Fat Tax people, its brilliant!

[sonickteam2]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2008/12/14/2008-12-14_governor_paterson_proposes_obesity_tax_a-1.html

Governor Paterson proposes 'Obesity Tax,' a tax on non-diet sodas
BY GLENN BLAIN and KENNETH LOVETT
DAILY NEWS ALBANY BUREAU

Sunday, December 14th 2008, 11:37 PM

Gov. Paterson, as part of a $121 billion budget to be unveiled Tuesday, will propose an "obesity tax" of about 15% on nondiet drinks.

This means a Diet Coke might sell for a $1 - even as the same size bottle of its calorie-rich alter ego would go for $1.15.

Paterson's budget also calls for a 3% cut in education spending, a $620-a-year tuition hike at SUNY and a $600 increase at CUNY - and about $3.5 billion in health care cuts, a source said.

The Democratic governor will not call for a broad-based income tax boost, but he will push to restore the sales tax on clothing and footwear.

The drastic belt-tightening comes as lawmakers struggle to close a $15 billion deficit this year and next.

"It's painful to make these decisions," Paterson said Sunday.

State employees again will be asked to forgo their 3% raises next year and defer five days' pay until they leave their jobs, the source said. In all, Paterson will propose about $9 billion in cuts, $4 billion in new taxes and fees, and $1.5 billion in nonrecurring revenue, a second source said.

The so-called obesity tax would generate an estimated $404 million a year. Milk, juice, diet soda and bottled water would be exempt from the tax.

"I'll just buy less," said Victor Lopez, 55, of Manhattan, as he drank a Coke at a midtown Subway store.

"I don't like to buy Diet Coke," said Amaury Garcia, 16, who works at a flower shop in Penn Station. "I'll just not buy any sodas if it goes up."

Public health advocates welcomed news of the tax, saying it would help the fight against childhood obesity.

"Raising the price of this liquid candy will put children and teens on a path to a healthier diet," said Elie Ward of the American Academy of Pediatrics of New York State.

The Paterson administration also announced steps yesterday to expand the state's social services net, including a 30% increase in welfare payments over three years starting January 2010, increased money for food banks and expanded access to the state's Family Health Plus program.

Paterson also hopes to make it easier for people to enroll in Medicaid by eliminating face-to-face interviews and fingerprinting requirements.

[vansmack]

Lame idea.  I'm pretty sure I'm the skinniest guy on this board and I've never touched a diet soda, mostly because I've never had to and it tastes like crap.

Now tie it to a scale or BMI and I'll sign on.

[sonickteam2]

i dont know, i bet manimtired is mighty scrawny.

[vansmack]

Yeah, but he's 19.  Lets see how he holds up when he's almost 35.

[Julian, Alleged Computer F**kface]

I want a flat fat-tax, none of this soda nonsense. Everyone gets on a scale at a government office and every pound over 105 for women and 165 for men is a $250 liability. We'd become the greatest civilization on earth.

[manimtired]

 

[sweetcell]

I want a flat fat-tax, none of this soda nonsense. Everyone gets on a scale at a government office and every pound over 105 for women and 165 for men is a $250 liability. We'd become the greatest civilization on earth.

right, because someone who's 5'1" should be expected to weigh as much as someone who's 6'5".  with my build, 165 would be unhealthy.  but what's health in the face of fabulousness!

smackie's BMI proposal was much better, although an actual body fat measurement would be best.

[Venerable Bede]

The other thing that's lame about is that there is evidence out there that says diet soda's are probably just as bad as regular soda in regard to obesity, since the sugar additive that's in diet soda does not send the same signal to the brain to tell it to stop consuming, which you get from sugar- so, you end up with people over-consuming diet soda thinking, "hey, there's no calories," which does nothing towards combating obesity. 

this same concept is evident in "fat-free" products- just because something is "fat free" or "no calories" doesn't mean you can't get fat from it, consumption is something only you can control.

[godsshoeshine]

i'm with julian here

[vansmack]

Did you see what venerable did there?

The eloquence in that first statement?

Holy shit, he used a capital letter.

I've seen it all.

[vansmack]

i'm with julian here

Are we adjusting for breast size? Developing a ratio for breast to ass? 

I can't sign off on that proposal until these things are worked out.

[bellenseb]

OK, but how can you overconsume diet soda if it has 0 calories? A billion bottles at zero calories = 0 calories. If it makes for a less boring zero-calorie-consumption experience, how is this not better than drinking liquid sugar in terms of keeping weight down?

Now, if people are thinking that diet soda means that they can over-consume other, caloric items, that's hardly the fault of diet soda, signals to the brain or no. Seems like a tiny bit of nutritional literacy would be a hell of a lot more powerful than any mysterious brain signals.

The other thing that's lame about is that there is evidence out there that says diet soda's are probably just as bad as regular soda in regard to obesity, since the sugar additive that's in diet soda does not send the same signal to the brain to tell it to stop consuming, which you get from sugar- so, you end up with people over-consuming diet soda thinking, "hey, there's no calories," which does nothing towards combating obesity. 

this same concept is evident in "fat-free" products- just because something is "fat free" or "no calories" doesn't mean you can't get fat from it, consumption is something only you can control.

[sweetcell]

The other thing that's lame about is that there is evidence out there that says diet soda's are probably just as bad as regular soda in regard to obesity, since the sugar additive that's in diet soda does not send the same signal to the brain to tell it to stop consuming, which you get from sugar- so, you end up with people over-consuming diet soda thinking, "hey, there's no calories," which does nothing towards combating obesity. 

this same concept is evident in "fat-free" products- just because something is "fat free" or "no calories" doesn't mean you can't get fat from it, consumption is something only you can control.

could you please point me to some of this evidence?  i'm not quite following what you're saying, maybe this evidence will help.  drinking zero calorie soda all day long = consuming zero calories.  my personal experience tells me that diet sodas actually help fight obesity since they fill the stomach and give the physical sensation of having a full belly.  a diet coke totally helps me plow through those noon-to-2:00 meetings, otherwise i'd be having hunger pangs. 

[Venerable Bede]

OK, but how can you overconsume diet soda if it has 0 calories? A billion bottles at zero calories = 0 calories. If it makes for a less boring zero-calorie-consumption experience, how is this not better than drinking liquid sugar in terms of keeping weight down?

Now, if people are thinking that diet soda means that they can over-consume other, caloric items, that's hardly the fault of diet soda, signals to the brain or no. Seems like a tiny bit of nutritional literacy would be a hell of a lot more powerful than any mysterious brain signals.

to a certain extent you are correct, however, because you continue to consume the diet soda, featuring an artificial sweetner that, while containing zero calories, also tricks your brain into thinking you haven't had enough sweet stuff.  what that then leads to is your body not thinking it's had enough sugar, leading to further consumption of either, said diet soda (while there may be zero calories, you still are consuming an excess of liquid) or something else to satisfy the urging for something sweet.  in other words, even though you are getting zero calories from the soda, the body still needs something to satisfy its need for sugar (i.e., produce insulin), and those products contain calories.

While the desire to reduce ones calories is laudable, deciding what to consume solely on the basis of calorie content is probably less healthful (because artificial sweetners are just that, artificial) than knowing what you are eating and moderating that consumption.  Yes, I read waaaay too much Michael Pollan.

Oh, and I hate the taste of diet sodas. . .gimme a tall 10 oz bottle of mexican Coke. . .that's some good fizz!

[vansmack]

He didn't ask you to repeat yourself, he said point me to some evidence.

What Venerable is saying is that he read it in Michael Pollan's book.  I can tell you, I've tried the Omnivore's Dilemma twice, and havn't made much headway.