A soda tax could help lower obesity, but I would not support it in the least.  I have lost 40 lbs so far while still managing to enjoy the sodas I love in moderation.  I know a good many people who enjoy soda who don't need to lose weight.  Just because some people cannot handle getting their weight under control on their own does not mean everyone else should have to sacrafice and pay more because of them.

Although I love FACEBOOK (and MySpace), I'd rather keep that separate from Calorie Count.

As far a Obama and the tax---that is crazy!!! Most of us here do not go near pop that has calories. We are well aware of the amount of sugar and calories in pop and have given that up years ago.

I know a few people who do not drink diet pop. One is a 94 pound, 31 year old who is trying to gain weight. Yes, she is short, but her doctor would like her to get up to 100 pounds. Why should she pay a tax???

It is totally stupid if you ask me.  My ex-husband, may he rest in peace, drank at least 8-12 Pepsi's a day, he was skinny, I have a son that drinks MD, thin as a rail, should I go on?? I think they are grasping at straws, another way for them to try and control people.....it's crazy.  I have lost 12#'s and have had soda, but in moderation.  Find something else (which I'm sure they will) to tax. 

I am in favor of a soda tax because soda doesn't provide any nutritional value whatsoever. It may not necessarily curb obesity in a substantial way, but I don't think a few extra cents a can is not going to break the bank for anyone. If it is, they should probably reevaluate their priorities on their grocery list.

@suegui - Drinking pure sugar high fructose corn syrup, is not a healthy way of gaining weight, and I'm not sure any doctor would support that.

I also think that soda is the least of our problems.  How many people truly get fat off soda alone?  Tooth decay, sure.  Overactive children, probably.  A nation of obese people off sode alone?  Doubtful.

What I think the real problem is that we are constant inundated with fast food commercials.  A 240-calorie soda is nothing compared to a 1500 calorie lunch, complete with 32-once soda.

Commercials really do work, otherwise why would companies use them?  They're everywhere, and they're constantly advertising some of the worst-of-the-worst foods, health-wise.  Combine that with the fact that its about 3-fold cheaper to eat garbage than healthy food, and it gets real hard for a well-meaning American to make the right choice.

No matter how steadfast I am, I still feel the pull every time I see a Pizza Hut commercial - a company that apparently wants nothing more than to kill me with heart disease.  We have laws limiting advertising on cigarettes and alcohol - what about foods that kill?

--J

I would continue to tax the heck out of cigarettes, chewing tobacco, and beer and alcohol- I love wine and twisted teas - but they are not a necessity and  Thank God , I have never smoked and continue to be amazed at those who still do and the young people who are starting the bad habit.

Cigarette smoke pollutes everyone's air- even if you are in your car next to a smoker you get the second hand smoke and those butts are everywhere, so you have disgusting litter along with it.

Beer and alcohol can harm others than those who imbibe, too, if the users drink and drive or become violent.

Tax those items up the wazoo!!!!!!!!! Even tho soda- both diet and reg are not good for you at all- even affects your bones- no need to overtax them!

Enjoy this day, everyone.

I might be in favor of taxing unhealthy items, BUT where does it end and why target the soda company? What about all the other companies that produce unhealthy food items? What about vehicles and television and all of the items that promote a sedentary lifestyle? Isn't it, ultimately, up to the individual to choose what our hand picks up and puts in our mouth?

Industry needs pushed to create and offer more healthy options for us as consumers. I doubt taxes will benefit us...only those who will pocket the extra monies we pay out will benefit. This direction of big government control is not the way our great country needs to go. We need to get back to government of the people, for the people and by the people.

Offer companies, instead, an incentive for producing healthier food.

 

 

 

 

Original Post by: jaminv

I also think that soda is the least of our problems.  How many people truly get fat off soda alone?  Tooth decay, sure.  Overactive children, probably.  A nation of obese people off sode alone?  Doubtful.

What I think the real problem is that we are constant inundated with fast food commercials.  A 240-calorie soda is nothing compared to a 1500 calorie lunch, complete with 32-once soda.

Commercials really do work, otherwise why would companies use them?  They're everywhere, and they're constantly advertising some of the worst-of-the-worst foods, health-wise.  Combine that with the fact that its about 3-fold cheaper to eat garbage than healthy food, and it gets real hard for a well-meaning American to make the right choice.

No matter how steadfast I am, I still feel the pull every time I see a Pizza Hut commercial - a company that apparently wants nothing more than to kill me with heart disease.  We have laws limiting advertising on cigarettes and alcohol - what about foods that kill?

--J

I totally agree with you. I still think how unfair that tobacco products suffered the bad rap (although I know it is unhealthy), and were not allowed to be advertised on tv anymore.

I wonder how many more people die, of health problems attributed to  fast food and other unhealthy food, than tobacco use? How many of us don't have food on our mind and a tantalizing food commercial comes on and we end up in the kitchen?

That one industry can be targeted is not American.

 if you believe alcohol and cigarette taxes make sense, then you should be all for the soda tax.

 

also, when you live in a state with low taxes like i do - you start to appreciate what taxes do for cities and towns. taxes may suck, but when distributed properly they work for everyone.

But in the end it is ALL of us who ends up paying for other's obesity in the cost of health care.  A small tax now could save big bucks later.

someone who is a closet  chain smoker  doesn't have any credibility talking about  health issues!

J. Teal 

If the purpose of the tax is to curb obesity then the tax should only be applied to diet drinks with calories and those with zero calories should be exempt from the tax.

I don't think a soda tax will cure obesity, but it might help.  also, carbonated beverages, in many states, are taxed at the same rate as bread, milk, meat and other foods, which I think is wrong.  Beer and liquors are taxed much higher than the proposed soda tax and if the new tax will go to pay for expanding health care to all, then it is a good thing.

This is ridiculous, it is just another way to raise taxes.  Did the new tobacco tax make everyone quit smoking?  OH, WAIT...I forgot.  Obama smokes! 

If taxes can cure obesity, then do it the right way.  Have everyone weigh in, and tax them by the pound. 

This is just another way for the goverment to make money and control people.    And why just pick on soda?  Why not tax potato chips, cookies, sugar cereals, fast food, etc. while they're at it?   Taxing soda would be a pandora's box.

How about a sugar tax?  Or at least dropping the subsidies on products like HFCS?  Sugar was never meant to be a dietary staple and if it cost more it would revert to being a 'luxury item'  That would make all sugary foods more expensive and, even if it didn't put people off buying them entirely, at least it would be a good source of revenue to pay for the universal health-care America so desperately needs.

Original Post by: carm3413

This is just another way for the goverment to make money and control people.    And why just pick on soda?  Why not tax potato chips, cookies, sugar cereals, fast food, etc. while they're at it?   Taxing soda would be a pandora's box.

I agree with this 1000%.  I don't have a problem with the tax, per se, but they are targetting only a small part of the problem (if it's even a significant problem at all).  Many of my friends who try to lose weight but fail say alchohol is the real problem - but it's already taxed.  Many others of my friends are slaves to fast food and chocolate.  Why should Coca-Cola suffer but everything be business as usual at Frito-Lays, Herseys, and Dunkin' Donuts?

Frankly, the only problem I see with soda revolves around kids and schools.  Kids should not be drinking soda.  Schools should not be supplying it.  Adults can behave as they see fit, but children need to be taught how to eat right or they won't when they are adults.  Every time I see a two-year-old drink soda I cringe a little.

--J

I think that soda should be oly for adults. i agree. no child sjould be drinking soda. its badon your teeth and it was a major part of my weight gain. water and skim milk are the best things to drink. I dont think taxing soda will change who buys it. I think that to must people soda is an addiction.

It's about time they taxed something other than tobacco and alcohol! How about taxing cell phones next? Especially those who like to walk around with the bluetooth hanging on their ear because they think it looks "cool"!

Original Post by: darcyskywolfe

A soda tax could help lower obesity, but I would not support it in the least.  I have lost 40 lbs so far while still managing to enjoy the sodas I love in moderation.  I know a good many people who enjoy soda who don't need to lose weight.  Just because some people cannot handle getting their weight under control on their own does not mean everyone else should have to sacrafice and pay more because of them.

In many places the "soda tax" exists already because of recycling issues. Soda is also an "empty" calories beverage. Except for sugar it provides no known nutrients.

Maybe soda along with tobacoo, booze and other things should have a luxury tax attached. These items contribute nothing to the ehalth of our population.

Wrong! And how many doctors et al do you know who talk the talk and do not walk the walk? Politicians? Clergy? Law enforcement? Celebrities? In the end we are all just people with weaknesses, bad habits and vices. The best we can do is try to overcome our non healthy issues and try to change.

I recommend people read Dr. Andrew Weil's new boook, Why Our Health Matters. For a country that is as rich as ours the health of our population is poor. I like soda too and I drink calories fee stuff but I do not have to have it to live just like smokers do not have to have tobacoo to live.

My last post was to foodbyjude

While everyone I know drinks tons of soda, I agree.

We need health care in this country... So if that means paying extra on sodas(junk food, fast food, etc) I'm all for it.

[Some] People eat and drink that stuff because it's cheap(ie, dollar menus at fast food, a two liter being just over a buck, etc). Raise the price a bit and there will be a percentage of people who stop eating/drinking that stuff.

I know that not everyone who drinks and eats that stuff is fat, But the money has to come from some where.... You paying a couple extra cents on soda will help 46 MILLION people get the care they need and deserve. I wish people would quit whining and thinking of them selves and think about THIS country! We pump millions of dollars into every other country, Time to think about the one WE live in!

Penkin, Actually, since she does have a difficult time gaining, the doctor did recommend it. It may not be healthy for you, but may help her out a bit.

I would never support another tax. For those of you who believe this tax will help obesity, or the economy, think again. It's only going to buy more luxurious and expensive dinners and vacations for the big shots.

I like to see Obama's concern about the high obesity rates in America, but I don't think a sugar tax will help in the long run. I watched this report on t.v. a few days ago & people would asked if they would spend the extra cents to get their soda. & surely enough all were determined to get their 'very much needed sugar'. This change won't affect me in any way seeing as i've given up soda many years ago. The problem w/ today's society is self-control. At this point any action will help. I can't blame the reasoning for trying to pass this tax. However, what will they tax next? This taxing will eventually get out of hand.

First , I don't believe The President is considering this tax to reduce nationwide obesity.  He, or more accurately his ring of advisors,  is simply looking for more revenue to support his Universal Health Care and other items on his socialistic agenda.

Secondly, if the tax is levied, it should be levied against SUGAR, not against soda pop.  There is nothing wrong, evil, or undesirable relative to drinking flavored, carbonated water, which is all that diet pop is.  It is not fattening, has no calories, is usually low in sodium, quenches the thirst, and some varieties contain caffeine, which has its own benefits.  Modern sweeteners make sugar unnecessary in such beverages and after a short 'getting used to it' period, are every bit as good-tasting as sugary drinks.  Diet Pop IS healthful, when taken in moderation.

Do not be fooled by the Chicago politicians now in control of the White House.  They will tax you until you are broke, to support their campaign to make America a socialist society.

What makes sodas different to fast food or candy? If they tax sodas, they should tax every other item that contributes to obesity. That's absurd. All countries in the world have sodas but not all of them have the obesity epedemic the US have.

Why not educate people instead on what good nutrition is? Why not reducing the tax on healthy foods? Why not giving people a tax break if they are healthy and doing things to keep being so (exercising, doing regular check-ups, etc).

There are other ways. Taxing the sodas is not the solution.

What's next, a tax on obesity? If you can argue in favor of a soda tax, those same arguements apply. This is another broken promise of no tax on the middle class and as mentioned above, another way to fatten up the governments pocket.  

"You paying a couple extra cents on soda will help 46 MILLION people get the care they need and deserve. "   Please get your facts correct. Strong opinions about myths are a serious problem today. 46 million people do not have insurance, not 46 million people do not have health care. 10 million can afford it and chose not to, 10 million that are not even citizens, 10 million  were TEMPORARILY uninsured for part of the year, 7 million children are eligible for SCHIP but their parents have not signed them up and 3 million are eligible for Medicaid/Medicare who are not signed up. That 46 Million takes a real beating when facts are applied. Federal law already mandates that every person listed above be given emergency care.

I find this interesting coming from a President who smokes! The tax doesn't seem to keep him from smoking.

Not being American, I don't mind if he taxes your soda, but I dearly love my Diet Pepsi.  I already have to pay a recycling fee PLUS a deposit on all cans - I don't think another tax is needed.

Considering there is 4x as much caffeine in most coffees (which I don't drink)as there is in my Diet Pepsi, I guess you would have to tax coffee as well.

Original Post by: jaminv

Original Post by: carm3413

This is just another way for the goverment to make money and control people.    And why just pick on soda?  Why not tax potato chips, cookies, sugar cereals, fast food, etc. while they're at it?   Taxing soda would be a pandora's box.

I agree with this 1000%.  I don't have a problem with the tax, per se, but they are targetting only a small part of the problem (if it's even a significant problem at all).  Many of my friends who try to lose weight but fail say alchohol is the real problem - but it's already taxed.  Many others of my friends are slaves to fast food and chocolate.  Why should Coca-Cola suffer but everything be business as usual at Frito-Lays, Herseys, and Dunkin' Donuts?

Frankly, the only problem I see with soda revolves around kids and schools.  Kids should not be drinking soda.  Schools should not be supplying it.  Adults can behave as they see fit, but children need to be taught how to eat right or they won't when they are adults.  Every time I see a two-year-old drink soda I cringe a little.

--J

I used to work in a lab and was curious how much 40 grams of sugar was (the typical amount in a can of soda).  I weighed it out and was shocked at how many tablespoons that would be equivalent to.  Probably about 5 tablespoons of pure sugar!  Most people don't realize how much sugar is in each can and a lot of people (and kids) drink several sodas a day.  It's crazy!  Would you let your kid eat a bowl of sugar every day? That's pretty much what a lot of parents are doing.  I've convinced so many friends and co-workers to choose water instead of soda; saves money and health.  I am all for taxing sugar, or at least getting rid of subsidies for corn syrup and sugar.  Put the savings toward after school athletic programs.  One of our main health care issues in the US is diabetes due to obesity.  If we can reduce this we'll be well on our way to reducing health care costs.  By taxing (or at least removing subsidies for) sugar/corn syrup your hitting the problem broadly (not singling out the beverage industry).  People make bad choices, unfortunately, we all end up paying for it one way or another (e.g. increased insurance premiums).  Fair enough to ask, where does it stop... junk food tax? Why not?  How about subsidies for fresh fruits and veggies?

Excuse me. Please don't belittle me. I don't care if it's 46 million or ONE million who don't have health insurance, and while I was never(and am still not) a fan of obama(didn't vote for him that's for sure), He really is only trying to help this country. I will not get into an Internet flame war about a soda tax, especially on a website geared to helping people lose weight.  In NC junk food IS taxed where as things that are necessary are not. I don't see a problem with it. You have your opinion, I have mine. Lets play nice :)

And by the way, I( and many of the people I know) CANNOT afford it. I have applyed for help, but was told without having a child, I DO NOT QUALIFY. I am in college and working a crap job to just barely get by. Please keep your nastyness to your self.

This debate is interesting!!And hilarious I mean some of the arguments for and against the health care bill has been totally bizarre! And yes, if people evade taxes (UBS list??!!) then the govt has to comeup with ingenious ways to get the money to pay for what govts are supposed to do - govern and take care of the weak & poor.

As for Facebook, Twitter - great but pls do understand many countries ban these sites including where I live So pls keep this forum going!!

Totally infavour of the soda tax; soda is basically water, carbon dioxide and sugar (loads of it). Also, Diet soda has aspartame. The higher the price for damaging your health the better.

Good job lisac71tx! We need people like you in control! You got my vote!

"I don't care if it's 46 million or ONE million who don't have health insurance"; well sweets, you might feel perfectly fine spouting off inaccurate figures but I find it irresponsible and unacceptable and I do care, especially when it is something this divisive. If you find that "nasty" you need to suck it up or the real world is going to knock you on your butt.

You qualify for healthcare by being alive. Again, federal law already mandates this. And in no way will a tax on soda help this country because those people who have to have a sugery drink will turn to kool aid, tea, monster drinks, etc....   obesity will be eliminated the day after lazy and stupid are eliminated.

"to pay for what govts are supposed to do - govern and take care of the weak & poor" what Constitution do you read? It is not the governments job to take care of anyone. Period.

Two words for you people who need to have their hands held from birth to death: Personal Responsibility.

 

lisac71tx - "Federal law already mandates that every person listed above be given emergency care."

This is a huge part of the problem.  Emergency care is VERY costly, and does not address preventative care which is far LESS costly.  We are paying for this type of care now and the entire system is breaking down as a result. Emergency rooms across the country are overwhelmed.  Hospitals are going broke, and often, in the communities which need them most.

We are the wealthiest industrialized nation, and yet the only one without a full healthcare system for every citizen.  What's wrong with this picture? When life-long Republican Bob Dole says he regrets not helping former President Clinton pass healthcare reform 15 years ago, and says we can no longer afford to punt this down the road, that's one heck of a statement!

The system as we have it today is broken.  We must fix it.  Instead of railing at each other and tossing trite slogans, we must all work together to address the issue. 

I absolutely agree that the system is broken and healthcare is way too expensive. We all agree there. However, people need to realize that insurance is not care. This reform bill does nothing to reform healthcare, it mandates insurance (unconstitutional), slicks the pockets of government and gives government more control when less control is what is needed. Tort reform, competition across state lines, a withdrawl of federal regulations and a crackdown of those who abuse the systems already in place would do alot to punt this down the road and it would not take 1200 pages.

PS. I don't do trite slogans, such as "the system as we have it today is broken" and "we must all work together to address the issue".

Bit of advice, use that in a sentence that is not absolute hypocrisy.

Original Post by: marv13032

First , I don't believe The President is considering this tax to reduce nationwide obesity.  He, or more accurately his ring of advisors,  is simply looking for more revenue to support his Universal Health Care and other items on his socialistic agenda.

Secondly, if the tax is levied, it should be levied against SUGAR, not against soda pop.  There is nothing wrong, evil, or undesirable relative to drinking flavored, carbonated water, which is all that diet pop is.  It is not fattening, has no calories, is usually low in sodium, quenches the thirst, and some varieties contain caffeine, which has its own benefits.  Modern sweeteners make sugar unnecessary in such beverages and after a short 'getting used to it' period, are every bit as good-tasting as sugary drinks.  Diet Pop IS healthful, when taken in moderation.

Do not be fooled by the Chicago politicians now in control of the White House.  They will tax you until you are broke, to support their campaign to make America a socialist society.

Okay, I agree with you about Obama's plans and that He has a socialistic agenda.  I am NOT an Obama supporter nor do I support Universal Health Care.  I also do not support taxing soda.  I also like what one other person said about the tax money probably going to the big wigs and us not seeing a cent of it.  AND by the way for those who are bound to get upset about my views, my husband and I do not have health insurance yet will still do not support universal health care.  There is health insurance out there that is cheaper than some...we would just have to pay for it ourselves.  I believe that the health care system needs to change but Universal Health Care is, in my opinion, not the answer. 

Okay to get to the real matter here!  DIET SODA HEALTHFUL?????  Get real!  How is Sacchrin and Aspartame healthful!  It is worse for you in some ways than regular soda!  DO some research on atrificial sweetners-its not the angel you think it is!

Hey, if you applied for aid and do not qualify, then perhaps you make too much money.

If you are in college, going for a degree program, there is plenty of Federal Aid available based on your income, not to mention State Aid, Scholarships, etc.  By the way, most colleges offer (and require) that you have health insurance. Where do you attend?

lisac71tx, we agree on many things.  We agree taxing behavior is not effective.  If that were the case, smokers would have quit long ago as the tax per pack has gone up and up and up.  People still smoke.  We both agree insurance is not the answer.  We currently have a massive insurance industry with very little control over its practices, and it's not working.  I totally agree with you that we need health care, not health insurance! 

My personal preference would be a universal health care.  Other wealthy and industrialized countries manage this and have generally healthier populations and longer life expectancies than we have.  Yes, they typically pay higher taxes to support it, but their citizens are not impoverished by any means!  Everything in life is a trade off and we have to trade something to fix this problem.  I'm willing to trade part of my income (taxes) for a healthier country overall.

"If that were the case, smokers would have quit long ago as the tax per pack has gone up and up and up." I've gone from a pack a day to a pack a week. lol. That is why I am on this site.... stopped smoking and gained weight! But it was not becase of the price for sure.

As for national health care, I'm opposed. I'm a huge fan of limited government and free trade and capitalism and personal responsibility. Apply reforms and then give a hand to the people that need it...fix medicaid and medicare so those without care will have care... these prgrams are our national health care (along with social security) that our taxes go to. Fix what we have, tweak it, but do not mandate it, do not allow everyone that crosses the border to have it, do not take away from one broken program to start another one that may or may not even work. And drop that stupid 1300 page bill. It would take all of one typed page to do this. But no, they have to add money for ACORN, money for perks if their ideology is followed, money for specific races and TASP like tests. Its ridiculous. If the government would just cut out their own pork projects they could "fix" this with money left over. If the greed and corruption and deciet and waste in Washington were not so embedded, most people would not have the problem they do have with allowing government to "fix" anything. All things as they are, I don't want the government to touch anything, my reasoning being the proof of every social program in existence. It is insane to think this one would be different. That part of your income tax you are trading is now going to be on top of SS and medicaid, plus don't forget the cap and trade that is about to hit every part of our lives if passed, the gas tax will rise, the carbon tax is coming, tax cuts are expiring.... you will end up taking home about 35% of your check, which is how these other wealty/industialized countries manage...with terrible results. I will not live my life nor work for another man, period. I will not contribute 60% of my income to entitlement programs that do nothing but foster entitlement. I am a charitable person and donate a larger percentage of my income than most of the members of Congress, including the VP; however, charity is only a virtue when it is voluntary and government mandated giving/redistribution will hurt the poor, not help them. After all, it is not the government that expands hospitals and builds universities and donates millions to research and the like .... it is the rich. It is the rich who keep charitys and clinics afloat. They will disappear when they are commanded to take care of others, and I for one will not blame them a bit. I will do the same.

Some of the comments here have been interesting. One in particular was that people who drank soda all the time and remained thin. Just because you are thin doesn't mean you are healthy. You can be thin and still suffer some of same ailments as the obese.

This is just the same as the tax on cigarettes. It doesn't help curb the amount of people smoking but we as Americans benefit from the tax.

Someone benefits, but I'm not so sure it is the average citizen!

First - "we also understand that for many of our users losing weight is a very private matter, and we will always make sure that you can share as much or as little as you'd like with others"  Thank you for this CC - it's not that I'm embarrassed to be here, but it's just noone's business but my own....

Second - I totally agree with this tax.  Many people don't even realize the amount of calories in a soda....

I think they should tax cake and cookies if anything and not soda. I myself occasionally(i used to drink a whole 2 litre diet soda a day!) maybe once a week have a cup of diet coke when im on the hurry but thats jsut about it.

Ive omitted so much out of my diet especially when it comes to that.

 

Have i lost weight? not much... been exercising too.