How's the sugary drink tax working out? (Johnstown, Montgomery: city hall, income)

[Flyers Girl]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

Correct, much like the sin tax, it's meant to do both. There are two goals at play - long-term and near-term. The ultimate goal is to reduce the incredibly harmful act of ingesting 40g of pure sugar in just a 12 ounce drink (that is unbelievable BTW). The near-term goal however is to make those who chose to partake in such risky and harmful behavior pay for their inevitable suck on society (i.e. diabetes, cavities, heart disease) by at least contributing to the public coffers. A pack of cigarettes is 11 dollars now. In 1994 they were less than 2 bucks. Between those times the child smoking rate has reduced substantially. The government isn't saying it's illegal to smoke, but they are phasing it out of the next generation due to cost. Hopefully the same thing happens with sugar water.

This is really a moot point though. Already 33 states have a sugar water tax; and as much as your employer hates to acknowledge this, the proven revenue generated from said tax has all other states, counties and cities incredibly interested. By 2020 we'll probably be adding sugar water to the "sin tax" category. Honestly, this where is should be classified.

Cheers,
A Water Drinker

To the bolded above: Herein lies why I question the effectiveness of "sin" taxes. They're effective long-term at their goal of reducing the behavior, but by that point, the government has grown addicted to the income. What's going to happen when they become completely reliant on that money to fund something and then that funding goes way down? I'll tell you what will happen: they'll just increase or add taxes elsewhere.


This is why a tax, once levied, never dies. Did you know that the citizens of this state are still paying for the Johnstown flood?

[HappyRider]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

Cheers,
A Water Drinker

Typical. Leave me alone and you can do whatever else you want to others. Your time will come to. Man doesn't live on water alone.

[NatasNJ]

My issue is that they are taxing soda to pay for unrelated issues.
If the tax from soda was set aside as health related only and specifically towards the effects of soda drinking then it would bother me a tad less.

[thedirtypirate]

Originally Posted by NatasNJ

My issue is that they are taxing soda to pay for unrelated issues.
If the tax from soda was set aside as health related only and specifically towards the effects of soda drinking then it would bother me a tad less.

Not drinking the soda is the health benefit. One of our local media sites overlayed map of Diabetes % and soda sales and their is an extremely strong trend.

[North Beach Person]

Maryland did the same with cigarette taxes a few years ago. The tax is now not generating the revenue expected (between people quitting smoking or scooting over to VA to buy cigarettes at half the MD price) so the call now from some quarters is to double the tax.

It's for the children and all.

[Pennsport]

Holy ****, the beverage industry is hiring you shills in bulk huh? Good grief. Do they compensate you by the post? Terrible arguments BTW, but I don't blame you guys. Make your coin while you can. Again though, doesn't matter. The wave has crested. OK, I'm done feeding your part time jobs. Be good ya'll.

[HappyRider]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

Not drinking the soda is the health benefit.

You can say that about anything. When will their turns come? What do you eat and I'll come up with a "health" reason to tax it.

[Flyers Girl]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

Holy ****, the beverage industry is hiring you shills in bulk huh? Good grief. Do they compensate you by the post? Terrible arguments BTW, but I don't blame you guys. Make your coin while you can. Again though, doesn't matter. The wave has crested. OK, I'm done feeding your part time jobs. Be good ya'll.

You can see my posting history, and that I live in this area. Nobody hired me, I just happen to be a Libertarian and don't believe in sin taxes.

[ElijahAstin]

I'm an admitted diet soda fiend. I usually do my grocery shopping outside the city anyway, so home consumption hasn't been an issue.

I will often by a bottle or two at work, though, and the extra thirty cents a pop (pun half-intended) is somewhat irksome. But I accept that it will most likely be a big moneymaker, and I should probably cut back anyway.

Sin taxes are all about revenue. The paternalistic narrative just makes them easier to sell. That's not to say I have a problem with them; let's just not pretend that they're designed to be "for our own good."

[HappyRider]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

Not drinking the soda is the health benefit.

I see you are refusing to help the kids. Shame!