May 21, 200917 yr This is the part I disagree with. If they're taxing sodas, it should be all sodas. There are no "healthy" sodas. I don't care if the artificial sweetners are apparently less fattening and healthier for you (I disagree but that's another thread). I also think that beyond the sugar, sodas are just toxic. Agreed. It's a "use tax". I am in agreement but........ If it is considered a luxury, food stamps should not be allowed to buy these products. I'm not picking on your stance, I agree with it. You just opened a door for me to vent.
May 21, 200917 yr Man, there is some scary stuff in this thread to the libertarian in me. People making decisions for me as to what is a necessity, what is toxic to me, what I should be consuming and using taxes to control and regulate behavior. The fact that there are several people thinking that way is pretty frightening. It's downright scary is what it is....
May 21, 200917 yr Man, there is some scary stuff in this thread to the libertarian in me. People making decisions for me as to what is a necessity, what is toxic to me, what I should be consuming and using taxes to control and regulate behavior. The fact that there are several people thinking that way is pretty frightening. Nobody is making decisions on what you should be consuming. You still get to make that decision, it will just cost more, which might deter you. Might even make you healthier. Does the airline dictate that I sit in coach? I don't think so, if I choose to pay the extra money I can go "first class". Does anyone dictate that I drive a 2001 Camry - no, I could drive a 2009 Prius, if I want to pay the extra money. Kool Aid is way cheaper than any soda and while both are packed with sugar you at least avoid the cafeine (sp)
May 21, 200917 yr Nobody is making decisions on what you should be consuming. You still get to make that decision, it will just cost more, which might deter you. Might even make you healthier. Does the airline dictate that I sit in coach? I don't think so, if I choose to pay the extra money I can go "first class". Does anyone dictate that I drive a 2001 Camry - no, I could drive a 2009 Prius, if I want to pay the extra money. Kool Aid is way cheaper than any soda and while both are packed with sugar you at least avoid the cafeine (sp) Nice try. But if I can no longer afford certain items because of the tax, the govt is most definitely making decisions for me. You and Obama may be the most well intentioned people in the world, but I do not need you to force me to be healthy or try through the use of taxation to be healthy. I wouldn't dare tell you how you should live your life, so please don't butt into mine. And there is kind of a "little" difference between the govt using taxation to modify behavior than what an airline charges to sit on a plane.
May 21, 200917 yr Man, there is some scary stuff in this thread to the libertarian in me. People making decisions for me as to what is a necessity, what is toxic to me, what I should be consuming and using taxes to control and regulate behavior. The fact that there are several people thinking that way is pretty frightening. All I'm saying is that if you want it, you will buy it regardless of the taxes. It's not a life or death necessity. If you want to eat Twinkies, chips and sodas, have at it. You'll at least be making a great contribution to healthcare for all if you do. I find it funny that people want a flat tax, but not a tax on items that you can either choose to buy or not. Just like the increased cigarrette taxes, you either choose to pay them or not. It's still your choice to buy the product.
May 21, 200917 yr I find it funny that people want a flat tax, but not a tax on items that you can either choose to buy or not. Perhaps you understand this, but in general, most proposals of a flat tax are either a sales tax on all items with no income tax, or an income tax with no consumption taxes.
May 21, 200917 yr All I'm saying is that if you want it, you will buy it regardless of the taxes. It's not a life or death necessity. If you want to eat Twinkies, chips and sodas, have at it. You'll at least be making a great contribution to healthcare for all if you do. Just like the increased cigarrette taxes, you either choose to pay them or not. It's still your choice to buy the product. Would you be in favor of the government banning all soft drinks and cigarettes? I'm not implying that your statements have given this opinion, just asking.
May 21, 200917 yr Perhaps you understand this, but in general, most proposals of a flat tax are either a sales tax on all items with no income tax, or an income tax with no consumption taxes. No...thanks for clearing it up. I've read flat tax propopal articles, but since I get lost somewhere about the 2nd paragraph of most, I can't say I understand any of it in any great depth. But, in the current system, I still don't understand why it's unfair to pay taxes on things that one CHOOSES to buy that aren't necessities. I guess it's because I consider chips, sodas, etc, to be luxury items and not "food stuffs".
May 21, 200917 yr Would you be in favor of the government banning all soft drinks and cigarettes? I'm not implying that your statements have given this opinion, just asking. No. I'm fine with the products being available. I'm fine with people having the right to choose to purchase them. No problems at all with any of that.
May 22, 200917 yr No...thanks for clearing it up. I've read flat tax propopal articles, but since I get lost somewhere about the 2nd paragraph of most, I can't say I understand any of it in any great depth. But, in the current system, I still don't understand why it's unfair to pay taxes on things that one CHOOSES to buy that aren't necessities. I guess it's because I consider chips, sodas, etc, to be luxury items and not "food stuffs". So who decides what constitutes a necessity? Do we just tax sodas with sugar in them or do we tax anything with sugar in it? Should we increase taxes on sugar itself? What about other sweetners? Should we tax maple syrup, honey, high fructose corn syrup? Where is the line? Since I've gone on my diet one of my favorie snack foods is sliced apple with a bit of peanut butter. It's not a neccesity, it's a luxury. Should my PB be taxed at a higher rate?
May 22, 200917 yr Author Man, there is some scary stuff in this thread to the libertarian in me. People making decisions for me as to what is a necessity, what is toxic to me, what I should be consuming and using taxes to control and regulate behavior. The fact that there are several people thinking that way is pretty frightening. Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Obama, and ALL the democrats no what is good for us and what is not. The way of government has worked so well in the places they control, Michigan, California,........................
May 22, 200917 yr I feel so much better that the libs know what is best for me. What happened to not raising taxes?
May 22, 200917 yr Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Obama, and ALL the democrats no what is good for us and what is not. The way of government has worked so well in the places they control, Michigan, California,........................ 95% of Americans will be getting a "Tax Cut". Only 5% of Americans drink those terrible sodas and by George, those rich pop guzzlers are going to pay!!!:rolleyes: If you people can't see that this opens the door even wider for the government to get to the bottom of your pockets, you are blindly following this bunch over a cliff! That's my opinion...Make it yours.
May 22, 200917 yr 95% of Americans will be getting a "Tax Cut". Only 5% of Americans drink those terrible sodas and by George, those rich pop guzzlers are going to pay!!!:rolleyes: If you people can't see that this opens the door even wider for the government to get to the bottom of your pockets, you are blindly following this bunch over a cliff! That's my opinion...Make it yours. :clap::thumb::clap: Preach on!
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.