Boycott 7-11!

Dan will you please have some self respect and give your posts a once-over before you upload them to the webz?

It helped kill a proposed a penny-an-ounce tax on soda in New York that would've raise $500 millions of dollars

Living in the midwest it was typical to buy 2 - 24 packs of pop and I was an only kid. Feel free to freak out Dan, but that's easily a reality for far too many families.

(Luckily I only drink pop with alcohol now. It's healthier that way, right?)

i've seen fatties from the public housing load up that many cases at the safeway at 35th ave and 75th st

The American Beverage Association is spending tons of cash to lobby and advertise against raising taxes on American Beverages. Shocking.

What did you expect them to do?

@3 My family did that as well. However we didn't buy soda every trip, it would take us a few trips to deplete the stash. I think what families should consider in the future is either drinks without so much sugar or just stop buying them all together if such a price increase freaks you out. We're talking about a 12 cent per can tax if my math is right. If that breaks your budget, you're doing it wrong or maybe you shouldn't be buying so much sugar. Clearly if you can't afford the price of a can of pop, you can't afford the doctor you'll need.

Yeah, the thing is, you don't NEED pop/soda and sports drinks. It's not like he's asking for a tax on bread or sarcasm. If only there was such a thing as a free liquid that was good for us. Oh well...

A good progressive goverment protects it citizens against their idiot mothers using that most effective tool of good child-rearing: tax policy.

A good progressive government never cuts spending, particular when it is going to such worthwhile causes as cushy retirement benefits for the members of politically key state employee unions.

damn corn syrup and processed white sugar is good food. really, i read that somewhere...

http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/myg2001/vie…

it must be true.

If you can't cure stupid, you should at least be able to tax it.

True story: on a recent road trip to visit relatives I see a couple of times a year, I found that elves had made off with my hidden stash of non-caloric sweetener. The ONLY thing available to make my crappy instant coffee tolerable was Karo Corn Syrup.

It took a minimum of two TABLESPOONS of corn syrup to take the ditchwater edge off the coffee (not really noticeably sweet), which equals 120 calories.

A teaspoon of white sugar, 4g, equals 15 calories.

As the Web site says, THIS IS WHY YOU'RE FAT.

It's all on the Nutrition Facts labels, folks; I just never had a reason to make this comparison before (and rarely drink soda anyway).

I think soda is a waste of money and of calories, I think taxes need to be raised, and I think this is a bullshit ad, but I still don't like the tax.

I like that discretionary, non-needed, addicting items are taxed. It almost makes up for the subsidies, and I like that people can choose between giving the government money to help the budget, or frugal tax-free alternatives. Egg creams, floats, fizzes, flips, sodas, and ginger beers can be made at home.

Trash like that never has that clean of a kitchen. Believe me, I know. If I had a dime for every filthy kitchen I've been in while a woman like that complained to me about something in exactly that tone of voice, I wouldn't have to work.

Can we stop subsidizing corn?

@15: But of course we should tax the ingredients for those discretionary, non-needed, made-at-home delights you listed. Right?

That being said, please let us get rid of subsidies. For this and many other reasons.

Fuck, I hate these types of appeals to our fear of poverty. We are going to have to (mostly) tax our way through this perilous bit here in this state, and shit like this lie to us by pretending the minor added expense isn't completely worth it for what it accomplishes.

Even in dear liberal Seattle, the continuing McGinn economic-fear spin on completely unrelated matters is going to make scaremongering ads like this shit find much more fertile ground than they might have.

dear outraged mothers,

here's an idea: make your own fucking lemonade. 3 ingredients and one of them comes out of the goddamn tap.

you're welcome.

I'm glad that all the commenters here seem to get it.

Her shitty corn based food/meat is highly subsidised, and at least finally we're removing the subsidy on her corn sweetened beverages.

We're not anywhere near moderate sin tax territory (restaurant tax) here, just a bit of reversing BAD food policy (cash to eat junk) with reasonable food policy (sales tax on junk).

As far as I'm concerned, they can tax the FUCK out of soda, and it wouldn't bother me a bit. In fact, it might finally give me the kick in the ass that I need to stop drinking the stuff.

*takes another swig of Pepsi*

If they ended the subsidies on corn, they probably wouldn't need to tax the consumers of that corn. Don't ya think??

@23: if they tax the corporations that make the sodas, or if they tax the consumer, or if they tax the hauling of sodas, the result will be the same. the cost of sodas will go up. What difference does it make to you at what point in the production the product is charged? And if the subsidies were removed, the result (wait for it) would be a higher price of the final product to offset their loss. I am taxed all over the place, but that's how this country pays for stuff. Oh well.

I'm essentially a libertarian, and I'm in favor of this tax.

In an ideal world, there wouldn't be subsidies resulting in artificially low corn [syrup] prices. But since I'm not making the good the enemy of the perfect, I'll tax the tax until we can end the subsidy.

Someone needs to do a parody of this ad. "If this tax passes, my children are going to have to drink something...HEALTHY! Is THAT what you want?"

@13 - Karo is not high fructose.

While I'm pretty much always in favor of small taxes on luxuries to pay for necessities, I don't understand your quest to equate pop with severe child abuse, Dan.

I don't understand your quest to equate pop with severe child abuse, Dan.

When did he do that?

Something you people for the tax don't seem to understand- corn subsidies are paid for with...wait for it...your tax dollars! Whether you buy soda or not, you already pay taxes to make it cheaper. Taxing the soda means using tax dollars to make something more expensive that is only cheap because of tax dollars. If you end the subsidy, soda will start to cost more, but only the people who buy soda will pay for it, and maybe they will start making drinks with cane sugar, which is still bad but not AS bad as HFCS, which is possibly one of the most deadly things Americans eat.

Tax the shit out of it. And while we're at it, how about an extra fast food tax?

The root problem is the corn subsidy. If agribusiness really needs a subsidy, why not subsidize fruits and vegetables destined for the stands in stores and markets to encourage and make affordable healthy life-styles.

As it is people buy the crap processed foods and drinks because they are cheaper than the healthier unprocessed options. If we shift subsidies away from corn that for the most part is turned into HFCS, we not only encourage people to treat the luxury of soda as a luxury due to its higher price, we encourage people to generally eat better.

No matter, soda should be taxed anyway, along with all the other foods (if you can call them foods) devoid of nutritional value. This isn't an encroachment on anybody's freedom, you are still free to purchase these items, you are just encouraged, fiscally, to be healthy. The government needs funds to run. To give our kids an education. To pave the roads you drive to work on. To pay the police and fire departments. To make our way of life possible. Also the system is overstrained by the poor health choices corporations encourage incentivized by our governments bass-ackwards subsidies and taxing of corporations as individuals.

@34 I agree that we need taxes to make our way of life possible, but I don't agree that regressive taxes on consumer goods, even unhealthy, luxury goods, is the best way to pay for things. It's not about whether or not it's an encroachment on freedom, it's about whether it's fair and/or financially sound. Let's say a soda tax does what it is supposed to and makes people buy less soda- then you have less tax money to pay for the things we need. Meanwhile, farm subsidies primarily go to incredibly wealthy tax cheats.

If we end subsidies on things like corn, soy, and water monopolies, the price of junk food, along with many other luxuries, will self-correct and there will be more tax dollars available for necessities like schools and roads, and we will actually have reduced the complexity of the tax code.