Soda Tax

Sektor

Sektor

    • 1,136
    Posts
    8
    Years
    The World Health Organization (more on them later) is backing a huge soda tax, which I will now refer as the Sugar Tax (more on this later). The Sugar Tax is their way of attempting to combat global obesity by forcing as much as a 50% tax on not only soft drinks, but any sweetened beverage item. This means that soda pop, lemonade, sports drinks, energy drinks, iced coffees, iced teas, and more will receive this tax should this idea successfully gain traction. You may find the article here.

    What is interesting to me is that they do not list off 'sugar free' drink specifics. I would also like to know the implementation on non-sweetened drinks like regular unsweetened iced tea or other like items. I doubt it's going to vary much and as such, some items and beverages will land themselves within the criteria of the WHO without being a valid candidate for this tax proposal. Further more, the sugary drinks that are offered through global chains such as Starbucks, McDonald's and other fast food restaurants may or may not receive this tax. And what of fountain drinks that are already of exorbitantly priced in places such as amusement parks?

    They also make no mention whatsoever of juice drinks or 100% juice drinks, which can have just as much sugar (sugar is sugar according to your liver) as a can of soda! The tax proposed will especially affect the lower income neighborhoods according to the study. Racism? (that was sarcasm ... please don't hit me)

    Your thoughts on this? Outrageous? Valid? Good idea? Bad idea? Will it garner enough attention to be discussed?
     
    well good thing I switched from drinking soda all the time to drinking alcohol all the time lol

    But really if the goal of this is to combat obesity, idk, I think there'd be better ways to deal with it rather than taxation. Though at the same time if you can't afford to constantly buy soda then maybe it'll help? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Further more, the sugary drinks that are offered through global chains such as Starbucks, McDonald's and other fast food restaurants may or may not receive this tax.
    Click to expand...
    Though this kind of doesn't help. People will just keep getting soda through these places instead of the stores (and a lot of Americans already go to fast food restaurants and Starbucks). Not like corporations not having to deal with taxes is anything new I'd think.

    Racism? (that was sarcasm ... please don't hit me)
    Click to expand...
    real talk, somebody, somewhere on the internet, will somehow manage to bring this into the conversation
     
    Nah said:
    real talk, somebody, somewhere on the internet, will somehow manage to bring this into the conversation
    Click to expand...
    Hello, I'm from the internet.

    The problem with a soda tax/sugar tax is the same problem with any kind of sales tax: it's a regressive. People with the least amount of money have to spend more of their money to get by (as opposed to people who are rich and can hoard their money) so they get hit with more of the burden for this kind of tax. And since (in European dominant countries) people of color are often disproportionately at the lower end of the economic spectrum a tax like this does hit them harder. So in that sense you could argue it was racist to a degree.

    The goal of the tax is laudable, but the implementation isn't. A better option would be increased health education in school, better availability of doctors and health workers to everyday people, and more restrictions on the sale of drinks like this (for instance, not allowing children under a certain age to buy them or not allowing them to be sold within a certain distance of schools).
     
    If the point is health, why dont they retract the sugar tax (not the Sugar Tax this is being called) that caused the use of even unhealthier artificial sweeteners/sugar substitutions?

    I dont think this will work, similar to how taxing drugs or cigarettes wont work. While soda is not particularly addictive, if one has obesity, they often have an eating disorder. Or they overeat/binge eat wayyyyy too much, which is addictive in of itself as a habit. Meaning if they want soda, they wont stop buying soda.

    According to this, soda is elastic, so it should decrease consumption.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804646/

    So it will probably decrease consumption of soda, but I would say it does not fight obesity.
     
    BadSheep said:
    If the point is health, why dont they retract the sugar tax (not the Sugar Tax this is being called) that caused the use of even unhealthier artificial sweeteners/sugar substitutions?

    I dont think this will work, similar to how taxing drugs or cigarettes wont work. While soda is not particularly addictive, if one has obesity, they often have an eating disorder. Or they overeat/binge eat wayyyyy too much, which is addictive in of itself as a habit. Meaning if they want soda, they wont stop buying soda.

    According to this, soda is elastic, so it should decrease consumption.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804646/

    So it will probably decrease consumption of soda, but I would say it does not fight obesity.
    Click to expand...

    There have been studies suggesting that sugar is as addictive as cocaine or nicotine. It's just that sugar isn't as (immediately) harmful to you.

    And I think all the subsidies given to corn (high fructose corn syrup) is another thing we could afford to stop doing.
     
    Esper said:
    There have been studies suggesting that sugar is as addictive as cocaine or nicotine. It's just that sugar isn't as (immediately) harmful to you.

    And I think all the subsidies given to corn (high fructose corn syrup) is another thing we could afford to stop doing.
    Click to expand...

    Interesting... so if sugar is that addictive, but the price for sugar is elastic, then the tax may prevent being overweight, but not obesity.

    Im not a fan of subsidies. I dont know too much about corn or farm subsidies other than they began in the New Deal. How expansive is the subsidization today?
     
    BadSheep said:
    Interesting... so if sugar is that addictive, but the price for sugar is elastic, then the tax may prevent being overweight, but not obesity.

    Im not a fan of subsidies. I dont know too much about corn or farm subsidies other than they began in the New Deal. How expansive is the subsidization today?
    Click to expand...

    It's several billion dollars each year from what I can tell. I'm not against that idea generally, but all other foods that get subsidies are just a small fraction of that amount. There are much healthier foods out there that deserve subsidies more.
     
    I'd also like to point out that I weigh about 200 and being 6'3" I'm not at all fat, nor overweight. This would also affect me and others like me. Sugar is a cause for obesity but not the sole cause. Sugars in drinks like orange juice and apple juice are also a cause for concern, and this does not address the types of drinks. A glass of OJ or grape juice can have about as much sugar as a can of soda if not more. Sugar is the issue, not the soda itself which is evident by the attack on 'sweetened' drinks. It'll also cause problems in the states because I know the soda tax in California applies to Sparkling and mineral water. Water.
     
    IMO nobody has any business buying sodas if they can't afford it. Nutritionally speaking, they're a really expensive waste of money. Buy a month's supply of carrots instead of 12-pack of soda cans.
     
    Biogoji said:
    There's better ways to combat obesity then taxing people. If people wanna drink soda than they should be able to without getting a tax slapped onto it.
    Click to expand...
    But the idea is to stop people from drinking so much soda. The only real ways to do that are to 1) make it more expensive, 2) ban it completely, 3) force it to change how much sugar is put in it, or 4) educate people about the health effects.
     
    I also find it interesting that the country with the highest obesity rate (I believe it is the US) also has EXTREMELY expensive healthcare. You would think people would eat healthier wanting to save money. I believe the average is $8,000 a year for healthcare or something in the US. That sucks up 40% of people's income I believe, and if you have a major health issue... well, to say the least- its rough.

    Does the US or any country with an obesity issue have national standards for health? Not required by law, but a sort of cultural thing or public school deal? Like the Presidential Fitness stuff we do.

    Could something like this help with obesity?
     
    BadSheep said:
    I also find it interesting that the country with the highest obesity rate (I believe it is the US) also has EXTREMELY expensive healthcare. You would think people would eat healthier wanting to save money. I believe the average is $8,000 a year for healthcare or something in the US. That sucks up 40% of people's income I believe, and if you have a major health issue... well, to say the least- its rough.

    Does the US or any country with an obesity issue have national standards for health? Not required by law, but a sort of cultural thing or public school deal? Like the Presidential Fitness stuff we do.

    Could something like this help with obesity?
    Click to expand...

    Well you don't really need national standards since there are plenty of healthcare standards that describe normal or healthy human body, for example, not being over 30 BMI for obesity.
     
    Kanzler said:
    Well you don't really need national standards since there are plenty of healthcare standards that describe normal or healthy human body, for example, not being over 30 BMI for obesity.
    Click to expand...

    Then what would motivate large masses of people to remain or go below the standard for obesity?
     
    BadSheep said:
    Then what would motivate large masses of people to remain or go below the standard for obesity?
    Click to expand...

    What motivates large masses of people to become obese and not keep their weight in check? Not caring enough to make a difference, and lots of cheap food. Culture and taxes, really.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top