Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should junk food be taxed?
Replies
-
The people who made the constitution could not have imagined how things would be today. Life is fluid and adjustments must be made. So stop with privacy this and constitution that. Entitled to Cheetos. Wake up, America.lemurcat12 wrote: »
Stop complaining about privacy. Unless you have something to hide, you don't need it. It would help so many people. They either don't understand how to eat well or they cannot stop themselves from making bad choices. And think of all the kids being raised by people who give them cookies as treats, children who see bad examples all day long. A sugar tax isn't even close to enough to get this country healthy.Carlos_421 wrote: »
What privacy concerns? What do you have to hide? Yes, people all over the world pay taxes on food and Yes, Americans are so entitled. "I need Cheetos." Entitled!lemurcat12 wrote: »Authoritarian little minx aren't you?
Okay, so let's say that your little card system is actually implemented (just to take this discussion to the next logical step)... how do you propose to enforce compliance? Will the poor shmuck behind the counter be expected to yank the offending items from your cart and toss them into a 'rejects' bin to be re-shelved for the next person? Will you give that poor shmuck extra training so that they can deal with the verbal abuse that they are going to receive on a daily basis for doing their job? Will you give them extended health care benefits for the physical abuse that they are going to receive as a result of doing their job (if you don't believe this will happen, I invite you to go look up 'black Friday' videos on UTube to see exactly what people are capable of doing).
But let's say that the stores do not want the liability of having to police your little system - what then? Do we create a whole new boondoggle (that would also be horribly expensive) by putting 'food cops' in every retail outlet to enforce the new procedures? How about the black markets (both in food and in 'food cards) and new venues for identity theft that you create thru the use of such a system? Please don't tell me the cards won't be able to be duplicated - they have said the same things about all the new advances in credit cards and yet identity theft is among the fastest going crimes in the world...
And then, we get to the bottom line - who pays for all of this nightmare? You can't possible create a 'fat' tax that would be high enough to cover the costs without crashing the entire economy (I won't go into an economics lesson on this but it's simple - raise the price, people buy less, production falls, people loose their jobs, less money to spend, a never ending cycle that results in the crash).
Just like the WIC, if you're not allowed to buy it you don't. We already do this on a limited basis. It works fine.
You are telling people they can't spend their own money on a legal product? Good luck with that. And that's even apart from the privacy concerns I have raised that you have ignored.
This is a ridiculous conversation (and you are trolling) because it will never, ever pass.
The tax might, on a state and local basis, in a variety of states or cities, depending mainly on how desperate they are for tax dollars.People all over the world pay taxes on their food. Why are Americans so entitled?
Do they? You mean because of a VAT that applies generally? Not the same thing.
I pay a small percentage on food, but many places exempt food from sales tax because it's an essential need, so has traditionally not been taxed (especially since sales taxes are regressive). Why do you hate poor people?
Government bureaucrats having access to my health and medical information to be able to decide what I'm allowed to buy with your stupid card.
That's a big stinking privacy issue.
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
Also: "The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings, and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone—the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the Government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment."
If that's feeling entitled, I see nothing wrong with it, sorry.
Stupid Constitution! I love my little red food card. And oh yeah. NO CHEETOS!!!
6 -
-
Stop complaining about privacy. Unless you have something to hide, you don't need it. It would help so many people. They either don't understand how to eat well or they cannot stop themselves from making bad choices. And think of all the kids being raised by people who give them cookies as treats, children who see bad examples all day long. A sugar tax isn't even close to enough to get this country healthy.Carlos_421 wrote: »
What privacy concerns? What do you have to hide? Yes, people all over the world pay taxes on food and Yes, Americans are so entitled. "I need Cheetos." Entitled!lemurcat12 wrote: »Authoritarian little minx aren't you?
Okay, so let's say that your little card system is actually implemented (just to take this discussion to the next logical step)... how do you propose to enforce compliance? Will the poor shmuck behind the counter be expected to yank the offending items from your cart and toss them into a 'rejects' bin to be re-shelved for the next person? Will you give that poor shmuck extra training so that they can deal with the verbal abuse that they are going to receive on a daily basis for doing their job? Will you give them extended health care benefits for the physical abuse that they are going to receive as a result of doing their job (if you don't believe this will happen, I invite you to go look up 'black Friday' videos on UTube to see exactly what people are capable of doing).
But let's say that the stores do not want the liability of having to police your little system - what then? Do we create a whole new boondoggle (that would also be horribly expensive) by putting 'food cops' in every retail outlet to enforce the new procedures? How about the black markets (both in food and in 'food cards) and new venues for identity theft that you create thru the use of such a system? Please don't tell me the cards won't be able to be duplicated - they have said the same things about all the new advances in credit cards and yet identity theft is among the fastest going crimes in the world...
And then, we get to the bottom line - who pays for all of this nightmare? You can't possible create a 'fat' tax that would be high enough to cover the costs without crashing the entire economy (I won't go into an economics lesson on this but it's simple - raise the price, people buy less, production falls, people loose their jobs, less money to spend, a never ending cycle that results in the crash).
Just like the WIC, if you're not allowed to buy it you don't. We already do this on a limited basis. It works fine.
You are telling people they can't spend their own money on a legal product? Good luck with that. And that's even apart from the privacy concerns I have raised that you have ignored.
This is a ridiculous conversation (and you are trolling) because it will never, ever pass.
The tax might, on a state and local basis, in a variety of states or cities, depending mainly on how desperate they are for tax dollars.People all over the world pay taxes on their food. Why are Americans so entitled?
Do they? You mean because of a VAT that applies generally? Not the same thing.
I pay a small percentage on food, but many places exempt food from sales tax because it's an essential need, so has traditionally not been taxed (especially since sales taxes are regressive). Why do you hate poor people?
Government bureaucrats having access to my health and medical information to be able to decide what I'm allowed to buy with your stupid card.
That's a big stinking privacy issue.
7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
Stop complaining about privacy. Unless you have something to hide, you don't need it. It would help so many people. They either don't understand how to eat well or they cannot stop themselves from making bad choices. And think of all the kids being raised by people who give them cookies as treats, children who see bad examples all day long. A sugar tax isn't even close to enough to get this country healthy.Carlos_421 wrote: »
What privacy concerns? What do you have to hide? Yes, people all over the world pay taxes on food and Yes, Americans are so entitled. "I need Cheetos." Entitled!lemurcat12 wrote: »Authoritarian little minx aren't you?
Okay, so let's say that your little card system is actually implemented (just to take this discussion to the next logical step)... how do you propose to enforce compliance? Will the poor shmuck behind the counter be expected to yank the offending items from your cart and toss them into a 'rejects' bin to be re-shelved for the next person? Will you give that poor shmuck extra training so that they can deal with the verbal abuse that they are going to receive on a daily basis for doing their job? Will you give them extended health care benefits for the physical abuse that they are going to receive as a result of doing their job (if you don't believe this will happen, I invite you to go look up 'black Friday' videos on UTube to see exactly what people are capable of doing).
But let's say that the stores do not want the liability of having to police your little system - what then? Do we create a whole new boondoggle (that would also be horribly expensive) by putting 'food cops' in every retail outlet to enforce the new procedures? How about the black markets (both in food and in 'food cards) and new venues for identity theft that you create thru the use of such a system? Please don't tell me the cards won't be able to be duplicated - they have said the same things about all the new advances in credit cards and yet identity theft is among the fastest going crimes in the world...
And then, we get to the bottom line - who pays for all of this nightmare? You can't possible create a 'fat' tax that would be high enough to cover the costs without crashing the entire economy (I won't go into an economics lesson on this but it's simple - raise the price, people buy less, production falls, people loose their jobs, less money to spend, a never ending cycle that results in the crash).
Just like the WIC, if you're not allowed to buy it you don't. We already do this on a limited basis. It works fine.
You are telling people they can't spend their own money on a legal product? Good luck with that. And that's even apart from the privacy concerns I have raised that you have ignored.
This is a ridiculous conversation (and you are trolling) because it will never, ever pass.
The tax might, on a state and local basis, in a variety of states or cities, depending mainly on how desperate they are for tax dollars.People all over the world pay taxes on their food. Why are Americans so entitled?
Do they? You mean because of a VAT that applies generally? Not the same thing.
I pay a small percentage on food, but many places exempt food from sales tax because it's an essential need, so has traditionally not been taxed (especially since sales taxes are regressive). Why do you hate poor people?
Government bureaucrats having access to my health and medical information to be able to decide what I'm allowed to buy with your stupid card.
That's a big stinking privacy issue.
Interesting that a person banging on about people who have nothing to hide shouldn't be concerned about privacy, yet has their profile set to private...
It's a shame you don't have an open diary so we can all see a good example of healthy eating...
We should bribe the hacker sitting in the basement in his underwear to stop trying to steal Carlos' identity and break into Zipp's food diary instead. I bet she's hiding Oreos.3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Can't wait 'til I start my cookie speakeasy. I am going to get SO rich.
Got to figure out the tax issue, though. That tripped up poor Capone.
Sister, I am 3 hours away, and even Capone and Dillinger relied on their friends in Indiana. You and I are totally bootlegging strawberry-rhubarb pie, jam, and assorted comestibles. I think we could even whip up some bathtub batches of strawberry-rhubarb ice cream.3 -
@Zipp237 Since this tax and card is an inevitability according to you, surely you can point to who is pushing for it in Congress? Is there a house bill or senate bill proposed? Some political action committee raising money to organize public support? Who is going to enact this thing?
I'm sure you believe it's gonna be a great card, a fantastic card...nobody creates a card like you, nobody. It's gonna be classy. And it'll give you great hair. And you're gonna make the fat people pay for that card, and make America Thin Again. Right?
6 -
mskessler89 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
Stop complaining about privacy. Unless you have something to hide, you don't need it. It would help so many people. They either don't understand how to eat well or they cannot stop themselves from making bad choices. And think of all the kids being raised by people who give them cookies as treats, children who see bad examples all day long. A sugar tax isn't even close to enough to get this country healthy.Carlos_421 wrote: »
What privacy concerns? What do you have to hide? Yes, people all over the world pay taxes on food and Yes, Americans are so entitled. "I need Cheetos." Entitled!lemurcat12 wrote: »Authoritarian little minx aren't you?
Okay, so let's say that your little card system is actually implemented (just to take this discussion to the next logical step)... how do you propose to enforce compliance? Will the poor shmuck behind the counter be expected to yank the offending items from your cart and toss them into a 'rejects' bin to be re-shelved for the next person? Will you give that poor shmuck extra training so that they can deal with the verbal abuse that they are going to receive on a daily basis for doing their job? Will you give them extended health care benefits for the physical abuse that they are going to receive as a result of doing their job (if you don't believe this will happen, I invite you to go look up 'black Friday' videos on UTube to see exactly what people are capable of doing).
But let's say that the stores do not want the liability of having to police your little system - what then? Do we create a whole new boondoggle (that would also be horribly expensive) by putting 'food cops' in every retail outlet to enforce the new procedures? How about the black markets (both in food and in 'food cards) and new venues for identity theft that you create thru the use of such a system? Please don't tell me the cards won't be able to be duplicated - they have said the same things about all the new advances in credit cards and yet identity theft is among the fastest going crimes in the world...
And then, we get to the bottom line - who pays for all of this nightmare? You can't possible create a 'fat' tax that would be high enough to cover the costs without crashing the entire economy (I won't go into an economics lesson on this but it's simple - raise the price, people buy less, production falls, people loose their jobs, less money to spend, a never ending cycle that results in the crash).
Just like the WIC, if you're not allowed to buy it you don't. We already do this on a limited basis. It works fine.
You are telling people they can't spend their own money on a legal product? Good luck with that. And that's even apart from the privacy concerns I have raised that you have ignored.
This is a ridiculous conversation (and you are trolling) because it will never, ever pass.
The tax might, on a state and local basis, in a variety of states or cities, depending mainly on how desperate they are for tax dollars.People all over the world pay taxes on their food. Why are Americans so entitled?
Do they? You mean because of a VAT that applies generally? Not the same thing.
I pay a small percentage on food, but many places exempt food from sales tax because it's an essential need, so has traditionally not been taxed (especially since sales taxes are regressive). Why do you hate poor people?
Government bureaucrats having access to my health and medical information to be able to decide what I'm allowed to buy with your stupid card.
That's a big stinking privacy issue.
Interesting that a person banging on about people who have nothing to hide shouldn't be concerned about privacy, yet has their profile set to private...
It's a shame you don't have an open diary so we can all see a good example of healthy eating...
We should bribe the hacker sitting in the basement in his underwear to stop trying to steal Carlos' identity and break into Zipp's food diary instead. I bet she's hiding Oreos.
2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »The silly thing is calling a sugar tax a done deal when it's not even in the works.
The idea that a tax on added sugar could pass Congress strikes me as, well, insane. Maybe someday, who knows, but it would have to prove its worth on the state level at the least.
No way guys, they are totally gonna pass a sweeping tax on products that they are subsidizing the sources of. That make so much sense, like, I just don't even know how you don't get it. Why does nobody understand this? How is it so hard?
Am I doing it right?6 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »The silly thing is calling a sugar tax a done deal when it's not even in the works.
The idea that a tax on added sugar could pass Congress strikes me as, well, insane. Maybe someday, who knows, but it would have to prove its worth on the state level at the least.
No way guys, they are totally gonna pass a sweeping tax on products that they are subsidizing the sources of. That make so much sense, like, I just don't even know how you don't get it. Why does nobody understand this? How is it so hard?
Am I doing it right?
Is it just me, or does that sound exactly like the kind of stupidity that gov't employs regularly?2 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »The silly thing is calling a sugar tax a done deal when it's not even in the works.
The idea that a tax on added sugar could pass Congress strikes me as, well, insane. Maybe someday, who knows, but it would have to prove its worth on the state level at the least.
No way guys, they are totally gonna pass a sweeping tax on products that they are subsidizing the sources of. That make so much sense, like, I just don't even know how you don't get it. Why does nobody understand this? How is it so hard?
Am I doing it right?
Is it just me, or does that sound exactly like the kind of stupidity that gov't employs regularly?
Unfortunately, you're right. However, I suspect that there would be enough dissenting voices that such a thing would get narrowly capped before passing into part of the tax code. There are still a lot of ag heavy states that would get their collective *kitten* pushed in by such a measure, if consumption dropped off but so hard. That, and greased palms.0 -
Nobody is telling anyone what to buy, just that it must be healthy. Think of it like insurance. You're required to buy it but nobody tells you which one to buy. You still have your freedom, but you're making better choices because the card won't let you make too many bad ones.Arguing about whether the tax is good or not is silly. It doesn't matter if you are in favor of the tax or not. It's coming. You'll pay it. Don't like it? Too bad.
Personally, I'm glad. They cannot tax junk food high enough. If you don't want to eat healthy diets, pay for your healthcare. You should be eating healthy and Yes, it is my business because we all have to pay for your bad choices!
You guys are asking for specifics that exist and are making it way more complicated than it is. YOU still buy your food. YOU still choose your food. All the card does is prevent you from eating an unhealthy diet by limiting your poor choices and encouraging good ones. The issue about money being loaded to the card was only brought up by people who didn't understand the basic concept. Yes, that is proof that people cannot understand things and do need help.WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
Wait, so the healthy food allowance isn't even our own money? And everyone has the same amount, regardless of income? Where does the money come from?stephanieluvspb wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
So where is the money coming from?
Who said anything about money? No offense, but these kind of questions illustrate the need for something like a Healthy USA Food Program. People just don't understand what is explained to them and need help. A card would do that. Nobody would have to understand what was explained, the card would just work. If you've used up your junk food allotment, no more junk food. No thinking required. The receipts could even make suggestions, like "How about some grapes?" It could be intuitive based on things you've purchased before, suggesting items that you like instead of more Oreos.
Now this has gotten absolutely ridiculous. There is no way that you have such a fundamental lack of understanding of how basic economics works. Everyone gets the same amount on their cars, but no payment is rendered to the food providers? No one needs to understand how it works it just works? Even my 5 year old understands that food costs money, and when told he can't have something, he wants to understand why and asks limitless questions.
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt yesterday and probe to better understand the concept you were proposing as well as see if you even understand it... Today, I'm convinced like others that you are trolling. Especially since every time someone suggests that is what is going on you insist that our questions support the need for such a ludicrously flawed system...
The business about how it cannot be done is untrue. We already do it with the WIC program and what I'm suggesting isn't close to as complicated as that. We also have food stamp cards that limit people financially. All we need to do is load info onto cards so that everyone can be prevented from making bad choices. It can be done.
It's a good idea. If this tax doesn't work, it should be implemented.
No no no no. The government will not be allowed to tell us how we spend our money that we worked for. If you can't handle it then there are companies who will help you but I'm good.
If people want to load up on ice cream or Cheetos, they need help and should be stopped.
Possibly two of the most contradictory sentences I've ever seen in on post. "You can by whatever you want, except you really can't"
Why do I need help if I'm buying cheetos and ice cream in bulk?3 -
No, you're not exempt. You're paying the tax. Everyone is paying the tax. If you want to eat ice cream, pay it. If you don't want to cough up the cash, don't eat the ice cream.So, if I have ice cream that keeps me at under 10% of my calories from "free sugar", am I exempt from the tax? Because less than that amount should be fine.
Do you really need ice cream, anyway? No, you don't.
Do you really need internet? No, you don't.
Do you really need deoderant? No, you don't.5 -
-
stephanieluvspb wrote: »
To be fair, there are plenty of people who don't mind the idea of higher taxes. Unfortunately, they often vote in numbers high enough to be able to demand that the rest of us agree with them.3 -
Fine, then the card tells you what to buy. You still get to choose though.
Nobody is telling anyone what to buy, just that it must be healthy. Think of it like insurance. You're required to buy it but nobody tells you which one to buy. You still have your freedom, but you're making better choices because the card won't let you make too many bad ones.Arguing about whether the tax is good or not is silly. It doesn't matter if you are in favor of the tax or not. It's coming. You'll pay it. Don't like it? Too bad.
Personally, I'm glad. They cannot tax junk food high enough. If you don't want to eat healthy diets, pay for your healthcare. You should be eating healthy and Yes, it is my business because we all have to pay for your bad choices!
You guys are asking for specifics that exist and are making it way more complicated than it is. YOU still buy your food. YOU still choose your food. All the card does is prevent you from eating an unhealthy diet by limiting your poor choices and encouraging good ones. The issue about money being loaded to the card was only brought up by people who didn't understand the basic concept. Yes, that is proof that people cannot understand things and do need help.WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
Wait, so the healthy food allowance isn't even our own money? And everyone has the same amount, regardless of income? Where does the money come from?stephanieluvspb wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
So where is the money coming from?
Who said anything about money? No offense, but these kind of questions illustrate the need for something like a Healthy USA Food Program. People just don't understand what is explained to them and need help. A card would do that. Nobody would have to understand what was explained, the card would just work. If you've used up your junk food allotment, no more junk food. No thinking required. The receipts could even make suggestions, like "How about some grapes?" It could be intuitive based on things you've purchased before, suggesting items that you like instead of more Oreos.
Now this has gotten absolutely ridiculous. There is no way that you have such a fundamental lack of understanding of how basic economics works. Everyone gets the same amount on their cars, but no payment is rendered to the food providers? No one needs to understand how it works it just works? Even my 5 year old understands that food costs money, and when told he can't have something, he wants to understand why and asks limitless questions.
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt yesterday and probe to better understand the concept you were proposing as well as see if you even understand it... Today, I'm convinced like others that you are trolling. Especially since every time someone suggests that is what is going on you insist that our questions support the need for such a ludicrously flawed system...
The business about how it cannot be done is untrue. We already do it with the WIC program and what I'm suggesting isn't close to as complicated as that. We also have food stamp cards that limit people financially. All we need to do is load info onto cards so that everyone can be prevented from making bad choices. It can be done.
It's a good idea. If this tax doesn't work, it should be implemented.
No no no no. The government will not be allowed to tell us how we spend our money that we worked for. If you can't handle it then there are companies who will help you but I'm good.
If people want to load up on ice cream or Cheetos, they need help and should be stopped.
If the card doesn't let me buy what I want then it's telling me what to buy. Get that part through your head.
I don't *kitten* like that we have to buy health insurance. To afford health insurance my parents will have to divorce. For the next year or two it's just cheaper to pay the fine, but after that. Sorry but that piece of paper means a lot to her and she's already starts crying when the divorce part comes up. Do you want to *kitten* deal with it when it starts cause I dont. Don't you think that if people could afford it they would freaking have it!? He'll trump would have my vote for sure if I knew he was going to get rid of it. Or do some MAJOR overhaul on it.
It is no one's place to tell someone that they can't have Cheetos or ice cream. He'll I don't even really like Cheetos and I'm allergic to a common ingredient in ice cream so if we were to get rid of them it wouldn't bother me, probably make it easier so I'm not tempted, but it's still no one's place to tell someone to have or not to have something.
That's pretty sad about your parents, but we needed national healthcare so I guess that's a price we have to pay. It's a small price for the greater good, don't you think?
Stop using words you don't understand. That is not a choice. A choice is to be able to buy what ever I want when I want. If it stops me from purchasing anything it is not a choice then.
No. And how the hell is this healthcare any good? Mom mother would pay over $400 a MONTH plus she would still have to pay for all her visits. And have a crazy high deductible.
I guess your okay as long as someone else makes the scraffic huh? Well guess what my mother will be going in to the system then because that's what we can afford. So is it really better?3 -
-
It would have to be done by states, I think. I don't know the percentage but it would have to be low at first so people wouldn't whine too much about having to pay taxes and freedom and all that nutty stuff. It will get raised over time and if you ask me, it cannot be raised high enough. Let the people eating the Oreos pay for the healthcare.WinoGelato wrote: »Arguing about whether the tax is good or not is silly. It doesn't matter if you are in favor of the tax or not. It's coming. You'll pay it. Don't like it? Too bad.
Personally, I'm glad. They cannot tax junk food high enough. If you don't want to eat healthy diets, pay for your healthcare. You should be eating healthy and Yes, it is my business because we all have to pay for your bad choices!
You guys are asking for specifics that exist and are making it way more complicated than it is. YOU still buy your food. YOU still choose your food. All the card does is prevent you from eating an unhealthy diet by limiting your poor choices and encouraging good ones. The issue about money being loaded to the card was only brought up by people who didn't understand the basic concept. Yes, that is proof that people cannot understand things and do need help.WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
Wait, so the healthy food allowance isn't even our own money? And everyone has the same amount, regardless of income? Where does the money come from?stephanieluvspb wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
So where is the money coming from?
Who said anything about money? No offense, but these kind of questions illustrate the need for something like a Healthy USA Food Program. People just don't understand what is explained to them and need help. A card would do that. Nobody would have to understand what was explained, the card would just work. If you've used up your junk food allotment, no more junk food. No thinking required. The receipts could even make suggestions, like "How about some grapes?" It could be intuitive based on things you've purchased before, suggesting items that you like instead of more Oreos.
Now this has gotten absolutely ridiculous. There is no way that you have such a fundamental lack of understanding of how basic economics works. Everyone gets the same amount on their cars, but no payment is rendered to the food providers? No one needs to understand how it works it just works? Even my 5 year old understands that food costs money, and when told he can't have something, he wants to understand why and asks limitless questions.
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt yesterday and probe to better understand the concept you were proposing as well as see if you even understand it... Today, I'm convinced like others that you are trolling. Especially since every time someone suggests that is what is going on you insist that our questions support the need for such a ludicrously flawed system...
The business about how it cannot be done is untrue. We already do it with the WIC program and what I'm suggesting isn't close to as complicated as that. We also have food stamp cards that limit people financially. All we need to do is load info onto cards so that everyone can be prevented from making bad choices. It can be done.
It's a good idea. If this tax doesn't work, it should be implemented.
You keep talking about this tax as if it has been defined, voted on and approved. Is this a national tax? State tax? A specific municipality? What parameters did they put on the foods that will be taxed? What percent is the tax?
I'm done talking about the card.
I believed you were for real until this last statement. Now I don't. No way.
3 -
It would have to be done by states, I think. I don't know the percentage but it would have to be low at first so people wouldn't whine too much about having to pay taxes and freedom and all that nutty stuff. It will get raised over time and if you ask me, it cannot be raised high enough. Let the people eating the Oreos pay for the healthcare.WinoGelato wrote: »Arguing about whether the tax is good or not is silly. It doesn't matter if you are in favor of the tax or not. It's coming. You'll pay it. Don't like it? Too bad.
Personally, I'm glad. They cannot tax junk food high enough. If you don't want to eat healthy diets, pay for your healthcare. You should be eating healthy and Yes, it is my business because we all have to pay for your bad choices!
You guys are asking for specifics that exist and are making it way more complicated than it is. YOU still buy your food. YOU still choose your food. All the card does is prevent you from eating an unhealthy diet by limiting your poor choices and encouraging good ones. The issue about money being loaded to the card was only brought up by people who didn't understand the basic concept. Yes, that is proof that people cannot understand things and do need help.WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
Wait, so the healthy food allowance isn't even our own money? And everyone has the same amount, regardless of income? Where does the money come from?stephanieluvspb wrote: »
None, yes, doesn't apply, doesn't apply.stephanieluvspb wrote: »So @Zipp237, how much of my money will be put on this card? Does everyone get the same amount? If I use all the money on my card before it gets refilled, do I just starve? Will the goverment take the rest of my paycheck and tell me what to do with it?
So where is the money coming from?
Who said anything about money? No offense, but these kind of questions illustrate the need for something like a Healthy USA Food Program. People just don't understand what is explained to them and need help. A card would do that. Nobody would have to understand what was explained, the card would just work. If you've used up your junk food allotment, no more junk food. No thinking required. The receipts could even make suggestions, like "How about some grapes?" It could be intuitive based on things you've purchased before, suggesting items that you like instead of more Oreos.
Now this has gotten absolutely ridiculous. There is no way that you have such a fundamental lack of understanding of how basic economics works. Everyone gets the same amount on their cars, but no payment is rendered to the food providers? No one needs to understand how it works it just works? Even my 5 year old understands that food costs money, and when told he can't have something, he wants to understand why and asks limitless questions.
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt yesterday and probe to better understand the concept you were proposing as well as see if you even understand it... Today, I'm convinced like others that you are trolling. Especially since every time someone suggests that is what is going on you insist that our questions support the need for such a ludicrously flawed system...
The business about how it cannot be done is untrue. We already do it with the WIC program and what I'm suggesting isn't close to as complicated as that. We also have food stamp cards that limit people financially. All we need to do is load info onto cards so that everyone can be prevented from making bad choices. It can be done.
It's a good idea. If this tax doesn't work, it should be implemented.
You keep talking about this tax as if it has been defined, voted on and approved. Is this a national tax? State tax? A specific municipality? What parameters did they put on the foods that will be taxed? What percent is the tax?
I'm done talking about the card.
I believed you were for real until this last statement. Now I don't. No way.
My favourite part was the "why worry about privacy if you don't have anything to hide"
Warrant, what warrant? Come on in. Search my place.2 -
6 -
No! We pay enough taxes.0
-
Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.0 -
ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.2 -
ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
It varies by state and local governmental unit. Illinois has a 1% sales tax on most food items sold at grocery stores vs. a higher rate on restaurant meals, clothing, hardware, electronics, cars, etc.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.
There are already federal excise taxes that apply to sales of certain items in all states. Alcohol and gasoline/diesel fuel, phone services are some common ones. A Federal excise tax on certain foods would in not be a precedent.0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.
There are already federal excise taxes that apply to sales of certain items in all states. Alcohol and gasoline/diesel fuel, phone services are some common ones. A Federal excise tax on certain foods would in not be a precedent.
I am aware. And like most Federal taxes, they are invisible to people, unless they actually go looking for the rates. At least with most state sales/sin taxes, there's some kind of point of purchase reference made. The entire spirit of this idea would be completely destroyed, if no one were actually able to tell what is taxed and what isn't, given the extremely hazy nature of the very phrase "junk food".
All fuel (except dyed off-road diesel): clear and concise.
All alcohol: clear.
All tobacco: clear.
All telecomm: clear.
All "junk food": erm...what the hell was junk food again?2 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.
There are already federal excise taxes that apply to sales of certain items in all states. Alcohol and gasoline/diesel fuel, phone services are some common ones. A Federal excise tax on certain foods would in not be a precedent.
I am aware. And like most Federal taxes, they are invisible to people, unless they actually go looking for the rates. At least with most state sales/sin taxes, there's some kind of point of purchase reference made. The entire spirit of this idea would be completely destroyed, if no one were actually able to tell what is taxed and what isn't, given the extremely hazy nature of the very phrase "junk food".
All fuel (except dyed off-road diesel): clear and concise.
All alcohol: clear.
All tobacco: clear.
All telecomm: clear.
All "junk food": erm...what the hell was junk food again?
From one of my earlier posts, I would say you label items on the shelve, similar to what most stores to with WIC eligible items and I would propose something like this for a store receipt
64 oz Cola $0.99
Federal "junk food" Tax 0.50
State/Local Sales Tax .10
Total $1.59
I would highlight the "junk food" tax in some manner for educational purposes.
0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.
There are already federal excise taxes that apply to sales of certain items in all states. Alcohol and gasoline/diesel fuel, phone services are some common ones. A Federal excise tax on certain foods would in not be a precedent.
I am aware. And like most Federal taxes, they are invisible to people, unless they actually go looking for the rates. At least with most state sales/sin taxes, there's some kind of point of purchase reference made. The entire spirit of this idea would be completely destroyed, if no one were actually able to tell what is taxed and what isn't, given the extremely hazy nature of the very phrase "junk food".
All fuel (except dyed off-road diesel): clear and concise.
All alcohol: clear.
All tobacco: clear.
All telecomm: clear.
All "junk food": erm...what the hell was junk food again?
From one of my earlier posts, I would say you label items on the shelve, similar to what most stores to with WIC eligible items and I would propose something like this for a store receipt
64 oz Cola $0.99
Federal "junk food" Tax 0.50
State/Local Sales Tax .10
Total $1.59
I would highlight the "junk food" tax in some manner for educational purposes.
Right but defining what should be considered "junk food" is the tricky part. You've mentioned Cola, ok, what about Diet Coke? What food products would be subjected to the tax.
I don't think the dispute is about if the tax should be explicit on the receipt, but that the very act of narrowing down the scope of what should be taxed would be extremely difficult to gain consensus.1 -
The answer is no. Its really about control...some in the govt want more and more control over you/us. If you like that idea you are crazy.2
-
WinoGelato wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »ofcsfoster36 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
When I go shopping my whole food is not taxed because it is a necessity i.e. Veggies fruits meats canned items. Food like chips, sodas, candies and pre made deli items have a sales tax placed on them.
That was kind of my point with the whole thing. This is already handled on a state-by-state and locale-by-locale basis. If people in their states, cities and towns want to tax people's eating habits, let them put up pols who will do so. There's no need for this kind of thing at the federal level.
There are already federal excise taxes that apply to sales of certain items in all states. Alcohol and gasoline/diesel fuel, phone services are some common ones. A Federal excise tax on certain foods would in not be a precedent.
I am aware. And like most Federal taxes, they are invisible to people, unless they actually go looking for the rates. At least with most state sales/sin taxes, there's some kind of point of purchase reference made. The entire spirit of this idea would be completely destroyed, if no one were actually able to tell what is taxed and what isn't, given the extremely hazy nature of the very phrase "junk food".
All fuel (except dyed off-road diesel): clear and concise.
All alcohol: clear.
All tobacco: clear.
All telecomm: clear.
All "junk food": erm...what the hell was junk food again?
From one of my earlier posts, I would say you label items on the shelve, similar to what most stores to with WIC eligible items and I would propose something like this for a store receipt
64 oz Cola $0.99
Federal "junk food" Tax 0.50
State/Local Sales Tax .10
Total $1.59
I would highlight the "junk food" tax in some manner for educational purposes.
Right but defining what should be considered "junk food" is the tricky part. You've mentioned Cola, ok, what about Diet Coke? What food products would be subjected to the tax.
I don't think the dispute is about if the tax should be explicit on the receipt, but that the very act of narrowing down the scope of what should be taxed would be extremely difficult impossible to gain consensus.
FIFY0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions