You're sending mixed messages. Trump's more liberal than most liberals.
Here you go. In his own words...
OT- Philadelphia passes soda tax the bastards
- Thread starter Extra Point
- Start date
Here you go. In his own words...
I'm not sure, but for a school district as poorly funded as this one, it's not exaggerating to say every little bit helps. The cigarette tax brought in more than $50 million in just its first nine months of existence, so clearly not everyone is leaving the city to buy their cancer sticks. Likewise, despite all the big talk on social media today, not everyone will cross the border to save 24 cents on a bottle of Coke.
Another point while I am ranting is why do the politicians burden the working class and poor people with a new tax instead of having the Big Soda companies pay instead? What happened to the idea to have the rich pay more? They can sell their soda at the same price as it is in NJ today, and they can send some of their profits to the state to help the little kids.
Unfortunately a portion of the funds will not go to the originally stated purpose, but I believe it's 20%, not a "yuge" amount that the millions in advertisements from the beverage association claim. It's disappointing that the wording of the bill wasn't more transparent from the jump, but like I said previously, anything that can help schools here is a positive IMO.
According to one story, the tax is expected to generate about $360 million over the next five years, with around $40 million NOT earmarked for the original beneficiaries of preschools expansions, the creation of community schools, and improvements to city parks, rec centers and libraries.
I'd have preferred it be known some funds would be used to help increase the general fund earlier in the process, but the positives outweigh the negatives here in my opinion. Can't afford the extra quarter for your lunchtime soda, or the extra buck for that two-liter? Drink water. Just like you shouldn't smoke cigs if you can't pay almost $10/pack or get drunk if you can't handle the alcohol tax. The fact is, most people won't feel this tax at all in their finances and will pay it, and the revenues will improve the situation for kids in the city.
I'd have preferred it be known some funds would be used to help increase the general fund earlier in the process, but the positives outweigh the negatives here in my opinion. Can't afford the extra quarter for your lunchtime soda, or the extra buck for that two-liter? Drink water. Just like you shouldn't smoke cigs if you can't pay almost $10/pack or get drunk if you can't handle the alcohol tax. The fact is, most people won't feel this tax at all in their finances and will pay it, and the revenues will improve the situation for kids in the city.
i think we should just work for free and the government can eliminate all taxes and just tell us what to do and what to eat. and what to drink and when to poop.
Seems ideal to me.
Seems ideal to me.
if they need the money for a good cause i dont think most people have issues with that. Its the fact that these taxs get hidden in multiple bills all the time. Stop hiding shit and be open about what it is you need to accomplish.
We need a tax on big government liberals. They are way more expensive than fat people, like waaaaaaaaaaaay more expensive.
The city fails at economics 101. Smokers will pay a tax on smokes. Alcoholics will pay a tax on booze. Soda drinkers can switch to water/coffee/iced tea to subvert the tax. They are estimating $5 billion in sales/year. Watch that revenue plummet and the tax go up to the mayor's original 3 cents/ounce to compensate for the money already spent.
The tax man's taken all my dough,
And left me in my stately home,
Lazing on a sunny afternoon.
And I can't sail my yacht,
He's taken everything I've got,
All I've got's this sunny afternoon.
This should be the beginning of adding taxes to all products and behaviors that lead to significantly shorten life spans, chronic disease, higher health care costs and reduced productivity. Your right to drink minimally taxed soda ends where the cost to the rest of us for your obesity begins. The taxes should not be random. We should define what the negative cost of each behavior or product is to our economy and tax the product/behavior such that - total negative yearly cost of behavior/product = total collected yearly tax on product/behavior. Simple as that. Its just math folks.
Last edited:
Fortunately, there will be an exemption to this new tax for all member of Public Sector Unions.
We can only hope that they will start a new Social Welfare program to bring fresh cold pressed organic juices to all of the socially and economically disenfranchised who will be disproportionately effected by this needed change.
We can only hope that they will start a new Social Welfare program to bring fresh cold pressed organic juices to all of the socially and economically disenfranchised who will be disproportionately effected by this needed change.
I don't understand why you would be for this new tax. They will start a new project with a bit of this new money and they will then complain that they need a lot more new money to complete the big project. New tax money gets the city into more debt. Politicians do not know anything about economics or about budgeting. I understand why the PHD guy is for new taxes, he is a socialist and that is their philosophy.
:-) Juice is being taxed too I think. The kids parents will have to give their kid more lunch money for the higher priced lunch or the government increase their lunch stamps for the subsidized people. I suppose milk won't be taxed and milk is made right there in PA. The milk farmers might do okay.
I was waiting for one of you far right neo cons to respond to my post this way. Too bad my opinion on this issue is a text book libertarian position and arguably a traditional pre-Regan conservative view on social issues. Thanks for exposing yourself for all to see.
Juice is not healthy. Its better than soda, but its just sugar water. That is why it is included.
Some are predicting it will take years for them to make any money because they will spend millions on legal fees depending the tax in courts.
You nailed it. My late father predicted 20 years ago that once they get done with smokers they'll go after fat people. Potato chips and candy are next up.
Is tonic water included in this tax? With all the gin and tonics I drink in the summer, that would be expensive if they do this in NJ.
Let's see if your buddy Chubsy Wubsy has the balls to veto that gas tax hike.
All these politicians care about is getting the initial projected revenue added to their budget so they can spend more. Deficits caused by people changing their behavior will happen later and can be dealt with by new or increased taxes.
I wish they had a tax on potato chips. The supermarkets keep on putting them on sales which forces me to buy them. If there was no sale or was taxed to bring the price to $4, I would be able to kick the habit.
Christie will pass the gas tax if they eliminate the estate tax in NJ before his term ends. I won't have to worry about the NJ estate tax maybe. I'm beginning to like Christie.
Ahh, the collective we. Who exactly is this "we" of whom you speak?
I don't know the detail of the fight pro or con and who staked a position on this tax. I would think the sugar lobby fought this just like they fought labeling on food products but without success. I dare you to find the percentage of sugar on any product listed in the "Nutrition Facts" label on any product! Ultimately sugar is the silent but sneaky food product that we need to be talking about.
The whole health argument really goes out the window in this particular case as the tax also applies to diet drinks with artificial sweeteners and many drinks one thinks of as healthy, such as Bai antioxidant drinks, which have only 5 calories and are sweetened with stevia
Things are never simple and you should know that. So, over time, we eliminate all unhealthy foods (meat?) and activities (no skydiving or mountain climbing). Everyone lives another 5-10 years. During those incremental years, they are still old and need substantial medical care. Many more seniors around whose mental capacities are essentially gone. Heart disease down but cancer hits at higher rates as we age. Massive increase in costs for senior care. Total medical costs go up, not down? Maybe, maybe not. But a hell of a lot less freedom for the individual.
This is not a soda tax, it is a sugary drink tax. Taxes will also be in juice, Gatorade, iced tea, energy drink etc.
I guess you might as well tax candy then. And every food that contains sugar.
The politicians will find a way to piss away all the revenue this generates and not fix the real problem. Once they drain the sugary drink money they're just going to find something else to tax.
I guess you might as well tax candy then. And every food that contains sugar.
The politicians will find a way to piss away all the revenue this generates and not fix the real problem. Once they drain the sugary drink money they're just going to find something else to tax.
This isn't exclusively a soda tax. It taxes any beverage with added sugar, including energy drinks, sports drinks such as Gatorade, diet sodas, iced teas, and even some fruit juices if they contain corp syrup and less than a certain percentage of actual juice.
People are not suddenly going to stop buying those beverages. Will they buy their 12 packs of cans, which receive among the largest price bump, outside of the city? Many probably will. Will they drink fewer sugary drinks? That's also a possibility, and therein lies the side effect that this tax could end up benefiting health in a city with a high obesity rate.
But by and large, people aren't going to stop buying a Gatorade for their kid to bring to soccer practice because the price went up 48 cents, and they're not going to skip that Coke on their lunch break because the price increased 30 cents. And those increases are assuming distributors pass on 100% of the cost of the tax; in Berkeley CA only 50% was passed on to the consumer.
Last edited:
I'm for the tax because it will have virtually zero impact on my day-to-day finances, and as someone who hopes to stay in the city for the long haul, anything we can do to improve schooling options is a huge, and necessary, positive. I'm not naive; the revenues have to be used for their stated purpose for this to be worth it, but understanding the situation the city's schools are in, I'll take that risk. I know most of you don't live in Philly, but it's amazing how many people here are crying about a small increase on sugary drinks when we pay ridiculously low property tax compared with the suburbs, especially those over the bridge. This has become a vibrant city that is being touted as a legit tourist destination once again, but to take the next step, it needs to do two things: improve the school system so those "unemployable" (wink) millennials will stay, and do everything it can to bring in more and better-paying jobs. If there's a tax to complain about here, it's the wage tax, not one that will cost you 24 cents on a can of Monster.
Last edited:
How exactly do you think this will help the schools? Do you honestly think it will have any impact at all? When it doesn't have an impact, are you okay with Philly taxing cheesesteaks, donuts, burgers, fries, etc. next?
The tax revenues are designed to do the following:
The city wants to implement universal pre-K at some point. Currently, there are about 14,000 quality, affordable pre-K seats, and about 9,000 are operated by the city school district. The hope is that the tax will fund an additional 6,500 seats in the next five years. In about a year, the administration hopes to create an online marketplace where parents can sort their pre-K options. Studies have shown that pre-K has all sorts of long-term educational benefits. I could afford to send a kid to a quality pre-K outside of the city school system, but in a city with one of the highest poverty rates in the country, there are obviously thousands of people who cannot.
The city also plans to select around 25 schools throughout the city and turn them into community hubs offering health services, tutoring, and adult literacy courses. And at the higher education level, $1 million is directed to the Community College of Philadelphia.
Combined with the revenues being brought in via the cigarette tax, yes, if the money is spent as it is intended, I believe this tax will help schools and children directly. Things were, and to a large extent still are, so bad here that every dollar counts.
True, medical cost does not go down because life expectancy is increased 5-10 years. The doctors, hospitals, drug companies, insurance companies and other medical providers won't allow it since they won't accept lower income/revenue. They will always find a trick to continue the billings.
As someone who has lived in the city and the burbs in the Philly area for the past 18 years do you have any faith the the city will specifically allocate the extra revenue to the schools?
I have none.....how about they first be accountable for the tax $$ they they currently collect first before asking for more?
Corruption runs rampant in City Hall and it doesn't help that the current Mayor (who I know personally) is a blithering idiot.
I guarantee that the revenue collected will go towards filling budget gaps.....then in a few years, the schools will cry poor again...with the cycle repeating itself trying to tax something else
