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.
Yeah, we need to let the government decide what kinds of foods we can eat and tax the ones that some bureaucrat thinks don't fit his ideal. Do you hear yourself?
What has happened to people being free to make their own choices? When did it become about helping to "raise revenue for tax strapped states?"
I'm not fat; I don't smoke; I don't eat fatty foods or drink sugar filled soda, but if you want to...go right ahead. It's none of my business. The difference with smoking is that I have to breath the same air as you, but you don't have to eat my food.
This country is being taken over by nanny state liberal control freaks who want to tell everyone when, where, and how they can take a **** and what kind of toilet to use. It's disgusting and has to stop.
You are all extremely paranoid and delusionall.. really.. do you hear YOURSELVES..
No one is saying that you can't eat or drink whatever the hell it is you want!!! NOT AT ALL!!!
Your right to choose is NOT being taken away by a SALES TAX!!!! You are all so hell bent on thinking that it's because the state doesn't want you to drink coke ..geez..
And again.. no government entity has decided that sugary drinks is unhealthy.. give me a break.. years of medical information and dietary study has come to that conclusion.. LOL.. but you all seem to think some beaurocratic think tank is sitting in a room and arbitrarily deciding what is healthy and unhealthy.. AGain.. maybe you want to go ahead and buy yourself a tin foil hat..
As for your analogy about the air we all share and smoking.. right on.. but you're wrong if you think someone else's bad choices in what they put in your mouth isn't harming you.. btw.. You're wrong if you don't think that children AND adults alike being obese becasue of their bad choices has no affect on you. Are you not aware of health insurance costs in this country...
Go back and read the post about how groups in a health plan work.. every time you pay your premium..even if you are healthy and never go to the Dr. you are paying for someone else who DOES need to go to the Dr. because they have high blood pressure, high cholesterol..their joints ache.. they have sleep apnea.. and any number of issues they take tons of meds for because they are OVERWEIGHT ..b ecause they like to drink coke all day and eat nothing but fast food and junk food!! If you don't thik that's true.. my mom used to be fat.. until she fixed that. when she was fat she was on 5 different meds for different issues AND she wore a sleep apnea mask at night.. Once the weight was gone.. so too were the medical issues and the tons of medication she needed to combat them. So as far as you thinking that someone else's poor food choices DOESN'T affect you.. you couldn't BE more wrong..
but alas.. this tax doesn't take away their ability to make their poor choices..all it is a sales tax people.. no different than what is applied to alcohol, cigarettes, cars, cloths, TV's , radios..and so on..
but alas.. this tax doesn't take away their ability to make their poor choices..all it is a sales tax people.. no different than what is applied to alcohol, cigarettes, cars, cloths, TV's , radios..and so on..
So why not apply this tax to everything? Why punish people for eating a bag of chips? For enjoying coke and hot dogs at a picnic? No, this isn't going to deter anyone, but it IS an attempt at punishment by a nanny state. No doubt about it.
And someone earlier said it right: Legalize pot, tax the hell out of it akin to alcohol and cigs (since it IS no worse than those drugs), and the government can work towards getting out of the deficit that way.
I have heard of it when there is a child in the car...
And rightfully so.. it' child abuse really when a parent sits there and smokes and allows their child to breathe in their unhealthy bad habits.
It's unfortunate that some parents can't be trusted todo the right thing by their own child.. but someone's got to protect them i f their parents can't.
So, if smoking in your car equates to child abuse, why isn't it child abuse to smoke in your private residence when you have minor children?
The danger of the nanny state is that its proponents won't be happy until everything they disapprove of is regulated and taxed out of existence.
The trouble I have with health and safety 'national security parents' is their disrespect for liberty and choice.
They can argue on and on about how what they are doing is good for your health and future well being, but it seems beyond their understanding that I have the right to choose, and badly in their eyes, products and lifestyles so long as it doesn't affect their property.
The proper solutions is not to ban or tax items that go against your beliefs, but to call for transparent and accessible information on all products.
If I go out of my way to buy extra leaded clothes,or sugar saturated fast food, it is my decision, unwise at it may be.
The kids today won't mind. They've been raised to be wimps. Maybe there should be a comprehensive wimp tax to encourage parents to raise better/stronger/self-reliant kids. First we could start with a tax on every over 25 year old who still lives with mommy and daddy and isn't disabled/sick. Then we should have a soccer tax for all parents who opt for soccer because they are afraid to let their kids wrestle or play football or hockey. Let's have an extra tax on electric outlet covers. Then, let's have another tax for all parents who make their kids roller skate or ride a bike or scooter with knee pads and/or a helmet. And to make it "corporate" we could tax those leagues that give every kid a trophy so their feelings won't be hurt and tax the schools that are afraid of offending some kid so they ban green and red and change song lyrics to winter at Christmas. We could also tax teachers who are afraid to harm a kid's psyche by grading them with a red pen or parents who think little Joshua or Britney shouldn't get a part time job while they're in high school or college or think it's too hard for them to shovel snow or mow lawns to earn a little money. I also propose an extra prince/princess tax on parents who sue schools for something a teacher said to their kids that hurt their widdle feelings and I'd double the tax if the kids are in high school.
When these "kids" grow up they will be a burden on society so if the government becoming your mommy and intruding in your personal decisions is what you want, let's have tax on wimp raising and get some real money in the Treasury.
Post of the day.
And to think that the NE states are the cradle of American liberties. What the hell happened to those people?
No one is saying that you can't eat or drink whatever the hell it is you want!!! NOT AT ALL!!!
Your right to choose is NOT being taken away by a SALES TAX!!!! You are all so hell bent on thinking that it's because the state doesn't want you to drink coke ..geez..
I'm not paranoid. What I am is tired of people who know better than I do what I should do with my life, and how they deserve to spend my money more than I do on what they determine to be higher priorities.
The government should not be in the business of punishing one group of consumers and helping another.
Again, it's about freedom. I don't eat or drink the stuff you're discussing, but I do want to live in a country where arbitrary uses of taxation don't become the rule.
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..
Specific foods do not cause obesity. Eating too many calories, regardless of the source (soda, chips, baked potatoes with sour cream, whatever), and exercising too little causes obesity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy
junk food is so easy to define.. high in saturated fats, high in sugar content..etc.
FDA can easily define what is a junk food.
You can't argue that potato chips are junk food, that a can of coke is junk food.. its unarguable...
Sure..there are items that are on that fine line.. but then those perhaps should be left alone..
draw a line..if a food falls over that line.. tax it..
But alas.. the actual tax proposed is NOT on all junk foods.. just sugary drinks.. which we all know that consuming them and in the quantities American's consume them in has lead to the obesity problem we have in this country.
My son ONLY get's 100% fruit juices and even then I give him half juice and half water. I wouldnt' be caught dead feeding my kids those sugary drinks.
"Real" nutritionists, e.g. those who have degrees in nutrition say there are no junk foods. That term was made up by the media. 100% fruit juice has as many calories as most sodas, and really very few vitamins, fewer than you might think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy
Um.. have you noticed that health care costs in this country are outrageous!!! Have you notice more and more kids are obese and coming down with TypeII diabetes????
This is way overexaggerated and is more prevalent in certain ethnic/social groups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy
NO.. I think that the dietary associations.. Dr's and licnese nutritionist who set guidlines of what is good and or bad for you should decide what is "junk food" and what isn't.
Science and medical instituations aimed at good health decide what is junk or isn't junk. We already HAVE guidliens for what is health food and not health food in place already..
now we're only talking about taxing it..
Just like science and health fields have deemed cigarattes bad for you!
AGAIN.. GOv't is not going to decide for you wether you will consume that soft drink.. go ahead.. drink it.. go ahead smoke that cig..
Weight watchers is not the final arbiter on this. They are in business to make money. See what I said above about nutritionists.
This is a horrible idea. While very few of us promote eating junk food, those who choose to do so should be allowed to do so without being punished with even more burdensome taxes. People use tax policy as a way to shape behavior: this tax, gas/carbon taxes, etc.
It's like limiting production of cars that are not Green. One of the reasons the Dems support the Big 3 Bailout (besides being in the pockets of the UAW and other unions) is that they can force the companies to make Green cars and produce fewer cars that are not fuel efficient.
Specific foods do not cause obesity. Eating too many calories, regardless of the source (soda, chips, baked potatoes with sour cream, whatever), and exercising too little causes obesity.
Yes.. I am aware of that.... and this tax may prevent people from purchasing too many junk foods because it costst MORE than reaching for that Apple that is NOT a junk food.
"Real" nutritionists, e.g. those who have degrees in nutrition say there are no junk foods. That term was made up by the media. 100% fruit juice has as many calories as most sodas, and really very few vitamins, fewer than you might think.
Yes.. real fruit juice has more calories..BUT you get more out of real fruit juice nutritionally than you do out of sugary drinks. I know about diet, nutrition fruit juices and all that.. it's my life being a juvenile diabetic. Even fruit juices I can't have very much of.. but it's much better to have 4 oz of fruit juice than 4 oz of coke any day... and any nutritionist would tell you that. No matter what label the press put on it.. it all started from the nutrtion community deeming it a non healthy food..
This is way overexaggerated and is more prevalent in certain ethnic/social groups.
LOL. that's a hoot. You obviously are not very well aware of health insurance issues.. maybe because you get it from your employer and do not see nor understand what and why a group coverage is raised every year and at what rate and why your groups coverage may have been raised. It has NOTHING to do with racial /ethnic lines!
Weight watchers is not the final arbiter on this. They are in business to make money. See what I said above about nutritionists.
Never said it was the final arbiter?? However, weight watchers goal is to help you account for the food you put in your mouth so that basically you stay within your calorie/fat allotment a day. They break down the points based on calories vs fat content. THe higher the fat content/calories.. the more points the food is given.. It's designed so that you CAN enjoy all your favorite foods including the junk ones, but in moderation. When you eat those things in moderation, however, you'lll be amazed at how little you are allowed.. the choice is either eat those potato chips and not eat much else the rest of the day and go hungry. And, btw.. that program along with other diet programs are based on NUTRITIONAL guidlines set forth by the NUTRITION industry... if ti wasn't.. it wouldnt' work
The danger of the nanny state is that its proponents won't be happy until everything they disapprove of is regulated and taxed out of existence.
The trouble I have with health and safety 'national security parents' is their disrespect for liberty and choice.
They can argue on and on about how what they are doing is good for your health and future well being, but it seems beyond their understanding that I have the right to choose, and badly in their eyes, products and lifestyles so long as it doesn't affect their property.
The proper solutions is not to ban or tax items that go against your beliefs, but to call for transparent and accessible information on all products.
If I go out of my way to buy extra leaded clothes,or sugar saturated fast food, it is my decision, unwise at it may be.
I have yet to hear how this tax takes away anyones choice..
is coca cola going to be removed from shelves now , so that the only thing left to purchase are non sugary drinks?
If you drink a coca cola.. are you breaking any laws?
NOOOOOOO... you still have a choice!!!
You people don't get that!! and it's quite hysterical how suddenly you feel you have no choices
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.
You are all so hell bent on thinking that it's because the state doesn't want you to drink coke ..geez.. 
