|
Opinion |
|
 |
|
Analysis and commentary on Obama's
proposed soda tax:
Con: Taxes equal tyranny
The Advocate
Soda is making us fat and causing our hearts to give out before we’re 30.
At least that’s what the federal government is implying with the very British act of taxing our sugary beverages. While I’m not compelled enough to start dumping two liters into the Columbia River, I am compelled enough to point out the problems with this unnecessary taxation.
The thought process is that by taxing soda, as well as other beverages such as juice and tea, people will be compelled to stop buying these relatively unhealthy options and turn to more heart-healthy choices.
Considering that soda, juice, and tea make up pretty much the entirety of beverage options, I think it’s safe to say that tap water bills should see a dramatic spike pretty soon.
It sounds pretty familiar, doesn’t it? Taxing an unhealthy item to deter people from buying it?
Oh that’s right, they did the same thing with alcohol and tobacco products. Well, the statistics are in on that, and surely people are drinking and smoking less, right?
Sadly, that outcome only exists in the fantasy-land that Congress must be living in where simply raising prices on an item actually stops people from buying it. Every study shows that both alcohol and tobacco consumption have remained completely unchanged, despite a major recession and increasing tax rates on both those things within at least the last 10 years.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind living in this dream world, as it sounds like a much nicer place where things actually work like the government thinks they should. Oh how easy things would be.
There are a few things to consider. For one, the tax on alcohol and tobacco didn’t work because people are addicted to those things. In other words, price is no option, because people are dependent on those products. So how is soda, which contains caffeine, which has been rated consistently as being on par with nicotine in terms of addictiveness, going to be any different?
Obviously people are not going to stop buying pop. It’s a normal commodity that most people don’t even think about, and while yes, it may be unhealthy, cops don’t give people breathalyzers for blood/soda levels, nor is there any known health risk called “second-hand carbonation.” Soda, for the most part, is a completely harmless beverage, and taxing it is punishing people for seemingly no reason.
In fact, charging people more for a product simply because it’s unhealthy really only serves to induce a guilt not seen since the conception of the Catholic church.
The only valid argument is that our country needs the money that this tax could bring. Now, it’s projected to raise about $24 billion over the next four years. That’s nothing. I mean it’s something, but in the face of the $11 trillion debt that our country is in, the $24 billion would help, but keep in mind that’s over the next four years, and by then the debt could be up another $4 trillion, at which point the money made off this tax is akin to a speck of dust floating in space.
This tax is unnecessary, ridiculous, and should not be considered for even another second.
The Advocate reserves the right to not publish comments based on their appropriateness.