NO SUGARY DRINK TAX!!!!

As opposed to last year, I've been fairly silent about my opposition to the Sugary Drink Tax or "Soda Tax" proposed my Nutter. Among friends and various online conversations, I've been the complete obvious, with my tirades going on for no less than 5 minutes at any given time going through the laundry list of reasons of just why this tax proposal is, in a word, stupid.

Once again, various writers are praising the proposal, especially since the idea is to fund schools with the revenue.

At the same time, these people don't seem to understand just why this tax isn't going to help squat.

This Tax ISN'T About Your Health!

I pointed this out more times than I can remember last year, but lets get this taken care of: The City of Philadelphia doesn't care about your health in relation to soda. None. Nada. Zip. Soda, in and of itself, isn't that bad for you. The reason it can cause problems is if you drink too much of it. In fact, even if you take that out of the equation, the main problem with soda today compared to 20 years ago is high-fructose corn syrup. That stuff? No, it isn't that good for you. If the soda companies went back to sugar (and with some sodas, that is the case), it wouldn't be that much of an issue.

The said, this still isn't about your health! Why? Because this tax would affect EVERYTHING with sugar in it. That means Vitamin Water, Gatorade... even Apple and Orange Juice would be taxed! APPLE JUICE! You're saying that Apple Juice is just as bad for you as soda? Really? Did I miss a memo or something?

This Tax isn't on You, the Consumer!

Another thing is, while I may hate this tax with a passion, it isn't on me. No, not at all. Instead, it taxes the STORE that sells it! I talked to a few people about that fact, and the general reaction was, "Wouldn't the stores just pass that onto the consumers?" No, I doubt they would. Soda for a lot of stores is one of their main sellers, and the cost of everything else in the store itself could go up! Certain items could get marked-up to help off-set the cost because no one wants to raise the cost of it on the consumer and lose more money.

Where does it End?!

You currently have places banning Chocolate Milk in schools, banning Happy Meal toys, and  essentially denying you personal responsibility! I'm sick of it! I'm sick of all these idiots thinking they know what's best for me! In school, the best way for me to drink milk was chocolate milk, and dang it, I was one of the fastest kids in my school! I went to McDonald's once a week for a Kids Meal, and you know what? I was one of the healthiest kids in my class!

With the sugary drink tax, shouldn't we just be more responsible? Shouldn't parents be able to say "NO!" Shouldn't ADULTS be treated like ADULTS?

The reason al lthe Nanny State crap bothers me is that it isn't really doing much to help ANYONE! It comes off as "feel-good politics" that don't solve anything at all! "I'm glad that little Johnny can't get his Happy Meal toys, now he doesn't want to go anymore! But he still sits on the couch all day just watching TV and playing video games."

To some degree, its sickening that I'm so upset over this! Someone once said people should be this mad about our property taxes going up, and I told them, "YES! We should! Our roads and bridges are great and the tax increase will keep them that way!" With this, its just the start. It's 2cents an ounce now (which is insanely high to begin with!), and then its just going to go up!

What happens when the city needs more cash? It can't raise the sales tax, it can't keep raising property taxes. Heaven forbid they raise the City Wage Tax 1% next year, raising it to $1 per $20k! No! Instead, they'll raise the soda tax another penny! "Crap, we need more money! We miss-managed funds and over-paid people on our pension program, and damn it, we still want DROP so we can retire for a day! RAISE THE SODA TAX!"

Soon they'll go for someone else in the name of "health"! Soon we'll have a cheese stake tax, a Tastykake tax, a fast food tax!

Meanwhile, they don't tax bottled water which hurts the environment, it's BAD FOR YOU, and it means less water fountains! They don't stop the cyclist rampaging through traffic who runs red lights or on the sidewalk (which is a $10 Ticket-able offense!) They don't propose ways of making the city feasibly BETTER with a tax!

Wait, no, they did. Someone said bars should be open later (until 3AM) and use the extra hour to fund schools. That could work. I'm still in favor of raising the fine for riding on the sidewalk!

This Tax Doesn't Solve ANYTHING!

Here's something I didn't consider last time, but I think it needs to be realized: The soda tax isn't entirely bad. Its not. I may hate it, I may despise it, and really, I think its just trying to get another buck out of the poor. Then again, there's a reason for that last part.

Most people who support this don't drink soda, juice, or anything like that. Instead, they drink water. Mostly bottled water. Why? Because they live in places where there's a lot more choices on a whole. They cook well-balanced meals and drink water. They have easy access to good food and are surrounded by people who are eating healthy as well. The idea of having a soda is rare, and really counts as an occasional treat for them.

On the other side are the people who oppose the tax and don't have access to healthy foods.

Go ahead. Ask around your office. Ask people on the street. You'll see what I mean. People with access to healthy food choices drink water, while people who live in poor sections have no real alternative but soda and juice and aren't being told anything else.

As much as this is an issue about choice, about personal responsibility... its also about culture and education.

In a large majority of our public schools, there is no real food education. There is no concept that what you put into your body really impacts you. At the same time, even if you do crave decent fruits and vegetables, where will you go? For me, it isn't easy. There are some supermarkets around me (3 really good ones, thankfully!), but they require a lot of planning to go and take about 30 minutes to get to by foot, bus, or even the train. There are a lot of people in the same situation. The corner store? The healthiest thing there are week-old vegetables.

A lot of people live in these "food deserts", and more needs to be done about it. Not only that, but we need to do more to educate children and teenagers in school about healthy eating and providing better and healthier school lunches that they'll eat! It can be done cheaply, and it'll start teaching kids to eat better so that soda doesn't look as good.

If you support the tax, that's fine. I hate the fact that people who oppose it, much like myself, are constantly lumped into the same pile of people who work for the soda industry and we seemingly have no mind of our own. I've drunk soda for years, and right now I'm trying to go more towards juice and water. The main issue? Price.

If you support the tax, realize that if you do support it for the health of the city that it isn't that simple. You need to start writing people in City Council to start looking for a way to fund more supermarkets and healthy eating courses. You know what? If Nutter used the tax money for that... I wouldn't mind. Much. I'd still complain, but hey, at least its going to something decent.

Anti-Soda Tax Rally Today

This just came in:

RALLY SET TO OPPOSE BEVERAGE TAX

Hundreds to gather at City Hall to oppose what would be nation’s highest beverage tax

WHAT: “Philly Jobs. Not Taxes” Coalition members will hold a rally against the city’s unprecedented 2-cents-per-ounce tax proposal on sugary drinks. The growing coalition is composed of concerned union workers, businesses, community organizations and individuals that strongly oppose the beverage tax. The coalition believes the tax unfairly burdens consumers, targets one component of the business community and is illegal under State law. The tax would more than double the cost of some beverages and put Philadelphia jobs at risk.

WHO: Danny Grace, Teamsters Local Union 830

Rushdi Mohamed, Owner, Cousin’s Market, North Philadelphia

Philly Jobs. Not Taxes Coalition members

Pete Ciarrocchi, President of Chickie’s & Pete’s and Co-Chairman of Philly Jobs. Not Taxes. (Available for morning interviews only.)

WHEN: Wednesday, March 24

12:00 PM

WHERE: Dilworth Plaza

City Hall (Northwest side)

SOURCE: PhillyClout

Now, I'm not happy that the movement to oppose this tax seems to be centered around union leaders and soda companies, and it actually hurts the movement in and of itself. What we need is a rally of the people, by the people to happen instead. More on that later, as well as possibly footage of the rally itself.

The "Soda Tax" Myth Part 3: It's a Slippery-Slope

When people say something is a "slippery-slope", it's considered a informal fallacy because it says there can be no middle ground when people argue a point. I've used the term a lot, and I want to acknowledge that I do see a middle ground in this, but to get there, I have to start with the simple fact that this is the start of something bigger here.

We began with taxing alcohol in 1862 at 20 cents a gallon under Lincoln to help pay for the civil war. Later on, we began taxing cigarettes, largely in part to help generate revenue, but with then a side-effect of helping health. From there, we began smoking bans, and then banning trans-fat foods.

In the end, we accepted all of these ideas and regulations. We realized that alcohol and tobacco was bad for us and we allowed the government to take more and more steps to stop us from, in a sense, killing ourselves. From simple taxation we went to bans. Its gotten to the point where smoking is banned anywhere but your own house, and to be honest, even as a non-smoker, I felt bad for the people who did smoke. In terms of drinking beer, we've agreed that alcohol should be consumed in reasonable quantities and by adults only.

So how does this relate to soda and sugary-drinks?

Sugary-drinks aren't that good for you. Period. Over the past few days, I've defended soda with as much fever and pride as possible. For me, a soda drinker, it effects me a lot. For some people I know, they don't think it will effect them at all, although I am quick to point out that in Philadelphia's case it most likely will.

But they aren't the problem. The problem is with over-consumption, abuse, and not taking personal responsibility for your actions.

That's IT. It's not hard, it isn't difficult, and it isn't much. If you consume too much of anything you run into problems. We seem so quick to run to the government to govern how we live. Why? Why are we so willing to give up our own personal freedoms for the sake of a little ill-conceived safety? We all know and realize that the biggest problem with this tax is that it isn't going to make people healthy in and of itself. We all know that over-consumption is the problem, be it fast food, junk food, or... well, anything.

So, where is this all going?

You may scoff at me getting so mad about this, but consider this: New York State is considering banning additional salt in restaurants. I am not kidding. SALT. Oh, come on, you know why; it's bad for you. Too much salt can give you a heart attack. Salt can kill you. We all know it, we all know its a fact... so why NOT ban it, right? I mean, if the government knows that TransFats will kill you, that soda isn't good for you, they MUST know better than us that salt must be banned as well, right?

Now we're looking at Pizza Tax. Why? Because it's BAD for 'ya! Come on, we all know it! Hell, it's WORSE than salt, let alone soda, right? The government is here to help! They want to make sure you eat right! An extra 10% per pizza isn't too bad, right?

Right?

I think you see my point.

So the soda tax was only the beginning. You, the people, have already shown your OK with the government regulating your day-to-day life and that they should be allowed to tax and/or ban anything THEY deem unhealthy for you. You? You have no say in this. These aren't put up to public vote, only to legislators.

Whatever happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY?! When did we all decide that giving up our personal rights? When did we decide that we are no longer a nation of grown adults who should be able to make decisions based on what we know an instead nothing more than children? I was never informed! Never got a memo, never got a IM, never got an e-mail, let alone a phone call.

Is this a "slippery-slope" No. The middle ground is there, and it can be reasonable if we actually start to look for it. If we're too quick to jump to a conclusion and don't look for alternatives, we're going to miss it and wonder why things got so bad. But I have argued that, yes, this is the start of the lost of some of out personal rights.

In the end, that is why I oppose this tax more than anything else. Yes, I may be mad about the fact that I'm finally getting taxed for what I enjoy as opposed to the smokers and drinkers. Yes, I may complain about why I think it doesn't make any fiscal sense. And, yes, I may have spent a ton of time and energy just to get to this point. The bottom line is that this tax is, literally, just the beginning of them taxing away your rights and, even more importantly, your responsibility to keep yourself healthy and alive.

Why do I oppose this tax? Because I want to be treated like an adult!

The "Soda Tax" Myth 2: It Will Help Raise Money

Or, in another way, "Why the Soda Tax doesn't make fiscal sense."

This is going to be a long post, folks, so I'm diving it up into a few sections:

1. The Fiscal Argument for the Tax
2. The Key Problem with the Tax
3. Who's Hurt By the Tax Economically
4. The Social Cost of the Tax
5. What About Jobs?
   
6. How To Raise the Funds Without a New Tax

So, point one:

1. The Fiscal Argument for the Tax

When you look at the economic outlook for the City of Philadelphia... it's pretty grim. Millions of dollars are needed to keep the city afloat another year, and the deficit just seems to keep getting bigger. To make up the money, the city has floated around some really unpopular ideas: Taxing trash bags, taxing plastic bags, closing down libraries and pools... even threatening to shut down the court system in order to get more money from Harrisburg. Yet it never happened. With unions working without a contract and the problem only getting bigger, these new harsh economic times called for new thinking.

Sadly, it wasn't for the better.
The argument for the Sugary Drink Tax is not based on health. Let me be clear; this argument isn't about your health. While other states may have thought about doing this in order to help keep health care costs down and, in turn, add more money to health care, this has NOTHING to do wit that.

Instead, the tax would be seen as a way to make more money for the city.


2. The Key Problem with the Tax

The problem, though, is multi-pronged.

For starters, revenue from soda will go DOWN after the first year alone.

Let me explain: The reasoning behind a "Sin tax", which is a tax that is imposed on certain items because we've deemed them harmful, is to REDUCE consumption of an item. Let me repeat that: The idea of taxing soda in the first place is to reduce the actual consumption of the product. In turn, you guessed it, revenue goes down.

While some analysis think it could bring in $18 Million or so the first year, keep in mind its based on the idea that people would continue to consume soda at their present rate. Adding an extra 40 cents to a 20oz bottle really isn't going to help.

So, we've covered that the tax isn't to make you healthy, and that the tax revenue from taxing it don't make any economic sense. But who else is hurt?



3. Who's Hurt By the Tax Economically

Retailers, namely the small ones, will be hurt most by this tax. But also you.

Without going into the much detail, in a capitalistic society, the idea is that the market itself determines what people want. In essence, supply and demand. Over the past few years in terms of health, we've seen more demand for healthy food and healthy food alternatives, and the market has responded by creating more healthy choices. But we also understand that the government needs to help from time to time to make sure that businesses look out for us.
The Sugary Beverage Tax would be leveled against retailers first.

Here's how it works:

Retailers would have to pay an annual tax of $.02 per ounce based on what they sell during the year. In turn, this will do three things; either force retailers to cut back on the drinks, force them to raise prices on their soda, or force them to levy the fee to their customers by raising prices across the board on certain items. To be honest, I couldn't even guess which route would be taken by most.

But, lets assume that retailers put it across the board to lessen the blow across the board. In the end, nothing is being done to stop you from buying soda because, well, you're only seeing a minor price increase in soda itself.

It also means that if you don't drink any sugary drinks yourself, you are now a victim of this tax. If you are in favor of this tax, you may be taxing yourself in a new way without even realizing it.

Grocery bill will go up if this law is passed. If the tax is spread across the board, and it could, it means that food prices will go up for everyone. The casual soda drinker is still hurt as much as the habitual one.

Wouldn't it make more sense to offer an incentive to both retailers and citizens to cut back on soda instead of taxing them? Allowing retailers who either cut back on selling soda a tax incentive or even if they stopped entirely would be more effective than a tax!



4. The Social Cost of the Tax

Now we get the the toll this can, and most likely will, have on society in this city. IF this tax is levied, do not expect people to simply stop buying soda. As I mentioned yesterday, diet soda wouldn't be effected and thus presents a new set of problems. Businesses will lose money and many corner stores keeping neighborhoods alive may disappear since they would not be able to compete against the larger stores offering lower prices on basically one item that everyone wants that the smaller places couldn't.

On top of that, people will start to simply cross the county or state line in order to get a cheap soda instead, or maybe stock up.



5. What About Jobs?

We're also talking about jobs.

Some people scoff at the idea that Coke and Pepsi, who both have factories in Philadelphia employing hundreds, if not thousands, are in danger of losing their jobs. To a degree, they may be right. But, please, tell me this; If the city where you had a major plant started to pass laws exclusive to you and their area, wouldn't you think twice about having a factory there?

Is job lost feasible under this tax? Yes it is. Demand would be down in the city, but its likely that outside the city demand would grow thanks to people simply going across either the county or state line to grab as much cheap soda as possible. So while it is possible we could see job lost at these plants, I doubt we'll see them shut down.

But the local stores and operators will be hurt and we will see job loss there.



6. How To Raise the Funds Without a New Tax

So, we've seen that the tax isn't about your health but about making money. I've shown that the reasoning for the tax itself doesn't make economic sense and that the impact on your wallet is effected even if you don't drink soda since the tax could be applied to everything thanks to retailers. I've stated that I think we won't see Pepsi or Coke leave town, but jobs were still in trouble at small retailers thanks to the tax.

How do we make the money back?

It's insanely simple: First, we don't need new taxes. The idea of a tax is to raise revenue, and as I've pointed out, there is no reason this one would work.

Instead, we need to start enforcing laws. We can start with tax evaders.
The City of Philadelphia is projecting a $150 Million Dollar Deficit. The City of Philadelphia IS OWED $300 MILLION DOLLARS. So let me make this so easy, even Mayor Nutter can understand:
-$150 Million + $300 Million = $150 MILLION SURPLUS

Easy enough?

So, that solves our short-term problem... what about long terms problems? How do we keep crime down while making money? Again, another easy one based on simply enforcing the law.

Currently in Philadelphia, minor crimes, a.k.a. Nuisance Laws, are not enforced. These laws include jaywalking, spitting, and littering among other things. All of these offenses can also be ticketed, thus revenue thanks to fines. The idea of enforcing these "minor crimes" is that it reminds you that the police are there for a reason; to enforce the law. How many times have you seen someone break the law in front of a cop and the officer did nothing?

If people start to respect the people who are supposed to protect them, crime goes down. If crime goes down, you don't need to much police presence. The revenue from ticketing may go down, but you've also reduced costs as well.

To be honest, I could go on and on about this. I've written twice with ideas on solving this mess, and the ideas always seem to get ignored. With City Council and Mayor Nutter trying to get more funds, I hope they look toward this and start using these ideas.

Tomorrow, I'm going to explore the issue even more and discuss your health, personal responsibility, and what it all means to soda.

The "Soda Tax" Myth Part 1: It Will Make You Healthy

Today, I'm going to take the time to debunk the myth that the soda tax will make people healthier. Now, before I start, I want to say a few things: First off, I'm not with a beverage company, I'm not paid by one, nor am I getting free swag from this. Not only that, I also want to point out that I'm not dismissing the fact that soda isn't great for you, but it isn't inherently bad. It seems so many people want to make it an either/or debate, when really, it isn't. But more on that later.

Soda alone does not make a person fat. In fact, simply put, soda in moderation isn't bad at all. If you have a can of soda once every two days, you're not doing that much harm to your body. If you exercise, you're in even better shape. Every day, you see people eating fast food, buying junk food, and simply consuming what they can either get their hands on the easiest or they enjoy. If, in the end, they exercise, stay active, and balance it with healthy food, really, what's the problem?

The idea of "taxing soda" is that it reduces consumption. There's a few problems with that logic.

For starters, it only taxes soda made with sugar and/or high-fructose corn syrup. You know what it doesn't tax? DIET Soda. So, the guy who wants to buy soda still can buy it without paying tax if he's willing to put something worse into his body.

Wait, what?

Point 1: DIET SODA IS BAD FOR YOU

For starters, Aspartame, the sweetener found in Nutra-Sweet, is commonly used in diet sodas. For me and others, it can actually trigger asthma attacks and other problems not related to caffeine consumption itself. Side-effects of it include dizziness, headaches, diarrhea, memory loss, and mood. The FDA has approved it, but it's only allowed in 90 countries out of over 150. In fact, it's 180 times sweeter than sugar. Neat, huh? So all the joy of sugar, but with much more painful side-effects. Throw in the fact that some people seem to ignore the fact that it is just as bad as soda itself, minus the calories, and you have yourself a recipe for disaster. The FDA has approved it, but it's only allowed in 90 countries out of over 150. Just to be clear, the stuff isn't going to kill you unless you drink a keg full of the stuff, and even then you just won't leave the toilet for a week.

Point 2: IT TAXES YOU FOR BEING CHEAP
Now, again, people keep referring to this thing as a "soda tax". The problem, though, is that it isn't a SODA tax; it's a SUGAR tax.

So, lets say you decide to not drink soda anymore because you hate the tax, so you go to the store to buy some juice. You have a choice between Mott's 100% Fruit Juice at $3.99 a gallon or a no-name brand for $2. You go up to the counter, pull out your $2... and then you're hit with a 2-cent per ounce tax! WHAT?!

Well, here's the problem: The juice you just bought has sugar in it. Yep, sugar! That means you would be required to pay an added tax on that juice to make you healthier. Your cost of living just rose thanks to this tax!

So the tax that was supposed to encourage people to make healthier choices may do just the opposite in some cases. Instead, they may buy bottled water which, in some cases, is actually pretty bad for you. It also makes it more expensive to make a healthy choice as well.


Point 3: IT TAXES YOU FOR BEING ACTIVE AND HEALTHY!

OK, lets just say you don't drink soda, and you only drink 100% natural juice. Awesome, and good for you! Personally, I couldn't do it, but still, good for you.

You've just hung out with your friends and played a great game of basketball, or maybe you just got done riding your bike around Fairmount Park, maybe even to work. You've worked hard, you're tired, and now you need to get some nutrients back in your body. So, just like most people, you go into the store and buy a Gateroade, Powerade, or maybe some other sort of sports drink.

BAM! 2 CENT AN OUNCE TAX!

Yes, your sports drink is now taxed thank to this law, so now there's a tax on being active and fit and not paying to drink bottled water. What? When was the last time you saw a water fountain in Philadelphia?

Point 4: TAXING THOSE WHO NEED IT

And now, the final group. Diabetics.

Now, this law, to those who want to point to the health benefits, is supposed to help stop people from getting diabetes, and to be honest, that's a great thing to try and stop. But, sadly, some people have it, and some people develop it at even a young age.

Thanks to this law, their little energy boost just got taxed.

In my life, I only knew of one person with the disease, and I want to state now that I don't know what type it was. I don't know if it was because they had low blood sugar, or if it was high. In the end, I knew they had the disease and it was a problem. Periodically while we were out, their blood sugar would get low and, being out of whatever it was that they may have had on them, we would go into the store and get a bottle of soda, or tea, or anything else with sugar in it to drink.

This tax will effect them as well.




I started by saying that we all want to paint soda in one way or another in this debate. There are people who so easily want, and do, compare it to smoking tobacco when, really, it's apples and oranges. There are also those who may go to far in their love of the drink to say it isn't bad at all. These people are also wrong.

Soda is fine.

We, as a society over the past 30 years, have taken the easy way out in these problems too many times. We seem to look to our government not to protect us, but to protect us from ourselves. This is one of the instances where we must start saying enough. This is when we need to start saying we need to be treated as adults, not children.

Soda isn't great for you. Personally, I drink about 20 - 32oz a day. Everyday. How and why can I do that, you ask? Because I can, and I know how much I can take. Everyone on this planet is different. What's right for you may not be right for me, and vice-versa. As Lemmy Kilmeister would tell you, "Anything that's good for me is fucking poison for a human being!" Actually, that one is true and no exaggeration, but you get my point.

I'm not trying to preach to everyone that soda is great, but I am saying that we need to start treating this just for what it is; a personal health matter.

Parents: Don't give your kid too much soda or sweets, it isn't good for them. A little treat now and then is fine, but not all the time. If you're an adult, just make sure you know how much you can handle and make sure you exercise properly.

In my humble opinion, if the City of Philadelphia cared about your health and that of everyone around, they would instead talk to Trojan and give out free condoms to the people in the city. Considering it's cheaper and easier to prevent STD's than it can be to treat it ($1 a condom if you're lucky)... yeah, lets focus on that and save a few more lives.

Philadelphia New Sugary Drink Tax Would Add 2 CENTS AN OUNCE!

2 CENTS AN OUNCE?!

Those greedy bastards are at it again! The details of this stupid, unhealthy, non-beneficial, and ultimately harmful plan have come out.

They want to tax you 2 cents AN OUNCE to drink ANY sugary drink bought in Philadelphia.

The sound of 2 Cents an ounce may not seem like much at first, until you realize what it adds up to. A 12-0unce drink gets an added quarter, 1 20-ounce goes up an added 40 cents, a 2-liter bottle get's an added $1.36, and a 12-pack goes up $2.88! Throw in an added cost of basic sales tax, and things get worse!

Now, you may be thinking to yourself, if you don't drink soda, "Ha ha! Those losers who drink soda are going to have to pay through the nose!" Well, your wrong. This tax effects ALL SUGARY DRINKS.

So say "Hello" to a tax on Apple Juice, Orange Juice, Prune Juice, and ALL Fruit Juices! Oh, and sports drinks are also subject to this tax.

Let me see if I get this straight: The City of Philadelphia, trying to make people "healthy", has decided to impose a tax that would raise the cost of even healthy fruit alternatives so that the low income citizens of Philadelphia will be outraged and unable to afford them, thus meaning that if you want to drink ANYTHING in Philadelphia, your best bet is tap or bottled water. The odd thing being that bottled water IS harming not only Philadelphia's bottom line, but also the environment.

Soda has become a scapegoat in a war to TAX YOU as much as possible.

Folks, welcome to the modern day stamp tax!

Photo courtesy of NorCalLabs