U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [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 12-20-2018, 09:01 PM
 
Location: North by Northwest
7,425 posts, read 9,552,499 times
Reputation: 4638

Advertisements

I don’t drink soda anymore (or live in the city proper, for that matter), but even when I was a city resident and drinking upwards of 40 ounces of diet soda a day I almost always did my grocery shopping in the suburbs—both before and after the sugary drink tax was implemented. Supermarkets in the city just aren’t great for the most part.

I think taxing things that people should be consuming less of anyway is fine and dandy, particularly in a cash-strapped city like Philadelphia. I’m not operating under the delusion that altruism and concern for peoples’ health and well-being is the primary motivator, but on the other hand, so what?

Last edited by ElijahAstin; 12-20-2018 at 09:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-21-2018, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
974 posts, read 554,872 times
Reputation: 1446
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ondoner View Post
The goal was to improve the overall health of the city residents while promoting valuable social programs.

How would your honest accountant quantify this? This is a social/health economics issue and not your regular bean counting accountancy.
Conservatives don't tend to calculate anything past the dollars and cents in their own pockets. So my guess is, their accountant wouldn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
14,136 posts, read 8,987,100 times
Reputation: 11576
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ondoner View Post
The goal was to improve the overall health of the city residents while promoting valuable social programs.
So you need peopel to consume more sugar and at the same time less sugar. That's gonna be tough pull off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
275 posts, read 125,243 times
Reputation: 249
The revenue generated from the tax does not seem to make a difference anyway since most of it is just sitting idle in the general fund. Another layer of ineptitude and corruption of our tax dollars.

https://www.phillyvoice.com/city-con...hools-rebuild/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Dude...., I'm right here
1,063 posts, read 620,314 times
Reputation: 556
You got this mixed up. The goal is to get residents to consume less sugar and for those who are consuming get them to pay for social services.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider View Post
So you need peopel to consume more sugar and at the same time less sugar. That's gonna be tough pull off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 10:41 AM
 
8,495 posts, read 4,610,665 times
Reputation: 2842
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider View Post
Since you had the $100m on your finger tips, do you know by how much the sale of sugary drink went down? That was the idea in the first place, wasnt it? An honest accountant, not paid by City Hall, would first deduct the losses in sales tax. Let's see if your $100m still stands.
The correct total is $78.8m in the first 12 months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 10:47 AM
 
8,495 posts, read 4,610,665 times
Reputation: 2842
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ondoner View Post
The goal was to improve the overall health of the city residents while promoting valuable social programs.

How would your honest accountant quantify this? This is a social/health economics issue and not your regular bean counting accountancy.
It was more about, I think, creating a money stream for funding pre-K and improving city rec centers. I'm not sure it had anything to do with affecting overall health outcomes as a goal. If that has happened, great!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 10:51 AM
 
8,495 posts, read 4,610,665 times
Reputation: 2842
Quote:
Originally Posted by BK_PHL_DEL View Post
The revenue generated from the tax does not seem to make a difference anyway since most of it is just sitting idle in the general fund. Another layer of ineptitude and corruption of our tax dollars.

https://www.phillyvoice.com/city-con...hools-rebuild/
That article is nearly a year old. Some of the money has released.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 01:27 PM
 
Location: North by Northwest
7,425 posts, read 9,552,499 times
Reputation: 4638
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyb01 View Post
It was more about, I think, creating a money stream for funding pre-K and improving city rec centers. I'm not sure it had anything to do with affecting overall health outcomes as a goal. If that has happened, great!
This. Reducing consumption (which Iím sure it has on some level) is a happy side effect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 01:32 PM
 
Location: USA
14,423 posts, read 7,707,745 times
Reputation: 10463
Quote:
Originally Posted by MB1562 View Post
Conservatives don't tend to calculate anything past the dollars and cents in their own pockets. So my guess is, their accountant wouldn't.
I am a conservative, and donate significantly to charities by giving my TIME, and money. I know others that do the same. We also pay a LOT in taxes on every level. Love your generalizations. They are all WRONG of course.

Government should NOT be in the business of Social Engineering like this. I don't drink soda, fruit juices, or any other sweetened beverage beyond hot tea with a teaspoon of sugar on occasion. This will not change habits of people. They will buy outside the city, or just pay the premium. It is just a stupid as Bloomberg's law in NYC about large soft drinks.

It is NOT reducing consumption.
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

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top