Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-23-2009, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
659 posts, read 1,086,069 times
Reputation: 381

Advertisements

Why not levy heavy taxes on alcohol in the same fashion as we have with cigarettes?

Or fast food?

Or junk food?

Or anything else considered a vice?

I don't necessarily agree with the notion of taxing something to get people to act a certain way (i.e. taxing the beejesus out of cigarettes), but, if we are going to do it why not broaden our horizons so to speak?

I would love to see less drunk drivers on the road simply because they could not afford the alcohol. I would love to smell less of that oh so wonderful cigarette smoke. I would love to see more people stray away from Mickie Dee's or those little debbie cakes because they cannot afford to buy them.

I mean, I want a healthier, sober, non-nicotine addicted America also. Why not make a buck while we're at it?

Last edited by kb09; 03-23-2009 at 10:00 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-23-2009, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,470,546 times
Reputation: 4586
Do you agree that basic needs should be taxed less than any "luxuries"? Because, the way I see it, people trying to meet their basic needs to survive should not be taxed nearly as much as those who are purchasing things with no positive value.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
659 posts, read 1,086,069 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Do you agree that basic needs should be taxed less than any "luxuries"? Because, the way I see it, people trying to meet their basic needs to survive should not be taxed nearly as much as those who are purchasing things with no positive value.
Fast food, nor junk food (soft drinks, chips, debbie cakes, etc) does not classify as basic needs. The are considered snacks which are considered a luxury of food.

Things like meats, vegetables, fruits water, and milk are classified as basic necessities. That's one of the reasons they have no tax on them.

You don't need soft drinks, or chips or debbie snacks to live off on. You do however need water, meats, fruits, and vegatables to do so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,470,546 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
Fast food, nor junk food (soft drinks, chips, debbie cakes, etc) does not classify as basic needs. The are considered snacks which are considered a luxury of food.

Things like meats, vegetables, fruits water, and milk are classified as basic necessities. That's one of the reasons they have no tax on them.

You don't need soft drinks, or chips or debbie snacks to live off on. You do however need water, meats, fruits, and vegatables to do so.
That's exactly what I was getting at! You mentioned taxing fast food...I was arguing (without going into specific examples) WHY it would be more acceptable to tax it than say fruits and vegetables.

Also why it is more acceptable to tax cigs and booze than fruits and veggies.

I couldn't tell whether you were suggesting TO tax these things more heavily or NOT to. I'd say with alcohol...absolutely. As far as the other things....not sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
659 posts, read 1,086,069 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
That's exactly what I was getting at! You mentioned taxing fast food...I was arguing (without going into specific examples) WHY it would be more acceptable to tax it than say fruits and vegetables.

Also why it is more acceptable to tax cigs and booze than fruits and veggies.

I couldn't tell whether you were suggesting TO tax these things more heavily or NOT to. I'd say with alcohol...absolutely. As far as the other things....not sure.
Personally I don't think we should be taxing things to make people act a certain way; i.e. social engineering. But, my point is, that if we are going to enact social engineering, why only stop at cigarettes? Why not alcohol? Fast food? Soft drinks? Foods high in fat, partially hydrogenated oil(s), sugar, and high fructose corn syrup; i.e. snacks?

If we truly want a healthier America, why not? It's been proven that more people die from health related diseases than smoking cigarettes. I think one of the many reasons they are raising the taxes on cigarettes because it would be less of an outcry from the public (even some people who smoke are glad they are raising the taxes). But if they tried that with snacks? Fast food? Soft drinks? It'd be a public outrage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,070,661 times
Reputation: 954
The last time I checked we did levy high taxes on alcohol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,470,546 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
Personally I don't think we should be taxing things to make people act a certain way; i.e. social engineering. But, my point is, that if we are going to enact social engineering, why only stop at cigarettes? Why not alcohol? Fast food? Soft drinks? Foods high in fat, partially hydrogenated oil(s), sugar, and high fructose corn syrup; i.e. snacks?

If we truly want a healthier America, why not? It's been proven that more people die from health related diseases than smoking cigarettes. I think one of the many reasons they are raising the taxes on cigarettes because it would be less of an outcry from the public (even some people who smoke are glad they are raising the taxes). But if they tried that with snacks? Fast food? Soft drinks? It'd be a public outrage.
I think the state would have MORE business doing this with alcohol than cigarettes or any of the other things. Reason being, alcohol is an intoxicant and those under the influence of alcohol are more likely to do things that can hurt others.

Cigarettes (with the exception of second hand smoke) and unhealthy food do not cause direct harm to anyone other than those consuming them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,470,546 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
The last time I checked we did levy high taxes on alcohol.
No. They are extremely low. I think, in most states, they are equivalent to about a penny (maybe a few pennies) for a 12-ounce beer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 10:39 AM
 
5,273 posts, read 14,551,091 times
Reputation: 5881
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
Why not levy heavy taxes on alcohol in the same fashion as we have with cigarettes?

Or fast food?

Or junk food?

Or anything else considered a vice?

I don't necessarily agree with the notion of taxing something to get people to act a certain way (i.e. taxing the beejesus out of cigarettes), but, if we are going to do it why not broaden our horizons so to speak?

I would love to see less drunk drivers on the road simply because they could not afford the alcohol. I would love to smell less of that oh so wonderful cigarette smoke. I would love to see more people stray away from Mickie Dee's or those little debbie cakes because they cannot afford to buy them.

I mean, I want a healthier, sober, non-nicotine addicted America also. Why not make a buck while we're at it?
Once you start down this road, when does it end?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2009, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,070,661 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
No. They are extremely low. I think, in most states, they are equivalent to about a penny (maybe a few pennies) for a 12-ounce beer.
For liquor it is about 20-25% of the price depending upon state law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:34 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top