While sitting at lunch with a few friends, all of us sipping on various drinks, some sugar laden some not so much, I was listening to the tongues wagging about New York Governor Paterson’s proposal to add additional taxes on the purchase of sugary drinks. I started to analyze this move, trying to come to terms with how I felt about it. My feelings on this are not ambiguous, yet I don’t have my feet planted firmly on the for or against side of this issue.
In defense of the request to add an additional 18 percent sales tax on sugary sodas and fruit drinks containing less than 70 percent natural fruit juice Laura L. Anglin, the state of New York budget director, stated that “one out of every four New Yorkers is obese”. This tax will purportedly raise $400 million a year for health programs, and is expected to decrease the consumption of nutritionally void high calorie soft drinks by 5 percent. That can only be a good thing right? There’s no debating the facts. Obesity is on the incline in this country.Thirty states boast an obesity rate equal to or greater than 25 percent, three states equal to or greater than thirty percent.Obesity is the second leading cause of preventable death in the U.S. with 30 percent of Americans classified as obese. Minority and low-socioeconomic-status groups are disproportionately affected by this epidemic, at all ages.
The most verifiable and common cause of weight gain and obesity are consuming more calories than the body needs (sometimes in the form of empty sugar laden high calorie soft drinks), and being sedentary. There are recent studies, however, which suggest the imbalance between calories consumed and calories burned can also be caused by a number of different obesity-related factors, including genetic, hormonal, behavioral, environmental and even cultural. In adding a tax of this kind it is important to remember that obesity is not always simply a behavioral issue. I don’t disagree with the tactic of taxing something unnecessary to provide funds for services which could eliminate or significantly decrease a serious problem, but I can’t see, at least not with any clarity, how soft drinks are causal, and if I were a resident of New York I’d want to know to their plan going forward.
Is the state going to address the issues which affect the obesity rate, the most notorious being economics and education? Are they going to fund and develop a program to keep high carbohydrate starch based meals out of pubic schools and replace them with healthier choices? On another level are they going to implement programs to address the issues which keep those on the lower end of the socioeconomic ladder from climbing up the ladder? Is there a plan to provide a top notch public school education ensuring everyone desiring to further their education after high school can do so and by that increasing their income potential making it more likely they will not only understand the concept of good nutrition, but will be able to afford to put it into practice in their own lives?
Is there a plan to start subsidizing broccoli and tomatoes instead of corn?
There is something to be said for taxing nutritionally void sugar laden products, but the tax is a band aid without a real plan. Will a 5 percent decrease in consumption of soda products translate into a decrease in the obesity rates? Theoretically it could, but in a state where the obesity rate has gone from 10 percent in 1990 to equal to or greater than 25 percent in 2007 there needs to be more than a 5 percent decrease in the consumption of sugary soft drinks to justify the “makes us fat tax”.
Published first at Blog Critics.
I don’t eat much sugar, exercise a lot and have the blood tests to back that. My thyroid however….This causes me much personal distress as much as i want to think differently I am vain. I was talking to my sister last night. She assumed that everybody in South Carolina is out of shape. She assumed wrongly
I think there comes a point when taxation in the name of health becomes big brother. Then again some school systems here might cut back to four days a week and I don’t understand why they don’t raise the taxes on cigarettes. Well I do as tobacco is big business but…
I took out the part of my post where I said that I preferred Wright as I understand where he’s coming from and find nothing wrong in much of what he says as I’m just not in the mood for the comments that would get. And some people here are on the verge of figuring out I have a blog and it’s called….While I stand by everything I say I do need to establish myself first
you’re thyroid will kill you…………….my wife had to have hers destroyed with radiation and that has to be swallowed……………….but that has NOTHING to do with this BLOG
\
Except, if you are a regular commenter here you’d know it does have something to do with the community at this blog.
jacob’s last blog post..Golf, now like Hollywood and Poiltics
Jacob sometimes you surprise me.
The Harvard Obesity Study has been seriously questioned by other parallel studies. This is nothing more than a headline publicity stunt with serious implications about the free market place. If the purpose is to improve society”s health, the more serious issue next to tobacco is the use of alcohol. Raise the taxes on alcohol considerably. If we tax soda pop, what is next, candy bars and Kool Aide? Better yet, lets make the toddlers and teens register their trykes and bikes. Greed pervades the market place and the government while no one talks about cut backs on spending.
If they institute programs which would help the problem I wouldn’t mind really but looking at what is proposed it looks like a baseless tax.
The state I live in has a two dollar a pack cigarette tax New York’s is somewhat lower – bringing in 260 million dollars and they say this soft drink tax will bring in 400 million a year. I am not sure on the comparisons between lung cancer deaths in NY and death from conditions aggravated or caused by obesity but either way this particular tax doesn’t look like it will do anything but cut down pop drinking my 5 percents and is worthless to all but the state who gets the money.
Soooooo right! It’s a band aid. We need new food policy; new farm policy. And no more of that damn HFCS in our food.
Happy Holidays! Dow 4000 in 2009!
Paul Malden’s last blog post..Facial Feature
Well we always do almost nothing at the expense (at both ends) to the people.
You’re dead-on about it being a band-aid, but isn’t that what government ALWAYS does? Just slap a new wrinkle on all of the old ones, with no regard to unintended consequences (or even consideration that we might not need the wrinkled old garment anymore?)
I have an easier solution. End corn subsidies.
Why are America’s poorest ALSO the most obese? Because of the prevalence of high-fructose corn syrup in so many products — which, thanks to the subsidy are priced below market value and therefore most affordable to those with the least resources.
If there were a fat tax, then you have government intervention in both inputs and outputs, and the bureaucracy grows at each end.
Here’s a similar dynamic that shows it can screw us in the other direction. We guarantee farmers a ridiculously high price for a commodity, then provide assistance to the poor to purchase things that are more expensive then they would be otherwise.
So we pay taxes to prop up the price — and then pay more taxes on the part of the price that was artificially inflated by our own previously confiscated tax dollars.
I’m a little spun up, can you tell?
Ike’s last blog post..Capitol Punishment
Corn subsidies should have been ended long ago, that frustrates me to no end. We should burn dowe that house, metaphorically of course.
You know they just released another study saying high fructose corn syrup is not the culprit. I say stop spending money on all these studies, stop having people who have never actually applied their knowledge in real life make policy, and maybe take what we don’t need to survive, but remove the tax on things we really do need like homes and cars and clothing and nutritious food, and books ( yeah I know that is a stretch but it’s true)
I personally think this is ridiculous. As a high school student and well below the obesity rate I feel awful thinking I would have to pay more, for something I consume on a regular basis. I do play a descent amount of sports and consume many soft drinks. This is tax is putting the blame on one thing for which there various other problems. And there are literally hundreds of more things wrong that needs to be fixed in this country. For one my school is pretty bad, and desperately needs radical reforms. And they act like the smoking tax worked miracles. It only alienated a demographic, let me tell you there are plenty of people who smoke at my age. I am actually surprised when I hear someone isn’t smoking, I do not. Overall this is an awful idea and should not be put into action.
Exactly Stephen.
We all sat around discussing how the people wanted to target smokers with high taxes and make them responsible for everyone. Well we laughed and said they would target the obese next…and sure enough it’s starting. If they truly believe something must change to help the masses, then charge everyone the same. Stop with the discriminating against the smoker, the candy bar eater.
This reminds me of someone we fought against in World War Two. He wanted a perfect race. He was ulgy and evil. Stop your discriminating.
I am all for a tax on cigarettes it has proven to cut down smoking, and it’s directly attributable to lung cancer where-as high sugary drinks are not directly attributable to obesity.
You’re right to point out soft drinks are not causal to obesity, taxing a symptom of a system which makes it hard to afford healthy food, punishes those with money as well as those who just happen to like soft drinks with no plan to address the obesity problem itself, and there is a problem I believe that.
We’re pretty good here about taking money on a false premise while never addressing the issues we need to address.
johnm’s last blog post..The Rhythm is Gonna Get You
I think the tax is a great idea to get people thinking about their own health. We keep at our same unhealthy behaviors until someone either tells us we are dying or cuts into our pocketbooks or makes it illegal!! We can’t increase taxes across the board because heaven forbid we raise taxes!! If any elected official breathes tax raising they are shunned and scorned to the dark side! We people are so ignorant and selfish that we will only allow taxing that points to specific groups of people like smokers or drinkers of high calorie beverages! Let’s not complain people!! Raising taxes is what we do to try to help this mess of a nation — we do not do it very well very often but we have to try —- and taxing out cigarettes surely did help to get the message out to stop smokers and ban smoking in public places and reduce lung cancer and etc. …………….
Yes, I agree it’s a great idea to take away freedom, and offer up a tax on using your god given rights.
However, let us not stop there since people feel they need to tax any behaviors they deem to be bad.
How about taxing people that give birth to children that have disabilities? Lets face it some people just have children even after they are told their child maybe born with a handicap.
Should others pay for their disregard of the strain it could put on taxpayers and healthcare? We could even put a tax on air as well. Every one of us exhale Co2’s that cause global warming, so we should pay though the nose in order to cut down this problem.
Get it though your head people placing a tax will do nothing to cut down the problem. All it does it take away individual liberty and puts more money into government hands so they can use it any way they like.
I’ll always laugh at people thinking taking money and their freedoms away is good for us all.
When you give up your rights and freedom, you become nothing but cattle for the government to slaughter any time they wish. Be careful what you ask for you may just get it!!!
And since Cindy K loves taxes so much I hope our government taxes everything she enjoys doing. I would guess Cindy would have no problem because its for the good of the mess of a nation! by the way Cindy do you do drugs because you sure do sound like someone that does.
My point is……it’s not the sugar………..it’s the LAZY…………..when I was 3 I was out of the house right after breakfast and had to be home at lunch………………then I was out playing until supper…………..still had PIE……………..CAKE…………….CANDY……………ICE CREAM……………everything that has……………SUGAR…………………….sugar is a natural need doesn’t make you fat……………..LAZY MAKES YOU FAT unless you have a GENETIC problem. This is just Government BS to try to tax everyone who is NOT obese…………………what if you’re thin and buy a sugar based drink? That’s unfair taxing. Don’t tax me for something a that doesn’t affect me ……………..if you’re going to try to tax sugar…………………………..tax ALL food……………….honey baked ham………………cake…….ice cream SUGAR itself…………..THIS IS REDUNDANT. YOU………as a GOVERNOR grew up on SUGAR………you’re not fat………………..so quit being a stupid Governor………………why not tax blind or crippled or anything else you can think of?
Let’s not forget the fact that many schools are being forced to all but ELIMINATE recess and other physical activities altogether due to budget cuts. Which means kids have to be sedentary pretty much all day…and it doesn’t give them the opportunity to socialize as well OR to really pick up on how fun it can be to play tag, soccer, four-square, whatever, especially since many times, school is the primary source of socialization for children around elementary school age.
Pretty lame way to try to make money for sure, people are fat usually, but not always, because they eat too much and don’t get off the couch, but soft drinks are not the culprit and as you pointed out the state will scarf up 400 million dollars and reduce soft drink drinking by 5 friggin percent. This is not a governor with a plan to decrease obesity. It’s another excuse tax. Our elected officials are just not very innovative.
Could we simply put physical education back in school?
I agree the tax seems worthless as a solution to the obesity problem, not even a drop in the bucket – it’s a baseless tax. However, if they are going to tax I’d rather they tax unnecessary consumption over necessary consumption. Necessary is debatable I know, but if we taxed stuff we don’t need and stopped taxing housing, electricity, water, gas, had limited transportation tax, and so forth I could see use for the tax. As a solution to obesity it is worthless. Soft drinks don’t cause obesity.
jacob’s last blog post..Golf, now like Hollywood and Poiltics
Ya think? Like it used to be? and parents used to make the kids go OUTSIDE to play?
Wait… did I read that correctly? They want to add an 18% tax to decrease obesity rates by 5%?? Dunno why I think the relationship should NOT be inverse. But that’s just me.
They don’t have phys ed in schools anymore? Good lord. Don’t tell my kids that… or I’ll have to return the school phys ed uniform and spend the refund down at the BK Lounge.
But damn… how was I supposed to know my cherry coke was the equivalent of a filterless camel cigarette?
sauerkraut’s last blog post..Caroline Kennedy to Hillary-ites: quitcherbitchen
You know what they serve kids here, and teacher for that matter?
Non of what they serve here in the cafeteria is healthy. If they could cook with whole grains and more complex carbs adding more vegetable choices to the mix the kids would be better off. I can bring my lunch as least, the students don’t have access to refrigeration, they have to eat in the cafeteria or end up with soggy warm sandwiches.
They have physical education in the system I teach in, but it is not that vigorous. The lifestyle of whole fmailies is involved here it’s not just the “no phys ed” at school problem.
Taxing soft drinks to decrease soft drink consumption by 5 percent is ridiculous.
Sounds like a quick way to raise funds – but I imagine sugary drink drinkers will go underground, order sugarless drinks, then add packets of sugar after the drinks are brought. The tax will not work.
I don’t really understand the obesity phenomenon. It wasn’t traditionally a problem in Europe – you see it very rarely here. Though there are now occasional headlines in Germany that people are getting fatter. The first thing that anyone here says when they’ve returned from a trip to America is how obese people are. The reaction is usually one of stunned disbelief.
On the other hand, anytime I baked something here based on an American recipe – people told me it’s much too sweet. I got in the habit of reducing the amount of sugar. I found myself, when I am back in the States, that I cannot eat the amount of pastries I used to, when I was used to them. They really do taste too sweet.
indeterminacy’s last blog post..Vote Twice then Write a Story
If you want to see a fat german, come on down to pennsyltucky – where the only skinny germans are the amish. The rest are fairly portly but that’s not because of the beer or soda drinks. It’s the dumpling soup! And apple dumplings! And the comcast cable!
Not enough people eat chocolate, imho. Chocolate. The last great American health food.
sauerkraut’s last blog post..Caroline Kennedy’s political handlers need to be kicked to the curb
Personally, I need to get away from sugar. Just today I told myself that I was going to have a small lunch since I had eaten a big breakfast. So what did I do?
I ate a italian sausage sandwich and a coke, which is rather small for me.
Then I followed it up with half of a pint of chocolate fudge and reese’s peanut buttercup ice cream.
mojo shivers’s last blog post..Some Of God’s Greatest Gifts Are All Too Often Unanswered… Some Of God’s Greatest Gifts Are Unanswered Prayers
hmmm Cooper ..
I tend to agree…
I’m a bit of a sweet tooth…but taxing is not going to help control obesity…
will power could though…
I love the new template… :)
laketrees’s last blog post..House hunting and..
“I think there comes a point when taxation in the name of health becomes big brother.”
Especially when the tax doesn’t actually do anything to control obesity – which it won’t.
Cooper, what I worry about is that in these hard economic times governments are looking for any excuse to raise funding thru taxation with feeble reasoning. Prayer not taxes!
KAK’s last blog post..The American Empire Has Fallen On It’s Face
I really wonder how much of this would be different if soft drinks were made with actual sugar. I would possibly see the benefit in taxing high fructose corn syrup to the point where cane sugar makes better economic sense, but that would need to be nationwide.
It’s true. The typical obese American gets most of his or her calories from soda. But this isn’t even a band aid. It’s a desperate attempt on Patterson’s part to seem like he’s doing something positive here. And in the process, more tax revenue for the state. It’s win-win
EsotericWombat’s last blog post..Just for Laughs
I know it’s not here, but we all know New York is 1 of the many to make moves that later spread to other states.
That’s just great. Tax my Redbull dammit.
Like always, these taxes never seem to actually go to anything functional or any improvements.
I say raise taxes 90% on any political official whom ever utters the words:” I believe we should tax….”
Bennet’s last blog post..Why I Wish I Could Fast Forward Christmas
The most verifiable and common cause of obesity is policy. The most verifiable and common cause off absurdity is faith in policy. The most verifiable and common cause of conservatism is the implementation of policy.
The Syllogism:
Unburned calories cause obesity
Sugared beverages have calories
Sugared beverages cause obesity.
Aristotle would have taken hemlock too.
Doug’s last blog post..Pardon