dunno. Wine has various positive health effects when used in moderation whereas saod is just nore refined sugar.


In fact, coffee and wine, both in moderation, do show some positive influences on health. But soda, jsut sugar, has its direct link to increased risk of Diabetes.


If the soda tax is thought if as a 'penalty' toward one's health, then wine is a bonus.

[Midnight Mike]

Tax the wine? I dunno. Wine has various positive health effects when used in moderation whereas saod is just nore refined sugar.


In fact, coffee and wine, both in moderation, do show some positive influences on health. But soda, jsut sugar, has its direct link to increased risk of Diabetes.


If the soda tax is thought if as a 'penalty' toward one's health, then wine is a bonus.

Oh screw up, I say, tax the wine heavily :borat:

[PhilDernerJr]

I am very passionate about taxes, and this here is a good example.

Mario said how wine has various positive health effects. True, but overall that can be debated. However, as mentioned, people are assuming that this soda tax is considered to be a "penalty" for the sodas being unhealthy. I bid to you all that this is NOT the case.

they are taxing this, not because it's unhealthy and to persuade people to eat/drink healthier, but only because it's something that people buy in abundance and they want to milk (pardon the pun) money from the regular joe whenever they can.

It's just how Bloomberg said he wouldn't raise taxes. Even though income taxes may not have gone up, everything else was taxed. Property taxes, water taxes, all went up. I don't understand this though. Why do property taxes even exist? If people own their land, it's their land and that should be that. Income taxes and water bills should cover plumbing. It's just an excuse to tax.

The Whitestone Bridge was built back in the day, and people were told that the toll would exist only until the bridge was paid for. Right. Now people who need to commute over the East River pay $9-$10 a day.

Gas taxes. Why is there a tax? Is there a problem with the fact that I want to gas up my car? Why the penalty?

Sales tax. Again, why am I being penalized for something that George W says is patriotic. ;)

I am all for taxes, but they should not extend beyond income taxes and taxes on very specific items that they truly and honestly want to dissuade people from purchasing (cigarettes, alcohol, etc.).

Is it really a shock when people have no money and the economy is poor when it is literally commonplace for 40% of people's earnings go back to the government.....and they STILL can't balance the budget?

[Matt Molnar]

Tax the wine? I dunno. Wine has various positive health effects when used in moderation whereas saod is just nore refined sugar.

Alcohol is already taxed three times: Federal and State excise taxes on the production end, and then sales tax when you buy it.

[Midnight Mike]

Alcohol is already taxed three times: Federal and State excise taxes on the production end, and then sales tax when you buy it.

How about a Mario tax :mrgreen: or a married couple with 2 kids have to pay an additional tax :lol:

[Midnight Mike]

I am very passionate about taxes, and this here is a good example.
I am all for taxes, but they should not extend beyond income taxes and taxes on very specific items that they truly and honestly want to dissuade people from purchasing (cigarettes, alcohol, etc.).

Is it really a shock when people have no money and the economy is poor when it is literally commonplace for 40% of people's earnings go back to the government.....and they STILL can't balance the budget?

This one is going to piss me off, big time

People who like the tax-free status of their company health benefits could be asked to ante up. Money in the pot: more than $700 billion over 10 years.

Smokers, drinkers to carry tax burden?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22444.html

f you make big bucks — or enjoy alcohol, cigarettes and Coke — the government might hit you up to pay for fixing the nation’s health care system.

On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee peeked into vending machines and liquor stores, company payrolls and health savings accounts, looking for a mix of tax increases and spending cuts as a way to pay for a health overhaul — which could cost more than $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

Experts thought the big debate might be public plan vs. no public plan. But that may well pale in comparison to the difficulty of settling on a way to finance health care reform.