San Fran Mayor wants to tax pop!

[club33az]

The key is if you can find contradictory studies. If 100 percent of 1,000,001 studies showed that Religion X provided actual (measurable objective) statistical improvement- you'd have a case, right?

No, you wouldn't. It's called freedom. Look into it.

[refurbmike]

Again, as far as I know, there are no scientific studies contradicting the statement: too much soda is bad for the health of the human body. It's an objective fact, no?

Too much water is bad for the health of the human body as well. In fact, more people die from water overdose than from soda overdose. Objective fact.

[refurbmike]

No, you wouldn't. It's called freedom. Look into it.

Agreed. I should have the right to ruin my life if I want to.

[Tiggerlives]

Too much water is bad for the health of the human body as well. In fact, more people die from water overdose than from soda overdose. Objective fact.

Which is why it's a crime to kill someone with water overdose during a hazing ritual, right?

Agreed. I should have the right to ruin my life if I want to.

So, if you want to kill yourself by plowing your car into oncoming traffic, that's OK?

Because that's what this is....again the healthy are subsidizing the unhealthy through increased insurance premiums. We are not alone on an island, as much as some would like to be. If it didn't affect me, I could care less if you killed yourself through unhealthy lifestyle choices.

[club33az]

Which is why it's a crime to kill someone with water overdose during a hazing ritual, right?

Wow!! Talk about a leap! It's a crime to kill someone. I don't think people are too interested in how you do it.

So, if you want to kill yourself by plowing your car into oncoming traffic, that's OK?

Two leaps!!!

Because that's what this is....again the healthy are subsidizing the unhealthy through increased insurance premiums. We are not alone on an island, as much as some would like to be. If it didn't affect me, I could care less if you killed yourself through unhealthy lifestyle choices.

This is why people can't get behind your arguments. Your comparing drinking a can of soda to "plowing your car into oncoming traffic?"
And tigger, we're all really, really impressed in how you live your life not affecting a single, solitary soul other than yourself.

The article also said the mayor hasn't said where the money would be going to. Would it be ok if it went towards the mayor's own pocket? I mean, after all, the side effects of reducing the amount of soda purchased is worth it, right?

[refurbmike]

Because that's what this is....again the healthy are subsidizing the unhealthy through increased insurance premiums. We are not alone on an island, as much as some would like to be. If it didn't affect me, I could care less if you killed yourself through unhealthy lifestyle choices.

So we should give tax breaks to anybody that takes vitamins or exercises, right? Because those people are saving us money?

And tax all unhealthy, processed food.

And we should tax anybody who doesn't brush or floss their teeth?

Any other taxes we should set to mold people into the perfect humans?

[Tiggerlives]

Wow!! Talk about a leap! It's a crime to kill someone. I don't think people are too interested in how you do it.

Yet it's not a crime to kill someone by creating and marketing addictive foods that lead to obesity and growing morbity rates. Odd. Apparently, people are interested in 'how' you do it. And, yes, the people at Hostess know they're killing Americans.

The article also said the mayor hasn't said where the money would be going to. Would it be ok if it went towards the mayor's own pocket? I mean, after all, the side effects of reducing the amount of soda purchased is worth it, right?

From the article: When he first floated the idea in 2007, he said the money would go to his Shape Up San Francisco exercise program and for media campaigns to discourage soda drinking.

So, first....why would we assume this changes?

Secondly, obviously if we're talking a crime (such as pocketing the money would be) you're on a different level. But someone mentioned simply increasing property tax- and I fail to see how that would have any benefits to the health of the nation. What's the difference if they raise property tax (affecting only those who own homes) vs. raising a soda tax (affecting those who only drink soda)?

This is why people can't get behind your arguments. Your comparing drinking a can of soda to "plowing your car into oncoming traffic?"

And you guys are acting like drinking soda or having an unhealthy lifestyle is a choice that affects only those making the choice. Completely acknowledging that a decent part of the health care problem comes in the increased cost of caring for an obese nation- which causes increased premiums for everyone.

And tigger, we're all really, really impressed in how you live your life not affecting a single, solitary soul other than yourself.

I do. Everyone does. The best you can hope is to impact in a positive way. Being curteous, racking weights, driving safely, opening doors instead of slamming them on people.

Those, unfortunately, are only the ways we can control our impact on others. I think a lot about the unknown impact my life has on others.

For instance, I wonder how many people I have helped kill by my interactions with them. Say I am only going 65 MPH on the freeway. Someone wants to pass but can't. They're now, say, 5 minutes behind where they would have been had I not been on the road. What did that 5 minutes change? If, for instance, after the road turns to two lanes they pass me and then get into a car accident and die 10 minutes down the road...did I lead to their death? Logically, if I didn't hold them up for those 5 minutes...they wouldn't have been in the position to get into an accident at that exact moment in time- they'd have been 1-2 minutes AHEAD of the accident. I'm sure I've killed more than my share of people with my interactions. All you can do is be cognizant of those issues you can control.

[Tiggerlives]

So we should give tax breaks to anybody that takes vitamins or exercises, right? Because those people are saving us money?

Gym memberships should be tax deductable for sure. Vitamin-taking would be rather hard to prove, no?

And tax all unhealthy, processed food.

Yep. Or, as someone suggested, get real about the health costs of our fast food nation and have the FDA look seriously at what's allowed/disallowed.

And we should tax anybody who doesn't brush or floss their teeth?

Hard to prove, no?

Any other taxes we should set to mold people into the perfect humans?

Whatever you can that has undeniable proof of incuring great costs to the public. Many of your examples are hard to prove/tax. How do you give a tax break to those who floss? Hence, it's a little easier to implement a sin tax, isn't it?

It's not about molding. It's about those who feel they can be a burden because 't's their 'right' to kill themselves' with unhealthy lifestyle choices. Do you deny that a good chunk of the health care problem has come from an exponential increase in costs associated with the way many Americans live their lives? (and I say Americans only because of a lack of experience with other countries).

[refurbmike]

It's not about molding.

Yes, it is. I'm surprised you haven't suggested tax breaks for certain genders and races based on research around those criteria affect their health.

It's about those who feel they can be a burden because 't's their 'right' to kill themselves' with unhealthy lifestyle choices. Do you deny that a good chunk of the health care problem has come from an exponential increase in costs associated with the way many Americans live their lives? (and I say Americans only because of a lack of experience with other countries).

Um... yes, actually. I would say a huge chunk of costs can be attributed to amount of care and protection doctors need from a sue-happy culture. They need to make sure every step is followed to the letter and need to be insured from malpractice suits. They need to make sure they can comply with every HIPAA ordinance out there. These things have NOTHING to do with how people eat and moreso with how our culture is shaped.

[Tiggerlives]

Yes, it is. I'm surprised you haven't suggested tax breaks for certain genders and races based on research around those criteria affect their health.

It's all about what the individual can control. You can choose not to eat a Twinkie. You can't choose your race. For the most part being obese is a choice one makes (yes, there are genetic outliers which cause natural obesity)