Comments on: The Coming Soda Tax

By: ktward

ktward — Sat, 23 May 2009 18:10:42 +0000

Now hold on a sec, midcon, (and here comes your payback for thwarting my barker13 efforts …Seriously though, taxation and regulation are two very different instruments: I’m all for both taxing and regulating alcohol and tobacco and gambling (as already exists) … but regulating sugary (HFCS specifically) drinks? Not so much. Go ahead and tax ‘em, but we don’t need regs there. I have my own opinion, of course, but scientifically the jury’s still out and it comes a little too close to Big Brother for my comfort.Hey, I likes me my gummy bears. Tax ‘em? Sure, if that helps in a larger, societal sense. But regulate ‘em? Over my dead body.

By: midcon

midcon — Sat, 23 May 2009 17:51:06 +0000

Yeah, David, ktward is on the money here. In the grand scheme of things, charging more for soda to pay for health care seems to be a non-negative (a positive) to me. And considering the excesses in many areas of our society is a little regulation such a bad thing? Lot’s of folks whose investments and homes are worth a lot less now might just be in the mood for a little regulation.

By: ModerateGal

ModerateGal — Sat, 23 May 2009 17:44:07 +0000

I don’t get the disconnect here. I keep seeing posts about how fatties should pay more for their bad choices when it comes to health care, but now that this proposal arises, there is complaining about it. That makes no sense to me.

By: ktward

ktward — Sat, 23 May 2009 16:38:34 +0000

Pardon me, but this is petty stuff in light of current circumstances.

Go ahead. Raise taxes on alcohol (which I drink regularly), sugary drinks (which I don't drink), tobacco (nope), gambling (nope) and whatever else is in no way linked to our good health or survival. We can then CHOOSE if we wish to continue imbibing.

Bottom line, we have to pay for the excesses of Bush admin and Obama's agenda somehow, better this s**t than raising taxes that are completely beyond my control.

Reality rules: gone are the days when petty, life-choice taxes are worthy of overt, partisan scrutiny. Get a grip.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Sat, 23 May 2009 14:28:09 +0000

Tenek: You wouldn’t be “lowering” your tax bill. You would be keeping your tax bill from rising higher.Having said that, I haven’t seen any good proposals from my fellow conservatives as to how they would lower taxes with entitlements soaring. I won’t believe they’re serious until they explain what they plan to do about the rising cost of Medicare, for example.

By: Churl

Churl — Sat, 23 May 2009 13:49:59 +0000

Tenek, yes, the proposal does give you the opportunity to avoid taxes by giving up something that you have previously enjoyed.”Always look on the bright side of life”

By: dn6939a

dn6939a — Sat, 23 May 2009 11:34:45 +0000

It started with sugar tax, then a stamp tax, then a tea tax… once again the government wants to to find ways to tax us to the breaking point.

By: Dr. Tesla

Dr. Tesla — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:27:34 +0000

Did David Frum green light this column? I thought the New Majority was all about higher taxes.

By: Bulldoglover100

Bulldoglover100 — Fri, 22 May 2009 18:17:38 +0000

All that matters to some is the ability to whine. Lower the tax bill??? Heaven forbid, then Obama gets credit…instead lets scream NO NO NO even if it is a good thing! Thats the ticket to the wilderness! All Aboard! The Stupid Express is leaving reality!

By: Tenek

Tenek — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:11:15 +0000

Slippery slope notwithstanding, it does give you the opportunity to lower your own tax bill. *shrug*