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.
um.. this isn't about mandates.. the gov't isn't mandating WHAT you eat.. it doesnt tell you you can't SMOKE does it? NOOOO.. it just taxes you for the cigs you buy.. and so in this case it would tax you for the junk food you eat..
want to keep putting on the pounds and being unhealthy.. you have that right.. go right ahead.. no one is stopping you or telling you you can't..
Yes, the government does tell people they can't SMOKE. Where have you been? Think. There are laws that prohibit smoking everywhere and are becoming more widespread and restrictive each day. They are not just taxing the habit, they are prohibiting it. The same process is being used to mandate and control what we eat. I feel its really a process to steal more tax dollars than some touchy, feely, humanitarian attempt to make us more healthy.
It always starts very innocently and then grows into a full blown theft of your liberties and tax dollars.
Again.. explain how that makes it a "nanny state" thing Please.. LOL. No one is saying you can't feed your kids sugary drinks.. no one is saying you can't eat potato chips
We tax things like TV's radios.. you name it we have a sales tax on it because it's something we don't need but want..
Well .. potato chips.. sugary drinks are things we don't NEED we WANT!!! so why not apply the same principal..
It's not making it against the law.. it's simply imposing a tax on an item.. like a cigarette tax or an alchohol tax.
If you want to put tax= making what you're purchasing against the law or wrong.. then that is your own conclusion.. but it doesn't mean that it's so
It's 'nanny state' thinking because it proposes using taxes to influence people's behavior in one specific area - what you consider to be 'junk food'...
And yes, TV's are taxed, but they are taxed at the general sales tax rate as other products are, there is no 'special' extra tax on tvs - so your analogy is very flawed..
I don't agree with 'sin taxes' either - there is no end to it once it starts...
People can avoid consuming these foods/drinks due to their own free choice...
What if I were to propose something you may not be crazy about. How about legalizing prostitution nationwide. Regulate it, tax it, remove the pimps and have the government run it, bring it out of the dark crime-laden environment it's in now - and make it safe from a crime and health perspective, give the women pensions and health insurance, hell- throw in dental coverage. It would generate tax revenue, would end the 'sex slave traffic' trade, and would eliminate the criminal component to the oldest-profession. But even though there are numerous practical benefits to this idea, I'll bet you wouldn't think this is so hot.
You see - what different people think is good or sinful can be very different - so we should NOT impose morals on others via the tax code - it can get out of hand very quickly.
Wow.. thanks for thinking I had soooo much power that I can personally decide the direction we should go.. a you say..
For crying out loud.. I'm stating an opinion..
It's not a tax on PEOPLE who are FAT!!! and it' not prejudice AGAINST people who are FAT!!!
It's a tax on FOODS that CAUSE obesity Geez..
And before anyone thinks I'm some skinny minny.. I'm not (used to be before kids) and am working my tail off to get the 20 lbs off that I need to be at the weight I should be at!!!
It's a little incentive for people to make healthier choices.. is all!
I think it is a tax on fat people.
I like to drink ginger ale. I'm not fat. I never go to the doctor. Why should I pay more for ginger ale because someone else thinks it's unhealthy?
A five cent tax on soda isn't going to stop someone who has no self control.
New York is in dire straits financially, and has to raise taxes somewhere. I just think it should be done fairly. Imposing a tax on "junk food" and deeming it a step forward for the health of NYers is BS. They skewed this so that some people would say or think "fat slobs deserve to pay more because they have more health problems and are a bigger drain on the insurance system".
It is what it is - punishing the obese for their food choices instead of looking at where the problem really lies, which is poverty and lack of education.
Educating people is too much trouble and takes too long though, so we'll punish them like dogs instead. Real nice, huh?
Yes, the government does tell people they can't SMOKE. Where have you been? Think. There are laws that prohibit smoking everywhere and are becoming more widespread and restrictive each day. They are not just taxing the habit, they are prohibiting it. The same process is being used to mandate and control what we eat. I feel its really a process to steal more tax dollars than some touchy, feely, humanitarian attempt to make us more healthy.
It always starts very innocently and then grows into a full blown theft of your liberties and tax dollars.
It tells people WHERE they can't smoke.. not that they can't!!1111 And rightfully so, because when someoen else smokes in public they take away MY RIGHT AS A NON SMOKER to not put that crap in my body. THere are no laws that make smoking illegal.... only WHERE you smoke illegal.
It hasn't stopped my husband from his cigarette.. he just can't do it in public (or in the house.. as per me!)
I like to drink ginger ale. I'm not fat. I never go to the doctor. Why should I pay more for ginger ale because someone else thinks it's unhealthy?
A five cent tax on soda isn't going to stop someone who has no self control.
New York is in dire straits financially, and has to raise taxes somewhere. I just think it should be done fairly. Imposing a tax on "junk food" and deeming it a step forward for the health of NYers is BS. They skewed this so that some people would say or think "fat slobs deserve to pay more because they have more health problems and are a bigger drain on the insurance system".
It is what it is - punishing the obese for their food choices instead of looking at where the problem really lies, which is poverty and lack of education.
Educating people is too much trouble and takes too long though, so we'll punish them like dogs instead. Real nice, huh?
YOur post right there proves that it's NOT a tax on Fat people or prejudiced against them.. because you say YOU'RE not fat and that you will consume gingerale.. a sugary drink.. jsut as my family is not overweight and will consume coca cola. .. so that means we ALL WILL BE CONTIRUBUTING in that tax by our purchases.. not just fat people
The same thing was said about cigs btw, when NY raised the tax.. guess what.. it raised more money for the state.. a nice chunk of it too AND it helped some more people curb or quit their bad habit.. It was pretty much a success.. and so will this tax on sugary drinks be a success!!
It's 'nanny state' thinking because it proposes using taxes to influence people's behavior in one specific area - what you consider to be 'junk food'...
It's not what I consider "junk food".. it's what science and medical doctors and years of research have deemed "junk food"
And yes, TV's are taxed, but they are taxed at the general sales tax rate as other products are, there is no 'special' extra tax on tvs - so your analogy is very flawed..
ON the sales level yes.. and the "tax" on soda is also on the sales level.. no "special tax" as you so state... but then there IS tax on TV when you subscribe to cable.. so your analogy is a little flawed.
I don't agree with 'sin taxes' either - there is no end to it once it starts...
People can avoid consuming these foods/drinks due to their own free choice...
And people can still do that with the sales tax added.. still their choice.. only now they'll be paying a sales tax when they purchase it.. nothing really has changed.
What if I were to propose something you may not be crazy about. How about legalizing prostitution nationwide. Regulate it, tax it, remove the pimps and have the government run it, bring it out of the dark crime-laden environment it's in now - and make it safe from a crime and health perspective, give the women pensions and health insurance, hell- throw in dental coverage. It would generate tax revenue, would end the 'sex slave traffic' trade, and would eliminate the criminal component to the oldest-profession. But even though there are numerous practical benefits to this idea, I'll bet you wouldn't think this is so hot.
Works for Nevada I guess.. I don't care either way.. I never plan on being a prostitute.. it wouldn't matter much to me either way..
You see - what different people think is good or sinful can be very different - so we should NOT impose morals on others via the tax code - it can get out of hand very quickly.
Food choice is not a "moral" issue.. so morals play no part here. It's not saying you are morally wrong for consuming a coca cola?? So your moral argument here makes no sense.. it's not ABOUT morality AT ALL!
It tells people WHERE they can't smoke.. not that they can't!!1111 And rightfully so, because when someoen else smokes in public they take away MY RIGHT AS A NON SMOKER to not put that crap in my body. THere are no laws that make smoking illegal.... only WHERE you smoke illegal.
It hasn't stopped my husband from his cigarette.. he just can't do it in public (or in the house.. as per me!)
Puh-lease.... the govt won't come right out and say "you cannot do that" with issues such as smoking. Instead, they take a backhanded way and make it difficult to do.
Give the govt an inch and they will take a mile -- it will take time but it happens.
This tax is nothing more than an attempt by the socialist state of New York to control behavior.
And, that is wrong.
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.
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.
Please.. LOL. No one is saying you can't feed your kids sugary drinks.. no one is saying you can't eat potato chips
