Philadelphia Becomes 1st Major American City with Soda Tax

a reply to: Metallicus
Here is a thought. When I was young, all our soda came in bottles. Returnable bottles. If you wanted to have a coke, you bought the coke for a dime and paid a nickle more to 'rent' the bottle. When you returned the bottle, you got your refund of a nickle. Under this system, recycling was included in the exchange. Children who wanted their own coke had to not only come up with the dime but the nickle also.

Modern soda is not healthy. You know it, I know it and many adults know it. Children do not. Children are prey to the soda industry who listen to and watch soda commercials all day long. They are lulled into compliance with the idea that to have one is to be happy, to be accepted by the pretty girls. Constant merchandising to sucker more children into their addicted community. Just like the cigarette industry has for a hundred years. Hook'em young and they are yours for life.

Now the problem as I see it is that the big soda companies are well out of the reach of regulation for selling their crap to the public. All the studies and information available now on how harmful soda is cannot be curtailed by clamping down on the industry, so what to the 'do gooders do"? They try to curtail the wide spread disbursement of this unhealthy substance by clamping down on the public, rather than the corporations that supply it.

So, rather than going after the 'pimps, the 'drug pushers' they go after the victims. It is far to little and far to late. Bosh on this tax, and super bosh on the corporations and corporate pimps that push this off on our children.

a reply to: reldra

It actually can affect others. Once stupid # starts passing in one state, it can trigger stupid # to pass in other states. Stupid # is like that.

I don't understand why they taxed diet drinks though. Seems contradictory.

instant outrage ! I'm outraged !!!

ok, now that we have that out of the way, who cares ?

a reply to: Metallicus

Absolutely ridiculous, though no more ridiculous than an alcohol or tobacco tax. Though, it is less ridiculous than the sure-to-come tax on "e-juice."

I would have been more annoyed by it if it targeted only drinks sweetened with other-than laboratory chemicals, as some attempts have targeted only the more-healthy non-diet drinks.

I hope the tax revenue raised will be used to pay for diabetes treatments, this reducing the cost of health insurance for Philadelphians. Hahahaha...ahhh, that was a good one, self! As if this has anything to do with caring about people's health!

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to finish stuffing half of these banana boxes with 6-packs of Demon Sauce aka pop or soda for my contraband truck to Philly.

originally posted by: StoutBroux
a reply to: reldra

It actually can affect others. Once stupid # starts passing in one state, it can trigger stupid # to pass in other states. Stupid # is like that.

I don't understand why they taxed diet drinks though. Seems contradictory.

It does. but, I really don;t see a 'slippery slope' here, other cities have failed to pass such a tax.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Metallicus
Here is a thought. When I was young, all our soda came in bottles. Returnable bottles. If you wanted to have a coke, you bought the coke for a dime and paid a nickle more to 'rent' the bottle. When you returned the bottle, you got your refund of a nickle. Under this system, recycling was included in the exchange. Children who wanted their own coke had to not only come up with the dime but the nickle also.

Modern soda is not healthy. You know it, I know it and many adults know it. Children do not. Children are prey to the soda industry who listen to and watch soda commercials all day long. They are lulled into compliance with the idea that to have one is to be happy, to be accepted by the pretty girls. Constant merchandising to sucker more children into their addicted community. Just like the cigarette industry has for a hundred years. Hook'em young and they are yours for life.

Now the problem as I see it is that the big soda companies are well out of the reach of regulation for selling their crap to the public. All the studies and information available now on how harmful soda is cannot be curtailed by clamping down on the industry, so what to the 'do gooders do"? They try to curtail the wide spread disbursement of this unhealthy substance by clamping down on the public, rather than the corporations that supply it.

So, rather than going after the 'pimps, the 'drug pushers' they go after the victims. It is far to little and far to late. Bosh on this tax, and super bosh on the corporations and corporate pimps that push this off on our children.

I am not sure the city of Philadelphia can go after the beverage Industry, they are backed by heavy lobbies. They did what they could do.

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: reldra


Oh HELL! I forgot about vaping! See? There ya go!


Still want a bigger government that doesn't have enough time to deal with REAL issues but have plenty of time to involve themselves in your life?

No, never said that. The government is big enough and it seems to deal with...I think you are leading to either entitlements or gun laws...just fine at the size it is. I think the FDA has grabbed more power on the vaping issue than they ever should have. But I also found that it will not cost the small vape businesses as much as they thought.

I am not leading to anything other than those currently in the government to do their jobs and work on things like oh I don't know JOBS? How about bringing manufacturing jobs back into the country rather than low paying service industry jobs? I don't know about you, but it seems the focus of our current batch of government cronies focus on everything EXCEPT the things dragging this country to 3rd world status.

Who knows maybe it's just me.

I agree with you. They should spend more time on on what you say.

But in regard to the OP, that was a local government decision, backed by citizens. There was a vote after public comment. That is the exact way city governments should work.

And it was an issue that doesn't run afoul of federal laws.

I'll give you that. I still believe it is silly AND hard to believe people would actually vote for taxing something else....

They need revenue. It might have been less controversial than raising property or school taxes. One NEEDS a home. One does not NEED soda. If one wants soda, paying 1.5 cent per ounce that goes back to the community isn;t such a tragedy.

I would agree IF the money actually went back into the community. However I am very skeptical that would be the case.

How bout that! I concede to you!

Mark that on your calendar!

Lol, I am marking that. I am just wondering where else it would go? It appears to be a case of a city raising revenue for city needs. If I am unclear about this, or other cities have done nefarious things in regard to taxes like this, I may be wrong.

a reply to: UnBreakable

People will start drinking water with their meals instead if their normal flavored drink. The extra money they think they'll get through the tax will fall short.

That's the point. Employers save big money on insurance if they put their employees through some type of health regimen. The state will either lose money through medical aid and make up the difference in soda tax or raise the already increasing premiums of those who make bad choices, but are medically insured. Both avenues ensure a conflict of multiple interests.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: UnBreakable
I live in a suburb right outside of Philly, and most people say they will drive a few miles to do their food shopping in the 'burbs instead of Philly. The already expensive food stores and restaurants will suffer. People will start drinking water with their meals instead if their normal flavored drink. The extra money they think they'll get through the tax will fall short.

Either they don't get extra money or people drink water or both. Drinking water is a better choice. If you want to shop elsewhere, you have the choice.

So you think it is okay for Government to social engineer our choices?

That isn't their damn job.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
instant outrage ! I'm outraged !!!

ok, now that we have that out of the way, who cares ?

People that care about Government overreach and regressive taxes.

You know, the kind of taxes that started a revolution here?

a reply to: Metallicus

Basically, everyone who likes this tax hates the poor and is for bigger government.

Sounds like a leftist dream.

The thing that irritates me the most about "sin taxes" is that it actually just screws poor people who are way more likely to smoke, drink crap, consume alcohol etc. So liberals, you're directly taxing the weaker members in our society to feel good. It's not going to make anyone give up a bad habit.

This is how it works, people.

They make a tax on soda.

People stop drinking soda.

Then the government says, "we're at a deficit", because they aren't getting the tax on soda.

So they raise tax on something else!

Yay! Morons!

originally posted by: eisegesis
This essentially puts soda in the same category as cigarettes. Let our mandatory health insurance meet the demands of people's declining health instead of putting stress on those who consume in moderation.

Like others have said, what's next?

Cheese?

Yes!

Illegal Cheese

originally posted by: StoutBroux

Once stupid # starts passing in one state, it can trigger stupid # to pass in other states. Stupid # is like that.

The most profound thing I've read today.

Stupid # is a virus; however, this mutation may not be as aggressive as the Californian and New English strains we're used to.

Let's hope, anyway.

a reply to: Metallicus

It's just another way of getting additional tax dollars out of us taxpayers. I swear all our legislatures do is sit around thinking of ways to generate income for the state and federal government!! I wish the people had more say in taxing legislation and laws instead of always leaving it up to our ignorant legislatures! I can bet if they asked the public to vote whether they would approve of taxing soda, they would get a resounding 10-1, WTF, NO!!!

originally posted by: StoutBroux
a reply to: reldra

It actually can affect others. Once stupid # starts passing in one state, it can trigger stupid # to pass in other states. Stupid # is like that.

I don't understand why they taxed diet drinks though. Seems contradictory.

"Diet" drinks are thought to cause more weight gain than corn syrup or sugar drinks, because of the way the chemicals "trick" the body's insulin response. It's doubtful the legislators who have been obsessed with transferring an ever increasing portion of every-increasing taxes to the poor and middle classes for the past 35 years have any clue about that though.

Because they're stupid. And they don't care.

a reply to: Metallicus

How is any tax of this nature not considered double-sipping??? Heck, triple. Tax your pay, then add in sales tax, then add in another tax for whatever items someone decides "need" a tax.

This time, from city that ought to represent freedom, too......

a reply to: reldra

Have you really succumbed so far into partisan politics?

Some of the money raised by the tax will go to pay for city employee benefits and pet projects of council members and to build up municipal provide budget reserves.

Re-Read this.
PET PROJECTS!

This is PA. Home of taxing for one thing and using the money for everything but what we were told it would be used for.
Watch this closely because within two years the money is going to be used for everything under the sun BUT what it was originally intended.

Just another "slush fund" for city council.

This is absolutely NOT about funding Pre-K, or healthy living. Pre-K is funded in large part by the Feds. It's an extension of HeadStart.

Philly is just like Chicago with the political machine running over everyone. Backed by the power houses in Scranton.
The city just voted itself a 90 million pot of gold to play with and you folks are still debating it's right to do so.
REALLY???

The only ones who "win" are every dirty politician with their hands held out.
SMH