Taxafornia at it again

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Milk doesn't eat away your teeth and has a lot less sugar.



Fortified soda would be just as bad for you as unfortified soda is now. The calories come entirely from sugar, so the calories would be just as empty and the carbonation and various acids in soda would still do just as much damage to your teeth.

so are we taxing juice?

that's evil too. lots of empty calories. and acid. acid is bad.
 
Last edited:

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
PS

this tax does nothing to help pay for health costs of overweight people.

Its for making government bigger. By starting new programs. Creating more government workers, which will then work to get more tax dollars. This is the new war on drugs - 'War on sugar'
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
Too live in such a simple world... :awe:

Even disregarding the potential criminal aspects, the liability of turning away a patient because they're too fat is enormous. As such, no hospital will ever turn away a patient in need of emergency care, regardless of what the law says.

As for telling people what to do, that's the approach New York City is taking, and not only has it been wildly unpopular, it was also deemed illegal and stopped by the courts. Taxing sugary soda may seem unfair and arbitrary, but what is most fair is often not what is most practical, and taxing soda is as good a method as any to discourage its consumption and cover the costs of its use without flat-out banning the product.

So you pass a law making it legal and removing liability for doing so.

Its not a difficult concept.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
so are we taxing juice?

that's evil too. lots of empty calories. and acid. acid is bad.

Or diet soda. It has acid too.

Oh, and people who drink diet soda gain more weight than those drinking regular soda... so the government must be taxing diet soda too right?

:hmm:

In fact, "The bill exempts drinks that contain fewer than 25 calories"... oops.^_^
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I'm not really seeing the outage.

Obesity is a major health problem, sugar-sweetened drinks are major contributor to that problem, and in many cases, taxpayers are shouldering the healthcare costs that stem from obesity. Taxing the consumption of sugary drinks is certainly fairer than burdening everyone with the costs of such consumption, and it has precedent from other "sin" taxes like cigarettes, alcohol, gas guzzlers, etc.

Taxing everyone, even those not obese, IS burdening everyone.

You want obese people to shoulder their burden, then you tax/charge OBESE people.

Fern
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Well, let's see...

It seems that sody pop is perfectly inelastic... so... by taxing the consumptioner my government raises revenue without worrying about the net income taxation on the supplier. Heck, they can even induce the supplier to remain in Caly and maybe entice others into the tax free haven we're creating.... over time.

It seems the first best step to making business friendly decisions is to shift the tax burden away from business - especially when dealing with perfectly inelastic stuffs. Let em make gobbles of after tax income which then passes to the owners.... who then also pay tax on that...

Gotta love ole Moonbeam.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
I'm not really seeing the outage.

Obesity is a major health problem, sugar-sweetened drinks are major contributor to that problem, and in many cases, taxpayers are shouldering the healthcare costs that stem from obesity. Taxing the consumption of sugary drinks is certainly fairer than burdening everyone with the costs of such consumption, and it has precedent from other "sin" taxes like cigarettes, alcohol, gas guzzlers, etc.

If the "sin" taxes are being spend on health care related matters, I would not mind but they are being spend on general fund and never enough for politicians and their ilks.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
I predict that millions of California's fattest will flee this outrageous one cent an oz. sugary drink tax and the pressure that releases on the San Andreas fault will cause a massive earthquake with California itself rising in altitude above sea level thousands of feet and the rest of the North American continent sinking beneath the sea. I am just so upset over this I'm going to go punch myself in the face.


Nah.... think on it a bit more.

Folks who are chunky, puffy or displacement vehicles achieved their condition over a protracted period of time. They have no motivation to leave given they don't care about no tax on their sody pop IF that is their bridge of choice. They are Calyfornians for life cuz they apply the same mindset to Calyfornia as they do to their sody.

QED plays an important role in keeping these folks from falling into the abyss and beyond given their energy is dissipated into my earth and it ain't no fault of their own... we all own San Andrea's fault.

The San Andreas is simply a means toward urban renewal and it is unaffected by the absence or presence of the potential energy possessed by the folks who favor designed obsolescence over the healthy and more svelt... (see avatar) among us.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
It's funny people are complaining about a soda tax when many states tax food, mainly southern states.
California DOES NOT TAX FOOD.
Soda is empty calories, and should be an occasional treat, and I am fine with it being taxed.
You morons should be complaining about your stupid state taxing the food you need to eat to survive, not a soda tax.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1230
 

RFE

Member
Dec 15, 2007
71
0
61
Instead of taxing sodas, the corn subsidies that contribute to the use of corn sugar a.k.a. high fructose corn syrup as a sweetener should be ended.

Sugar is harmful is consumed in high amounts but not as harmful as hfcs.

This should be an important component in this conversation, yet is greatly overlooked by the dishonest and/or ignorant clowns running the various government entities.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
It's funny people are complaining about a soda tax when many states tax food, mainly southern states.
California DOES NOT TAX FOOD.
Soda is empty calories, and should be an occasional treat, and I am fine with it being taxed.
You morons should be complaining about your stupid state taxing the food you need to eat to survive, not a soda tax.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1230

from your own link. most states don't tax food.

If someone is an occasional user of soda why should they be punished? Why should they pay for someone else not being able to control what they eat or drink?


You'll probably throw out some bullshit excuse about health care.

easy fix. If your fat, you pay more for healthcare.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
from your own link. most states don't tax food.

If someone is an occasional user of soda why should they be punished? Why should they pay for someone else not being able to control what they eat or drink?


You'll probably throw out some bullshit excuse about health care.

easy fix. If your fat, you pay more for healthcare.

He said 'many' and you say 'most'... anyhow....

Look a bit further into this...

California ought to find creative ways to raise revenue (for what ever reason they need the revenue for) and they propose a method that avoids a monetary impact on the non consumer. Sounds good to me.

Also it is a bit like a VAT and everyone loves a VAT versus an Income taxation scenario.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,297
6,355
126
from your own link. most states don't tax food.

If someone is an occasional user of soda why should they be punished? Why should they pay for someone else not being able to control what they eat or drink?


You'll probably throw out some bullshit excuse about health care.

easy fix. If your fat, you pay more for healthcare.

You have this all wrong. If somebody is an occasional soda user why shouldn't thy pay the tax? They are paying the tax occasionally not any tax for those who can't control themselves. If you don't want to pay the tax don't buy soda. You simply don't want to be an adult who accepts the fact that society can legally impose a sin tax. Perfectly legal. Repeat that over and over in your mind. Your attitude of charging the fat more for healthcare is equally immature. They already pay more if they are fat and try to buy healthcare themselves on the market and will probably be refused anyway. So they pay more because they copay more and they don't live healthy lives so they pay in tons of ways. But healthcare for those who can get it is equalized as a collective risk so that everybody can buy into it. It is created intentionally with the idea that those who aren't sick support those who are, and visa versa when those roles reverse.

Let go of the vine and start thinking.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
You have this all wrong. If somebody is an occasional soda user why shouldn't thy pay the tax? They are paying the tax occasionally not any tax for those who can't control themselves. If you don't want to pay the tax don't buy soda. You simply don't want to be an adult who accepts the fact that society can legally impose a sin tax. Perfectly legal. Repeat that over and over in your mind. Your attitude of charging the fat more for healthcare is equally immature. They already pay more if they are fat and try to buy healthcare themselves on the market and will probably be refused anyway. So they pay more because they copay more and they don't live healthy lives so they pay in tons of ways. But healthcare for those who can get it is equalized as a collective risk so that everybody can buy into it. It is created intentionally with the idea that those who aren't sick support those who are, and visa versa when those roles reverse.

Let go of the vine and start thinking.

I think you need to start thinking your stuck on something.

There is nothing immature for charging fat people more for insurance. Its all about risk/reward.

Futhermore, what sin is committed by soda? The only external costs are those forced upon to others by government. If you eliminate those, then there is no sin. If you drink too much soda, you might get fat. That has and should not have an impact on anyone else.

Risk must get priced into insurance. Otherwise there will be too much consumption by the slackers of society.

PS 'sin' is in the eye of the beholder.
 

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,322
14
81
There is nothing immature for charging fat people more for insurance. Its all about risk/reward.

...

Risk must get priced into insurance. Otherwise there will be too much consumption by the slackers of society.

As has been mentioned multiple times in this thread, fat people are already charged more for insurance.

Please try to keep up.
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
"Being fat isn't always the fault of soda, so we can't tax soda, that would be unfair! There are other ways to get fat!"

"Being poor is always the fault of laziness, so just take away health care for poor people so we don't have to help fellow humans live! If they deserved basic health care they wouldn't be poor!"

Hurray for internal inconsistency in favor of selfishness and greed.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
As has been mentioned multiple times in this thread, fat people are already charged more for insurance.

Please try to keep up.

It was mentioned it was only for people that purchase polices individually.

It should be expanded to all heath insurance policies.


I'm sorry you are too slow to get that.


PS.

If fat people are being charged more for insurance. Then we don't need this tax do we?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,297
6,355
126
m: I think you need to start thinking your stuck on something.

There is nothing immature for charging fat people more for insurance. Its all about risk/reward.

M: Charging fat people more is already built into the system and to the extent that fat people who lose insurance can't get it back again. A strictly risk reward insurance system means no insurance company will insure risk at any level many low income people will be able to afford, while at the same time, they can't be turned away from emergency care at hospitals at public expense. So you get cheaper health care but pay it back in taxes and an elevated level.

m: Futhermore, what sin is committed by soda?

M: Soda doesn't commit sin. Those who ruin their health by drinking it do. The body is God's temple. Purity of body is a conservative moral imperative.

m: The only external costs are those forced upon to others by government. If you eliminate those, then there is no sin. If you drink too much soda, you might get fat. That has and should not have an impact on anyone else.

M: Using too much sugar is just like drinking too much alcohol so alcohol is taxed. Too much is the quantity that makes you fat. Want to drink in moderation and commit no sin, you still have to pay the tax for the privilege of doing what teetotalers don't. The greater the self control the less the risk and the greater the reward.

m: Risk must get priced into insurance. Otherwise there will be too much consumption by the slackers of society.

M: By the time too much consumption has taken place it's already become a preexisting insurable condition, the cost of which is passed on to the non-slackers in the form of taxes all of them must pay, not just those who take advantage and risk whether they can successfully manage their desires to indulge in sin. In this way the cost of dangerous substances is increased and the most on slackers, as you call them, while the cost of insurance and the elimination of health care waste via emergency room expense, is reduced by the wider availability of affordable health care.

And don't forget that the legislature elected by the people says what sin is as long as the courts don't disagree. Sin tax is a reality you will have to live with regardless of your opinion as to what sin really is. Sin tax is a cost shifting mechanism that both deters via its expense and transfers the burden imposed by sinners back to them. It rewards non-indulgers directly because they don't pay sin tax while reducing their other tax burden by decreasing wasteful medical practices that occur when people don't have medical insurance by providing extra revenue with which society can subsidize the cost of health insurance and create increase availability to those who can't afford it otherwise.
These are really just liberal solutions to the problems conservatives have created in society by inflating their own egos, running down and disparaging the week and nonconforming, by telling them they are worthless slackers from the time they are children. Self destructive life styles are just these folks way of getting even by destroying themselves and taking others with them. We have taught them they are worthless enough to want to do this by our selfishness and indifference to their pain because we are in just such pain ourselves and will not see it. Disdain for the weak is just another form of self destruction. But you will never see or understand because you do not want to and the complexity of thought and the introspective clarity to do so is prevented by your defective inability to reason. Have a great day.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,297
6,355
126
"Being fat isn't always the fault of soda, so we can't tax soda, that would be unfair! There are other ways to get fat!"

"Being poor is always the fault of laziness, so just take away health care for poor people so we don't have to help fellow humans live! If they deserved basic health care they wouldn't be poor!"

Hurray for internal inconsistency in favor of selfishness and greed.

Oh there are lots of ways to not think like you do. Being fat is sometime the fault of genes. We should cull them from the gene pool by forced sterilization just as we should sterilize folk who exhibit low aptitude for comprehension like you. This is fair because your lack of mental acuity is the result of lazy thinking and nothing but a self affliction you visit here on this forum. But please do us the favor of shooting yourself because you're not worth the price of a publically funded bullet. Or you could maybe try the Bible. You will be judged by how you judge the least. You realize, I hope, that it is really you who are the least among us. So maybe I shouldn't say these things except you probably want to be treated as you treat others, no? But fear not since you have been forgiven. Tell that to the damaged child you have buried within you. It will hurt but you can awaken. I hope you do.

And don't waste your time trying to pay me for this message. I have already paid for you. I've already felt the pain you're in.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |