Soda Tax Simply Didn't Go Far Enough

[MarginOfError]

9 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

If all you are going to do is insult and twist the meanings of people who are trying to have a discussion with you I see no point in continuing

Truth be told, you may be on to something.  Instead of banning straws, let's instead mandate they be manufactured with geotagging RFID readers. Each straw will cost an additional 16 cents. But then we'll finally be able to collect the data that shows how straws move about the globe after they are disposed of and we can finally and rightfully impose straw bans on those evil liberal coastal states and China while leaving Utah to consume its Diet Coke in peace.

[Just_A_Guy]

4 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Truth be told, you may be on to something.  Instead of banning straws, let's instead mandate they be manufactured with geotagging RFID readers. Each straw will cost an additional 16 cents. But then we'll finally be able to collect the data that shows how straws move about the globe after they are disposed of and we can finally and rightfully impose straw bans on those evil liberal coastal states and China while leaving Utah to consume its Diet Coke in peace.

Sure.  And let’s also impose a $1500 surtax on abortions for pregnancies that don’t threaten the mother’s life and aren’t a result of rape or incest.  We’ll use that money for a study of why women actually get abortions.   

Edited May 21, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[MarginOfError]

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

Sure.  And let’s also impose a $1500 surtax on abortions for pregnancies that don’t threaten the mother’s life and aren’t a result of rape or incest.  We’ll use that money for a study of why women actually get abortions.   

I believe the technical term for that is "co-pay"

[Just_A_Guy]

1 minute ago, MarginOfError said:

I believe the technical term for that is "co-pay"

(To continue the threadjack)

Hmm.  I’ve been told that abortion is a zero-profit industry and that the procedure routinely costs less than $500.

We may need to increase the amount of the surtax.  Just to make sure there’s actually enough money left over for the study itself.  We need DATA, darnit!!!!   

Edited May 21, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[MarginOfError]

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

(To continue the threadjack)

Hmm.  I’ve been told that abortion is a zero-profit industry and that the procedure routinely costs less than $500.

We may need to increase the amount of the surtax.  Just to make sure there’s actually enough money left over for the study itself.  

What you've been told is true.  I don't see why that precludes charging three times the cost.  Because capitalism.

[Just_A_Guy]

Just now, MarginOfError said:

What you've been told is true.  I don't see why that precludes charging three times the cost.  Because capitalism.

Which ironically brings us back to the soda tax.  We’ll charge what the market will bear—and if the market will bear it, we’ll charge ‘em some more, until the market doesn’t bear it any longer.  

[MarginOfError]

Should be easy enough.  Once they get a taste of those sweet, sweet taxes, they'll be begging for more.

[Just_A_Guy]

2 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Should be easy enough.  Once they get a taste of those sweet, sweet taxes, they'll be begging for more.

Rush Limbaugh:  “No society has ever taxed itself into prosperity.”

Philadelphia:  “Hold my (root) beer and watch this!”

[MarginOfError]

Portland, Maine would be a good counter example to that claim. Its retail economy thrives on alcohol sales (night life). Every time it needed new revenue while I was living there, sales tax on mixed drinks went up. Business never suffered.

[estradling75]

8 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Which ironically brings us back to the soda tax.  We’ll charge what the market will bear—and if the market will bear it, we’ll charge ‘em some more, until the market doesn’t bear it any longer.  

Indeed  Tax the straws and the USA will stop using straws and then we can prove that none of them in the pacific are ours...  Of course the Tax man will demand another source and see that foam cups are also there. So they we tax those instead So we stop them which gets another target and so on and so forth.. And the USA then spends its leadership in a internal game of Avoid the Taxes... the rest of the world continues on and nothing is done about the trash in the pacific

[MarginOfError]

3 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed  Tax the straws and the USA will stop using straws and then we can prove that none of them in the pacific are ours...  Of course the Tax man will demand another source and see that foam cups are also there. So they we tax those instead So we stop them which gets another target and so on and so forth.. And the USA then spends its leadership in a internal game of Avoid the Taxes... the rest of the world continues on and nothing is done about the trash in the pacific

Don't forget the RFID tags. I'm not paying for a styrofoam cup unless it has an RFID tag that I can scan into my phone and then watch its world travels.

I get very emotionally attached to my styrofoam.

[Just_A_Guy]

8 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Portland, Maine would be a good counter example to that claim. Its retail economy thrives on alcohol sales (night life). Every time it needed new revenue while I was living there, sales tax on mixed drinks went up. Business never suffered.

Interesting.  Do you have stats?

Looks like the idea is spreading, within Maine at least:  https://maineexaminer.com/democrats-want-to-raise-maines-beer-liquor-wine-taxes/

[MarginOfError]

4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Interesting.  Do you have stats?

Looks like the idea is spreading, within Maine at least:  https://maineexaminer.com/democrats-want-to-raise-maines-beer-liquor-wine-taxes/

Nothing hard.  Just anecdotes of long timers laughing each time the tax went up a quarter a percent, since they knew never to buy their alcohol in Portland proper.  This was one of those taxes that was being paid by people coming in from outside the city to be at the night clubs.  

It was brilliant, in its own way, as the city was able to boost revenue without laying the cost on the backs of its residents. (much like hotel taxes)

[NightSG]

18 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

NIMBYism at it's finest.

Or just refusing to strain at that gnat. 

[Guest Mores]

19 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

Nothing hard.  Just anecdotes of long timers laughing each time the tax went up a quarter a percent, since they knew never to buy their alcohol in Portland proper.  This was one of those taxes that was being paid by people coming in from outside the city to be at the night clubs.  

It was brilliant, in its own way, as the city was able to boost revenue without laying the cost on the backs of its residents. (much like hotel taxes)

I ran into this once.  Apparently there is some border city that has sales tax.  And it is 90% tourist driven.  Do you know what that city is?

Oregon still avoids a statewide sales tax, correct?

Edited May 22, 2019 by Mores

[anatess2]

4 hours ago, Mores said:

I ran into this once.  Apparently there is some border city that has sales tax.  And it is 90% tourist driven.  Do you know what that city is?

Oregon still avoids a statewide sales tax, correct?

New Hampshire doesn't have sales taxes nor wage taxes.  People from border towns of Massachusetts and Maine buy stuff in New Hampshire.  I usually buy boxes of jellies and jams in NH when I'm in the New England area because they're super cheap and tax free.

[mnn2501]

On 5/20/2019 at 7:57 AM, MarginOfError said:

Can we trade soda bans for a nation wide ban on plastic straws?

 

https://soyummy.com/myths-about-plastic-straws-you-need-to-stop-believing-right-now/

 

[mnn2501]

Bring back the burn barrel. We burned all our garbage except for glass and tin cans when I was growing up, and food waste went into the compost heap.

[NightSG]

On 5/22/2019 at 12:51 PM, mnn2501 said:

Bring back the burn barrel. We burned all our garbage except for glass and tin cans when I was growing up, and food waste went into the compost heap.

We used a burn pit and it got plenty hot to melt down pretty much everything that didn't burn. Glass could still be recycled as large lumps, but aluminum tended to oxidize too much. 

With a forge burning waste motor oil, it's fairly easy to cast piles of soda cans into ingots. Depending on current prices it's sometimes worth it. 

[Anddenex]

On 5/21/2019 at 5:38 AM, MarginOfError said:

I wonder how people ingested fluids before straws.

Hands, leaves, hats (cowboy that is -- they are called 10 gallon for a reason), puckered lips and sip, cups, mugs, and I think there are a few others.

Edited May 28, 2019 by Anddenex

[Guest Scott]

On 5/21/2019 at 6:10 AM, Mores said:

There is a difference between religions socially engineering through gentle persuasion vs. a govt. trying to enforce it through taxation.

Utah definitely fits in the latter with its alcohol laws.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Scott

[Guest Mores]

6 hours ago, Scott said:

Utah definitely fits in the latter with its alcohol laws.

Nope, their laws reflect the society.  Not the other way around.

"Social Engineering" is specifically "We don't like the way society is, so we're going to change it through laws and taxation." -- This is bad.

The other is "Our society is X and we'd like to preserve X from those who want to change it.  So, we're going to codify X so they get that."  And at some point when society changes in spite of that, the new Y will change the laws to reflect Y.  That's the way laws are supposed to work.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Scott]

26 minutes ago, Mores said:

"Social Engineering" is specifically "We don't like the way society is, so we're going to change it through laws and taxation." -- This is bad.

While I agree with your definition, I still don't see why Utah's liquor laws wouldn't fit in the above category.  See below for example:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/02/14/utahs-liquor-markup-among-highest-of-any-government-controlled-agency/

Why wouldn't this match the definition above?

Edited May 29, 2019 by Scott

[Guest Mores]

7 minutes ago, Scott said:

While I agree with your definition, i still can't see why Utah's liquor laws wouldn't fit in that category.  See below for example:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/02/14/utahs-liquor-markup-among-highest-of-any-government-controlled-agency/

Why wouldn't this match the definition above?

You suspect a motive that is not the primary driving force to that proposed legislation.

Quote

each liquor control entity has its own formula for earning revenues, often a confusing mix of taxes, handling fees, markups and multipliers.

It is about revenue for the state.  What it does for social engineering is a secondary effect (if at all).  Many such "vice" taxes in the country are not about "telling people what they should or should not do."  It is about having the state deal with the negative consequences (drunk driving accidents, domestic abuse, disorderly conduct... ) 

I'd invite @mirkwood to weigh in on how much of a burden the public has when people drink too much.  Then I'd invite anyone to weigh in on how often police are called over someone who drinks a 12 oz can of soda (or even more) each day.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Scott]

15 minutes ago, Mores said:

You suspect a motive that is not the primary driving force to that proposed legislation.

It more than revenue. 

I live in Colorado, but minutes from the Utah border.  People (not me!) are always driving into Colorado (both locals and tourists) to buy booze.  There are two reasons for this.  One is because beer in Colorado has a higher alcohol content.  The second is because the booze taxes are a lot lower in Colorado.

Quote

It is about revenue for the state.

If that were the sole purpose, why is the alcohol content of beer lower in Utah and why the alcohol laws about serving alcohol in places like restaurants, etc.?  The state would generate a lot more revenue without those laws.

The same is true of things like medical or recreational marijuana.  Colorado cities and towns bring in a lot more revenue from the taxes of those products than they spend on the negative consequences.

Quote

I'd invite

@mirkwood to weigh in on how much of a burden the public has when people drink too much.  Then I'd invite anyone to weigh in on how often police are called over someone who drinks a 12 oz can of soda (or even more) each day.

I agree with you.  Alcohol causes a lot of problems.  I wont touch the stuff.  Alcohol is worse than soda when it comes to society.

I still think though that Utah's alcohol laws would fit in the category as social engineering.

PS, I'm not saying that there aren't good reasons for Utah's laws either.   Personally I don't like having a liquor store and marijuana dispensary on every corner (well at least it seems like that at times).   

Edited May 29, 2019 by Scott