|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
You've got to be kidding, a soda tax? Let's tax the kids now.  President Obama says 'sin tax' on sodas is food for thought, despite Gov. Paterson's failed proposal BY David Saltonstall DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/09/08/2009-Gov. Paterson's proposal to tax soda in New York fizzled, but President Obama believes it may be time to pop a similar sin tax on the nation. The President, in an interview with Men's Health magazine released yesterday, said he thought taxing soda and other sugary drinks is worth putting on the table as Congress debates health care reform. "It's an idea that we should be exploring," the president said. "There's no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda. And every study that's been done about obesity shows that there is as high a correlation between increased soda consumption and obesity as just about anything else." Obama is floating the idea seven months after a storm of protest forced poll-challenged Gov. Paterson to drop his plans for an 18% tax on soda and other sugary drinks. Despite that debacle, congressional lawmakers have considered soda taxes as one way to cover the cost of revamping the nation's health care system, estimated to eat up much as $1 trillion over the next decade. But Obama - who works out six days a week and keeps a bowl of apples in the Oval Office - has been largely mum on the controversial topic, at least until now. As in Paterson's case, Obama's comments drew the immediate wrath of industry and consumer-choice groups yesterday. "The tax code should not be used as a method for social engineering, and that's what this is," said J. Justin Wilson, the senior research analyst for the Center for Consumer Freedom, a group funded in part by the food and beverage industry. "It smacks of the regulation that government imposed on tobacco, but soda is not tobacco." Obama acknowledged that the idea could lead to charges that Uncle Sam is trying to dictate personal diets, but he hinted the trade-off may be worth it. "Look, people's attitude is that they don't necessarily want Big Brother telling them what to eat or drink, and I understand that," Obama said. "It is true, though, that if you wanted to make a big impact on people's health in this country, reducing things like soda consumption would be helpful."
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
I'm beginning to like the old president who didn't give thought to anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I'm beginning to like the old president who didn't give thought to anything.
Seriously, though...it's much like cigarette tax -- on one level I'm like 'I get it', but on another, more passionate level I'm like 'screw that'. And 'screw that' always wins out.
Don't tax my soda. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
I say we triple the tax on anybody who votes for a new or increased tax.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,961
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,961 |
First off, Happy Birthday J.. have a great day..  As for a soda tax,,, I just don't think it would fly.. but I get the idea behind it. I don't like it, but I get it.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
if they sin tax the soda, because its a sugary drink, then they will eventually tax candy and other snacks (salty content goods), then eventually red meat, and probably fish(due to mercury content). Imagine the tax on Pixie Stix if it's taxed based on the amount of sugar content. 
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm beginning to like the old president who didn't give thought to anything.
Seriously, though...it's much like cigarette tax -- on one level I'm like 'I get it', but on another, more passionate level I'm like 'screw that'. And 'screw that' always wins out.
Don't tax my soda.
Then quit taxing my beer,...I have no problem with it from the health standpoint, as I do beer and cigarettes. But enough is enough. He taxes soda to the point where Americans in those plants start losing jobs --and they will -- then again, he just keeps digging us into a bigger hole.
Now if he's talking about a tax on imported soda, then we'll deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Obama acknowledged that the idea could lead to charges that Uncle Sam is trying to dictate personal diets, but he hinted the trade-off may be worth it.
That's the whole article right there... as long as the government views it as "worth it" they have no problem dictating personal choice decisions... and if anybody doesn't understand how much worse this will get the more government gets involved with healthcare, then you are fooling yourself.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
The vicious circle,...tax a commodity to generate revenue to pay for the health care supposedly caused by bad diets and desparately needed by the few who don't pay for anything, and take away jobs, and thus health care, from people who do contribute. Makes sense,... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126 |
It's a good thing I drink pop instead of soda, so I have nothing to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
j/c Just being Cliff Clavin here, but they did tax kids before. To help pay for the Spanish-American War chewing gum was taxed. Through that same legislation, taxes on beer and tobacco were doubled. I guess that's where the line originates that, "War is Hell". Here is a nice little history on taxes through the years from the Treasury Department: http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtmlFor one thing I learned when and why the income tax was declared unconstitutional (in 1895 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional because it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
While the War Revenue Act returned to traditional revenue sources following the Supreme Court's 1895 ruling on the income tax, debate on alternative revenue sources remained lively. The nation was becoming increasingly aware that high tariffs and excise taxes were not sound economic policy and often fell disproportionately on the less affluent. Proposals to reinstate the income tax were introduced by Congressmen from agricultural areas whose constituents feared a Federal tax on property, especially on land, as a replacement for the excises.
Hmmm... and most of the people that voted this fool into office fall into the category that would most greatly be effected by rising taxes. The people that are really hurting because high taxes and high tariffs are not good for a sound economic policy are the same people that voted in a guy that would love to raise those taxes. Makes sense now. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I'm currently working on a draft copy of a bill that will be presented to the house and senate and if approved, this country will be out of debt in 6 months. I plan to tax stupidity.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
It shouldn't take 6 months...
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Unlike politicians, I estimate income conservatively and try not to over-promise.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
Quote:
Obama acknowledged that the idea could lead to charges that Uncle Sam is trying to dictate personal diets, but he hinted the trade-off may be worth it.
That's the whole article right there... as long as the government views it as "worth it" they have no problem dictating personal choice decisions
This is that slippery slope. Compromise a small little bit of freedom in the name of something that the government says is good for you. A bit similar, IMHO, to DUI check points. The Supreme Court in the past has upheld their constitutionality admitting that it infringes on your 4th Amendment rights, but its just a minimal intrusion so its no big deal. Just a little piece here and there...
"My signature line goes here."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,609
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,609 |
Funny, I used to purchase pop all the time. Then the prices pretty much doubled and I rarely purchase it anymore. If it gets taxed causing it to go up even higher yet, then it looks like I'll be cutting it out all together.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
I'm currently working on a draft copy of a bill that will be presented to the house and senate and if approved, this country will be out of debt in 6 months. I plan to tax stupidity.
They already have the lotto. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
I'm currently working on a draft copy of a bill that will be presented to the house and senate and if approved, this country will be out of debt in 6 months. I plan to tax stupidity.
So our government can actually, singlehandedly stupidize the country out of debt! City cofers will overflow, big business will begin to thrive and won't even have to turn a machine on! My mother in law will be rolling in dough!
Genius!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Quote:
If it gets taxed causing it to go up even higher yet, then it looks like I'll be cutting it out all together.
And then where do they get the money to fund whatever the money was funding? 
Hmmm....lets tax the nasty pretzel eaters.....
Eventually it will get to the water out of the tap and then they know their money will always be there because if the people stop taking baths, they'll fine you for stinking in public. (See Hawaii Bus Ban thread).
"My signature line goes here."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
If we would just stop taxing all these individual items, and just put a blanket national sales tax on things, then the tax burden is spread across everyone, and you can control how much you pay by controlling how you spend your money.
Hence the rich will pay more, because they probably buy more big ticket items. The poor will still pay their share, just in much smaller volume. And we eliminate the need for this huge tax book, and all the IRS folks to collect these taxes, which would then be collected at the register.
The displaced IRS folks could take jobs in the accounting departments of the merchants to help deal with the extra work.
And I can save by not having to keep all my receipts to give to the accountant every year.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Hence the rich will pay more, because they probably buy more big ticket items. The poor will still pay their share, just in much smaller volume.
This is a fallacy of sorts.
The poor would end up paying more...not in volume of money but in percentage of income.
The poor spends more of their total income than the middle or upper classes....it's often the reason why they're poor in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
I didn't say anything about percentage of overall income, and personally I don't care, but we've been down this road on this board a 100 times about why it's the responsibility of those that worked to get ahead to supply the funds to all those that won't put in the effort.
And I would bet if you pulled all the freebies out of the governments hands and put "aid" in control of non-profit charitable groups, there would be plenty of donations to get the job done. And there would probably be better control to avoid abuse and fraud of the aid.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26 |
Quote:
And I would bet if you pulled all the freebies out of the governments hands and put "aid" in control of non-profit charitable groups, there would be plenty of donations to get the job done. And there would probably be better control to avoid abuse and fraud of the aid.
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/hauser/PDF_XLS/workingpapers/workingpaper_35.pdf
A good read I pulled out only a small bit to larg to post 32 pgs
An Investigation of Fraud in Nonprofit Organizations:
Occurrences and Deterrents
by
Janet Greenlee, Mary Fischer
Teresa Gordon,* and Elizabeth Keating
The Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations
Harvard University
December 2006
Working Paper No. 35
2. Data and Methodology
Our paper uses the 2004 survey data provided to us by the ACFE to more thoroughly examine occupational fraud in the nonprofit sector. The surveys provide the most complete in-depth data presently available concerning fraud in the nonprofit sector. The seventeen-page
survey instrument used to collect the data focused on the following six areas: cost of occupational fraud, methods used to commit fraud, methods used to detect fraud, characteristics of the organizations victimized by fraud, characteristics of the perpetrators of fraud, and legal outcomes of the fraud.
Of the 508 occupational fraud cases reported by ACFE members (Table 1), 58 of the cases occurred in nonprofit organizations. The survey explicitly does not ask the respondees to provide the name of the organization, thus all data is anonymous. Given the small size of the data set, we provide primarily descriptive statistics using bivariate correlations (as appropriate) to test the significance of selected relationships between variables.
3. Findings
Fraud losses in the 58 nonprofit cases ranged from a low of $200 to $17 million, with a median loss of $100,000. Four nonprofits realized losses of more than $1,000,000. An equal number of organizations saw losses of $2,000 or less. The total loss from all nonprofit frauds was nearly $30 million. If the estimated annual loss of $40 billion is correct, the cases reported in the survey represent less than one percent of all losses.
Table 1 Organizational Victims of Fraud with Median Dollar Loss
Type of Organization
Private Company
Percentage of the 508 Reported Cases 41.8
Median Loss from Fraud $123,000
Public Company
Percentage of the 508 Reported Cases 30.2
Median Loss from Fraud $100,000
Government Agency
Percentage of the 508 Reported Cases 15.8
Median Loss from Fraud $37,500
Nonprofit Organization
Percentage of the 508 Reported Cases 12.2
Median Loss from Fraud $100,000
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
So are you saying we need government to do the job instead or more oversight????
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26 |
more oversight I should have stated that. The oversight that is needed has to be done by the Nonprofit Organizations. if you read the artical it makes that clear http://www.hks.harvard.edu/hauser/PDF_XLS/workingpapers/workingpaper_35.pdf ABSTRACT Losses due to fraudulent activities are particularly troublesome in the nonprofit sector because they directly reduce resources available to address tax-exempt purposes. The ensuing bad publicity may also reduce contributions and grants in subsequent periods. This paper uses data provided by Certified Fraud Examiners to report on the types of fraud they identified in nonprofit organizations and the characteristics of both the victims and the perpetrators of the fraudulent activities. Based on the analysis of the data, the authors suggest ways that fraud losses can be prevented or mitigated. In particular, governing boards are urged to consider important controls in addition to the annual financial statement audit.
Last edited by airsave; 09/10/09 07:21 PM.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Let's tax the kids!!
|
|
![[Linked Image from img.photobucket.com]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/Concor1033/NEWDTsig.jpg)
