How about a fast-food tax?

[MinneapolisMatt]

We all know it's trash for your body. That should be given a sin-tax.

I feel that bad eating habits are nipping at the heels of smoking as far as health care costs go.

Wanna feed your kids a happy meal? Fine. But pay a 5% tax on your bill. Lords knows smokers and drinkers have been funding the government for years. Why should unhealthy junk food be any different?

[baycityMI]

1. then I want a cut in my taxes for eating healthy.

[thelordofhell]

105. Then I want a cut in my taxes for not smoking

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[Kceres]

2. I thought the sugary and soft drink tax was a great idea.

Did you see the advertisements against that? The fast food industry has a powerful lobby. They will spin it as a war on affordable food. Just saying..

[October]

29. Yes, the advertising AGAINST such a tax was everywhere! Ridiculous!

"The government is telling us how to shop for our family" type nonsense.

They won -- of course.

[winston65]

104. I think that taxing food in any form is immoral-

the solution (IMO) is banning high fructose corn syrup. HFCS is poison, liquid fat.

[Arkansas Granny]

3. Why don't we tax soft drinks, too?

[ThomWV]

48. When that is tried in an area the sugar interests bombard the airways with pro sugar ads

No kidding, they have spokespersons standing there telling you that your children will be deprived of substance if you vote to tax soft drinks. It is the most manipulative twisting of facts since the days when everyone smoked and doctors said it may indeed be good for some folks on the air.

[noiretextatique]

4. that tax would like hurt those suffering the most already

how about a tax on the companies who sell it? a tax that cannot be passed on to consumers.

[hobbit709]

5. There's already an 8.25% tax here in TX.

[Shandris]

6. How about 'No', 'Invite me over to see what YOUR lifestyle needs taxed' (n/t)

[HopeHoops]

7. Make it 25% - the shit would still be cheap and just as disgusting.

Besides, most of the consumers wouldn't notice the increase - that involves math.

[Ter]

11. What a disgusting intolerant post

n/t

[HopeHoops]

15. Why thank you!

[Rebubula]

17. Intolerant...

...of what exactly?

[HopeHoops]

25. Yeah, I was wondering that too. Fast food is shit processed into packaged shit.

I'm not sure what's intolerant about that, but it is a hard sell to argue that it isn't shit. It makes people fat, so making it less affordable might just influence people to actually try COOKING!

[Mimosa]

56. Designed to make liberals look stupid, I'm thinking.

I eat 'fast food' rarely, maybe 3 or 4 times a year if that. BUT I despise snobs.

[Wait Wut]

23. Thank you for pointing out that the poor are...

...idiots and probably illiterate, as well. I've been wanting to say that out loud for decades, but always thought folks would assume I was heartless and bigoted!! :sarcasm:

[HopeHoops]

Frankly, the SUV crowd with the GPS and in-visor DVD players are the intended target.

[indurancevile]

39. it's comments like that that lead people to reject the democratic party for the republicans.

totally unnecessary.

[Bill McBlueState]

74. hmmm

I'm not sure anyone's really changing parties because someone said something snarky on a message board.

[indurancevile]

77. not one comment; a general perception of "elitism".

[Philippine expat]

66. As a fast food eating, decent at math liberal, you can KMA

n/t

[Bluebear]

94. Asshole post.

No offense.

[Cirque du So-What]

8. Consumption taxes are inherently regressive taxes

whether it's gasoline, beer, ciggies or fast food. I fail to understand why people are falling over themselves trying to come up with ways to hit low-income people with ever-increasing sales taxes. Why aren't people clamoring for higher income taxes on the fucking rich?!?

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. The poor are obviously not bright enough to make decisions on their own

That's why they're poor in the first place. If they were smarter they would be eating at high-end gastropubs gourmet food trucks.

[indurancevile]

40. good question.

[postulater]

9. How about the tax is used to subsidize fresh food at the same location.

A store that sells junk, collects the tax and then gets credit for selling local grown vegetables.

[Ter]

10. Too many Democrats are obsessed with taxes

I hate them. This will only hurt the poor and teens. I don't see Bill Gates or Steve Jobs eating Taco Bell.

[Posteritatis]

101. Especially specifically punitive ones like the OP wants. (nt)

[yawnmaster]

12. Let's have a obesity tax, where people are taxed for every pound they have over...

a healthy norm.
and make it a progressive tax so the first 5 pounds have a fairly low tax, but above that you need to start paying for your extravagant lifestyle.
That way we are truly targeting what is unhealthy.
for instance, eating too much healthy food.


I'm being sarcastic, of course.
or am I?

[spin]

36. For many years I exercised regularly and perhaps excessively ...

Now that I have turned 65 I have been determined to be a candidate for a hip replacement and also suffer from degenerative disk disease in my lower back.

Hip replacements only last so long so I am attempting to put off the replacement until it is absolutely necessary. My doctor tells me that there is little that can be done to correct my back problems.

I try to be careful of my diet and I still exercise by walking on a treadmill but the combination of my problems cause me to view the treadmill as a torture machine.

Consequently, I am overweight by 20 pounds. I eat fast food about once a month.

[Lil Missy]

13. That would affect the poor mostly. How 'bout a luxury tax instead.

[hifiguy]

14. Unfortunately it would be

regressive, and brutally so.

[Rebubula]

16. How about...

...NO!?!



YEAH!!! Tax the poor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ZombieHorde]

18. Why go after the poor? Don't they sacrifice enough?

Do you really want to restrict their pleasures?

[NeedleCast]

19. Sure, As Long As We Can Raise A Tax on What You Find Enjoyable Too

That's fair, isn't it?

[Throd]

57. How do you tax sanctimony?

[JVS]

62. Massive farmers' market, microbrew, and organic fees

[Dappleganger]

20. Oh my.

:eyes:

[former9thward]

21. Food should not be taxed. Any version of it.

Your healthy is my unhealthy and so on. Who makes the decision on what exactly is "healthy" and what is "unhealthy"? Do we tax the salads they have in fast food places? How about the diet colas they sell with 0 calories? Do they get taxed the same as the colas with hundreds of calories? Sorry no more taxes on food of any sort and no more regressive taxes.

[Rex]

22. How about a special luxury tax on all items over 200k?

That are not 'needs'.

[NeedleCast]

24. Maybe make an exception for housing

Even a very modest house in some areas of the country is in excess of 200k.

[Rex]

31. Anything essential like a house, food, transportation

I would exclude. A 350k car, I would not. A 3 million dollar yacht, I would not. A 5 million dollar platinum toilet I would have an extra-extra tax on. So many 'wants' that could be taxed it is silly we don't.

And if the uber-wealthy don't like it, they can move to Greece.

[Starry Messenger]

26. Anything but taxing the wealthy.

:sarcasm:

[rollin74]

27. low income people would be affected the most

people who could least afford a tax increase

very bad idea

[ElboRuum]

28. No.

Do I need say more?

[rucky]

30. What's DU's fascination with regressive taxation as a form of social engineering?

[ElboRuum]

37. Authoritarians come in both cherry and blueberry flavors!

Seriously, someone is going to have to tell me why, if I'd tell a nattering authoritarian social conservative to go pound sand when it comes to their opinion on matters involving what people do in the privacy of their own lives, why a liberal crowing about 'fixing our awful poisonous American culture' with regressivist policy would expect to be treated any differently.

[ProfessorGAC]

43. +1

I noted the same thing down lower in the thread.
GAC

[Posteritatis]

99. feeling Better Than You and Being Right are addictive things, I guess

Whole lot of would-be micromanagers around here; it's sad that they don't see how vile they're generally being when they propose stuff like that.

[CTyankee]

32. While I would not be affected by such a tax, I do think that it is a bad idea to

tax food, just on general principles.

I do not agree that all sales taxes are bad, altho I agree they are regressive. That we all pay SOME taxes makes us a democracy and makes us stakeholders. But put the major load in the progressive taxes, such as income tax...

[Gold Metal Flake]

33. You Are Adorable!

[Peacetrain]

34. I am going to disagree with you.. and i will tell you why.

For the poorest in our nation.. fast food is the only food.

Go into some of our more distressed neighborhoods.. are not even that distressed.. how many grocery store do you see?

People are living fast food.

[slackmaster]

35. I'm opposed to making government dependent on unhealthful practices for revenue

I see a conflict of interest in having government, which is supposed to promote the general welfare, rely on sales of harmful substances for money.

[Riftaxe]

41. Why a regressive tax?

Punish people for not being able to afford to eat in a 4 star restaurant?

Why not just tax people for living under the poverty rate?

[ProfessorGAC]

42. Unbrilliant

Sin taxes are the antithesis of a progressive tax system. They affect those least able to afford the taxes in the greatest possible way.

And, no i don't want them on cigarrettes or liquor either. But, that dog has left the yard.
GAC

[The Straight Story]

44. Gas tax too - exhaust and harm to health (asthma/etc) and the environment

:)

[lynne]

60. Yeah, because we don't pay any taxes on gas now, right?

:rofl:

[yawnmaster]

45. How about a tax for watching TV that is bad for you...and a tax on Movies that...

might be bad.
Violent shows would be taxable.
Mind draining shows also - like reality shows about celebrity lives.
Watching Nova would be free.
A show like jackass would have a large tax as we have to pay the medical for those kids that try it.
These just off the top of my head.

A commission could be formed to determine what is good and bad for us.


I'm working on an idea now on how we can tax people to control what they wear. I hate those baggy pants.

[Proles]

46. In theory...

In theory it's not a bad idea. I think a tax on soft drinks would be better than a tax on fast food.

I think a lot of impoverished people actually depend on fast food somewhat for sustenance, and a consumer tax on that may be debilitating.

The problem is that unhealthy foods tend to be cheaper than healthy ones. A solution targetting that problem needs to be found.

However, a tax on unhealthy food businesses themselves might not be a bad idea. I doubt something like that would be debilitating to say, McDonalds.

[ProfessorGAC]

49. And They Wouldn't Just Pass On Those Costs?

Now, i do acknowledge that the cost would be amortized over EVERYONE who buys the food, not just poor people. So, it does reduce, but not eliminate, the impact on the lowest income people.

The problem i have with this idea is that it's social engineering masquerading as a revenue solution.

Fundamentally, i don't accept the "everyone should want to live forever" philosophy. So, if i want to eat things that are bad for me, let me be. And, then i extend that to everyone else. Trying to change behavior through taxation is a fool's game, and it's inherently silly.
GAC

[NightWatcher]

47. how about a tax on each share traded daily in the market? 5 cents per share per transaction

then the wankers who shift billions of shares around each second trying to manipulat the market and make a few bucks could fund EVERYTHING.

Lets not tax the poor, but the fuckers who have manipulated us for years. The bastards should be happy they're not in prison, so let them pay a little tax to bail US out for a change

[Taverner]

50. Might be more trouble than its worth

For me, it seems reasonable. But I'm not who you have to sell it to. Can you imagine the outrage from rotund bloviators like Rush?

Again, I also think a national internet sales tax is a good idea, even if it's a regressive tax.

[madinmaryland]

51. NO. How about a fair tax for those who can most afford it.

[proud patriot]

52. leave my cheeseburgers alone

thank you for your consideration

[JoePhilly]

53. TAX THE POOR!!!

Maybe you don't intend that, but that is the outcome.

[ohheckyeah]

54. How many people up in arms over a tax on fast

food (which I don't support) feel the same about taxes on cigarettes?

[yawnmaster]

55. I have problems with cigarette taxes for a number of reasons...

One being that we get the tax money for programs (beyond smoking cessation) and its a good amount of money...
is the govt really going to put their effort into creating programs that will cut that tax money (by people quitting smoking)?

[jberryhill]

58. Double for happy meals bought for circumcised boys!

[lynne]

59. Why do you hate the poor, the unemployed, the elderly, the underemployed and teenagers -

- many of whom eat fast-food because its all they can afford to eat when out. There are healthy options available at fast-food spots, too. Just had a chicken garden salad at McDonald's the other day.

Why do you hate chicken garden salad????

[jberryhill]

61. Bad Health Habits Save BILLIONS In Social Security Payouts

Why is "health care costs" the only thing you mention.

If someone works until 60 and drops dead of lung cancer or a heart attack, all those social security payments are saved.

In terms of health care costs, do healthy people who live long enough to collect a lot of social security, then proceed to die of something cheap? No.

[cottonseed]

63. Why TAX when you can just cut the TAX BREAKS!

Make corn syrup and fat more expensive and you've just done same thing (plus w/o the breaks you're getting your income back). Then you're talk a "tax and spender" either. Just against welfare for corporations. Good enough for me.

[TheKentuckian]

64. How about we treat nanny staters like other authoritarians?

Especially the fucks that are always wanting to use the tax code to punish the poor.

[MinneapolisMatt]

65. Obviously, people are completely missing the point of my post.

I'm not a snob. I don't think poor people are stupid. Did I say any of those things?

I'm not sanctimonious. I don't give a shit what people put into their bodies.

If you buy $10 worth of fast food, what's wrong with paying 50 cents extra?

I'm not dissing on the poor at all. I'm simply trying to think of ways to generate some extra revenue.

Maybe it's a bad idea. I can accept that, but my heart isn't in some dark, prickish place for crying out loud.

[ElboRuum]

68. Maybe you don't give a shit... and no I don't believe we've missed the point.

But you seem to believe that people who make so-called bad choices should not only be held accountable for them (which they already are, reaping the poor health as predicted) but also financially punished for them as well. Now considering that quite a few of the poor can really only afford crap like this, as all of the free-range or organic food is equanimous to a luxury item in comparison insofar as price, you are proposing to increase their financial burdens.

Regressive taxation is punitive taxation which seeks to actively discourage a behavior while at the same time drawing revenue from that behavior, and regressive taxes always have a disproportionate effect on the poor because your 'extra 50 cents as no big deal' is a greater percentage of their income than it would be for someone more affluent. It is this fact which makes me boggle every time liberals, who claim to have a healthy desire to lessen the burden that the poor experience, get these ideas that these sorts of taxations are just fine.

[Posteritatis]

100. For some people there's quite a bit wrong with paying 50 cents extra sometimes

Perhaps your sanctimony and, yes, contempt for the poor are blocking your view of your denial of your actual attitude here.

[jimmyflint]

67. Yes, and tax soda,bottled water, energy drinks, and corn syrup

But not milk or real fruit juice.

[Shagbark Hickory]

69. How about a fast food ban?

I mean if it's trash for your body, if the health and wellfare of the public is the motivation, why not just ban it?

If you want to tax poor people who don't have a Flemings or Ruths Chris in their neighborhood, then why not just come out with a poor people tax.

[totodeinhere]

Don't ban it because an occasional fast food meal is not harmful.

It's when you overdue it that you run into trouble. I admit that I occasionally eat fast food, and I am not obese and my blood pressure is normal. So why should I be denied that occasional pleasure if it is not harming me?

[sheldon]

70. How about severing the incentives and subsidies for this crap?

Junk food is cheap, partly because of how powerful the lobbies are, getting our government to help pay for much of it...
Some of the crap that gets to call itself food, shouldn't even be allowed.
It's also an EPIDEMIC that has the potential to bring the country to its knees, over health care.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

71. A nanny state regressive tax. It's bs.

[tnlefty]

72. Jeeze, I don't feed my kids 21, 18 and 16 fast food very

often, I cook, however, I bought them lunch today from a fast food restaurant, for the first time in years. I paid a sales tax (9.25%) on that order.

Do you live in a place where a sales tax doesn't apply to fast food purchases, but also to food from grocery stores, food produce stands, etc.?

I'll admit that I don't like the tax on food, but I live where I live, and I'm surrounded by stupid.

edited to add: I'm not saying that you're stupid, not my intent at all, but food taxes just bug me as they hit people who can least afford them, but pay dearly as a percentage of their income...

[Lyric]

73. How about we stop disproportionately taxing poor people and tax golf courses instead?

Shove some new taxes onto the shoulders of the people who CAN afford it, for once. If we simply *must* impose a moral standard via taxation, let's go after the BIG fish--not the minnows.

[Bill McBlueState]

75. Why is a fast-food tax considered a tax on the poor?

When I was near the poverty level a few years ago, I almost never ate fast food. Big bucks for empty calories. I went to the grocery store, where I could use my food stamp card. Packed my lunch for work. And so on.

[Throd]

76. What used to work for you then, might not work for others now.

When I lived in a "poor" neighborhood (West Long Beach) quality produce wasn't always an option. I had a car, so I could drive to other parts of town to do my grocery shopping. Other people had their own issues, like having children and not having a car, to contend with.

[JI7]

85. because wealthy people can get junk food at "finer" places

[flvegan]

78. Broadbrush? I had a BK Veggie Burger today.

I'm betting that the meal I built around it is nutritionally better than your lunch or dinner.

Care to have a go?

I don't like fast food nor the folks that sell it, but it should be about nutrition, not an industry.

[JHB]

79. No, no , absolutely not.

Start thinking about the things that you do, and think about which ones other people who don't do that thing would be quite happy to tax you on.

[RegieRocker]

80. Tax for food should be verboten even for the baggets.

[totodeinhere]

81. That would be unfair to people who only have an occasional fast food meal and do

not jeopardize their health. It is possible to eat one fast food meal per month and do just fine. Yes, eating there everyday is probably not good, but if you do that you really do need to get a life.

[Blue-Jay]

82. Fast food? TAX! - Good food? NO TAX! - Who decides? MinneapolisMatt!

I'm OK with this.

[U4ikLefty]

83. taxing smokes is regressive as well

but that is different...yeah

[JI7]

84. Why not just raise taxes on the poor ?

[DainBramaged]

86. Here we go

Olive Garden, Cigarettes, breastfeeding, circumcision, narwhals, pit bulls, smoking bans, and soda pop

High school bands, kids on planes, bombing the moon, tax fast food, Rapture, PETA, breeders and Applebees

Vaccinations, ponies, Ipads, Michael Vicks, Octomom, Spitzer and Charlie Sheen, we sure started the poutrage and we made the Weiner gone.

[flvegan]

87. I see that you failed to mention Octomom AND Charlie Sheen.

Apologist. How shameful, DB.

[DainBramaged]

89. No I didn't

:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :rofl:

[flvegan]

90. You know

I luv ya DB, right?

If you say "yes" then I'm gonna need a test drive in that Cadillac CTS-V Wagon that I know you have access too. I want that car.

[DainBramaged]

95. Coupe coupe coupe coupe

Heads rotate 180 when you drive the coupe, the wagon looks like the Chrysler wagon and doesn't get a glance.




When the rep came by with the coupe last month, all he asked was we didn't turn off the traction control.


We did.


:evilgrin:


PS


We had a Hennessy blown 705 Camaro in for warranty work. Owner STOOD with the car the entire time would not let us drive it LOLOL.

We also had the FIRST SLP 555 in. Would never know it was a blower car. STOCK air box and engine cover.

[flvegan]

96. No, I must have the wagon.

And Hennessy is a God. Much like Lingenfelter. I hate that I can't afford either.

[DainBramaged]

97. Great back in the day drag story about Lingenfelter

I personally knew John. In the 70's when I was a semi-professional drag racer, he built lock-up torque converters for us. In fact the FIRST time we used one and won in 1974 running our SS/EA '68 Corvette at a points meet, we were tossed after winning because they hadn't been approved yet. And boy did they make a difference in ET and began the trend away from sticks. He also did our cylinder heads and motors for friends much richer than we. He also let you buy cars from him with JUST drive train mods and not including kidney-crunching suspensions.


I can still see him standing on the starting line at Raceway park in NJ watching our 'Vette run. It is a shame he is gone. His place lives on, but it isn't the same without him.

http://www.thelingenfeltercollection.com/

[Lucian]

92. Sounds like the lyrics to "It's the End of the World as We Know It V2."

[NiteOwll]

88. Why not subsidize healthy foods instead?

People buy the unhealthy foods because they're cheap and quick. The people I know who work the most hours -- eat the most fast food. Seems pretty heartless to tax the foods they CAN afford.

[Lucian]

91. How about we tax somebody other than the poor for once?

[Bluebear]

93. Yes, let's tax the poor even MORE to fund the war machine. GREAT idea!

:eyes:

[winston65]

98. I'm not disputing that junk food is not healthy-

But what you advocate is yet more regressive taxation. Go into a McDonalds in the morning and you'll see lower working class with children and seniors eating. One thing about junk food is that is very cheap. A surtax on junk food sounds good until you see who will be paying the tax. The poor and elderly are already being screwed into the ground, you want to make it worse? In lives filled with bad choices, perhaps junk food is not the worst thing they could be doing. I'd rather feed my child a happy meal than nothing at all. Is it a bad choice? Hell yeah. But don't make it cost more.

[WatsonT]

102. Why not just levy a tax on people proportionate to their fat percentage

You can eat fast food and be healthy.

You can avoid it entirely and be obese.

So if the point is to cover the added healthcare costs of being unhealthy just place a tax on fat. Around April everyone can be required to get weighed in and have a special doctor approved tax added to their returns. Adjust it for male/female and by age. And below a certain amount you get a pass.

[WatsonT]

103. And frankly if you wanted people to be healthier and save money for the federal government

don't add a new tax just cut agricultural subsidies.

Or maybe switch them from corn (which means corn syrup, meat, and cheese are artificially cheap) to fruits, nuts, and veggies.

Hamburgers would immediately become more expensive and farmers would find producing corn and animal products somewhat less lucrative. Pushing a switch over towards a more diverse agriculture, making other things (like veggies) cheaper as they are now given even more land.

All this can be done with no new taxes and a net savings to the feds.

[NYC_SKP]

106. No.

Because not all fast food need be unhealthy.

Try again.