It's only Berkeley, CA, but...
It still sets a precedent.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancygagliardi/2014/11/05/berkeley-makes-history-on-the-soda-tax/
My own "representative" Rosa DeLauro has offered up the exact same tax. OK, not exactly the same...she wants 2 cents per ounce and not one. And she is in Washington D.C. and not the Mecca of Socialist wet dreams, so should her "SWEET" act pass it screws with the rest of the country and not just a few fruit loops in Berkeley too blinded by liberalism to know they are getting hosed.
I said it about tobacco and I'll say it about this: If a product is so bad for you that a campaign must be mounted to stop you from using it, then BAN IT! Make it illegal to use or consume, period. But that's not how government works.
Instead governments will tell you to not use a particular product because it is bad for you, and then they tax that product. They gain passage of the new tax laws with promises of using that money for all sorts of wondrous things ("It's for the children!") and that you will benefit in both finances and health. However, in order for the finances/taxation part to work, they must assume that more people will pay the tax than avoid it. In other words, they are lying yet again and those who support the new taxes are stupid enough to believe professional liars that they go along with spending more and even vote new taxes upon themselves.
But I'm just the crazy guy in the corner who doesn't know a thing about food or about trends concerning food.
And that's all I have to say about that.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancygagliardi/2014/11/05/berkeley-makes-history-on-the-soda-tax/
My own "representative" Rosa DeLauro has offered up the exact same tax. OK, not exactly the same...she wants 2 cents per ounce and not one. And she is in Washington D.C. and not the Mecca of Socialist wet dreams, so should her "SWEET" act pass it screws with the rest of the country and not just a few fruit loops in Berkeley too blinded by liberalism to know they are getting hosed.
I said it about tobacco and I'll say it about this: If a product is so bad for you that a campaign must be mounted to stop you from using it, then BAN IT! Make it illegal to use or consume, period. But that's not how government works.
Instead governments will tell you to not use a particular product because it is bad for you, and then they tax that product. They gain passage of the new tax laws with promises of using that money for all sorts of wondrous things ("It's for the children!") and that you will benefit in both finances and health. However, in order for the finances/taxation part to work, they must assume that more people will pay the tax than avoid it. In other words, they are lying yet again and those who support the new taxes are stupid enough to believe professional liars that they go along with spending more and even vote new taxes upon themselves.
But I'm just the crazy guy in the corner who doesn't know a thing about food or about trends concerning food.
And that's all I have to say about that.