The soda tax proposed in DC

[Anonymous]

Am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea? Personally, I think that it might change behavior in this case. As I understand it the tax is for two purposes. First it is supposed to fund healthier school lunches for kids in DC. Second, it is supposed to change behavior.

First, I will say I don't drink soda any more. I gave it up a few years ago. I will still buy it when we have a party and I have soda in our fridge to serve to guests. My husband also uses it as a mixer from time to time. (I don't like the mixed drinks he makes with soda so I don't drink them) I try to eat healthy most of the time, but I still indulge in junk food from time to time. I would be willing to pay a tax on junk food too.

I guess if you drink it all the time, you might have a problem. I also understand that this tax is regressive and hits people who can least afford it. I know I sound a bit elitist here, but won't that change behavior a little bit? Isn't drinking less soda a good thing overall for everyone, regardless of economic status?

The best argument against the tax that I can see is that if it is successful then there will not be enough revenue from the tax to fund the program and then someone will be left holding the bag. I do believe that the plastic bag tax has changed behavior in DC.

Can someone give me the arguments against the soda tax other than the one above?

[Anonymous]

The soda tax is a great idea. I totally support it.

[Anonymous]

I drink soda and live on a limited income, but I support the tax. It will amount to much less than the difference of price between brands or between sale and regular prices. It's one thing for an adult to choose to drink junk, but a very different matter for schools to push it on kids to save a few cents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The soda tax is a great idea. I totally support it.

Yes. And those anti-tax radio ads are offensive.

[Anonymous]

How about a discount on low/no calorie alternatives. Sort of like the bag refund. The big beverage companies and most retailers sell both.

[Anonymous]

I drink a ton of soda, and am fine with the tax.

However, it's monumentally stupid to exclude diet sodas. They're just as bad for you as the full-sugar ones, maybe worse because of all the artificial sweeteners. I know lots of people (myself included) who made the switch from diet to regular and LOST weight. Diet soda is a bad, bad idea. I wouldn't be surprised if, a few decades from now, we look back on the diet beverage craze the same way we view those 1950s ads claiming that a certain brand of cigarette is good for your health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about a discount on low/no calorie alternatives. Sort of like the bag refund. The big beverage companies and most retailers sell both.

There's no actual discount on diet sodas, but my understanding is that they are exempt from the tax.

I'm a huge, huge soda drinker, and blame the 15 pounds I've recently gained on that habit. I completely support the tax.

[Anonymous]

Tax tax tax tax!!! Another reason to move out of DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tax tax tax tax!!! Another reason to move out of DC

If you want to go, go. There is no wall. I'd like to pay less tax, and I'd like to have congressional representation. But I like my house, I like my neighborhood, and I like my neighbors, so I'll stay. I may bitch about it now and then, but "I'm gonna move, I'm gonna move." gets tiresome.

[Anonymous]

Isn't one of the greatest tenets of our democracy and capitalism free will? Why should I now start paying higher taxes for things like soda so nanny state government can take care of me. I understand the ramifications and shouldnt be punished because of another person's misuse of the product. But since we want govt to control our healthcare we need it to tell us everything we can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't one of the greatest tenets of our democracy and capitalism free will? Why should I now start paying higher taxes for things like soda so nanny state government can take care of me. I understand the ramifications and shouldnt be punished because of another person's misuse of the product. But since we want govt to control our healthcare we need it to tell us everything we can do.

Seems to me that nanny government is quite suitable for a crybaby citizen.

[Anonymous]

DC is not a state. How come Tea Party doesn't protest THAT lack of democracy? I live and work here and will pay my nanny however much I want. (I'm pro tax so long as there is a carrot to go with the stick.)

[Anonymous]

Look, soda does not make you fat. Lots of soda or any other foods make you fat. So let's get real here.

Better to tax obesity itself.

What we should tax big is tobacco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:... What we should tax big is tobacco.

DC, as well as 14 states, increased tobacco taxes in 2009.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:... What we should tax big is tobacco.

DC, as well as 14 states, increased tobacco taxes in 2009.

They haven't gone far enough.