You can read the article here: Beer tax on tap for health care?
Tell me, my drinking brethren...what do you think of the latest attempt at a SIN tax?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Observations from a Generation XY-er who sees the challenge and the opportunity in tomorrow, while looking at the peril and the promise of today.
21 comments:
I not much of a drinker, but I think Obama trying to tax energy,beer,and soda is crazy.. I guess he hasn't seen that so far he has added $4.56 trillion to the debt. The pace that he is on he is going to spend more in two years than Bush did in 8yrs. Since Jan 20th the Us Gov't is in the Car business, Banking business,and the union business.. We are going to be just like Europe and other socialist countries.
well if you're going to spend, you have to tax (Bush should have learned that) and his policies are socialist-leaning, no doubt...but my question is particular to SIN taxes. SIN taxes are not overall taxes because people who don't take part in those activities aren't taxed, but legal activities (smoking cigarettes, drinking, gambling, and now SODA) are being used to levy taxes...what do you think of levying taxes on specific activities/commodities so that some are taxed where others aren't?
And the government has been in the Car business, the banking business and the union business long before Jan 20th. Don't fool yourself that it wasn't.
evin, I think you right.. How can you call things that are legal and call it a sin tax.. I think the idea of levying taxes on certain activities/commodities is going to be a bad idea.. when you start taxing things that can start a ripple affect on other things. take the beer soda tax, think of how much beer is going to be at concerts, sporting events,and other entertainment.. You can bet your bottom dollar cigarettes,gambling, and the entertainment well be taxed like crazy!!
Well if we are going to add SIN Taxes then maybe we should tax fast food, cause I'm pretty sure that crap is gonna kill us faster than cigarettes and beer! And I don't know about everyone else but did you not see it coming? Who did everyone think was going to pay for all the bailing out...oh, yeah, the Average Joe...aka YOU and I! It's only the beginning ladies and gents...
I totally agree with you!! It's only the beginning, folks didn't think about we the money was going to come from for the Bailouts, Healthcare, and his other plans..
well, my friends are a very intelligent group, so I'm pretty sure we all knew that the money to pay for the bailouts and stimulus and healthcare and any other spending initiatives that get started was going to come out of our pockets.
Guess it time to start brewing our own booze... I still have friends that can whip up some of the recipe now and then!!
I'm tired of the so-called "sin" taxes. Why not tax people as they go into church every Sunday morning? Stop penalizing hedonists!
Really? Because I'm pretty sure that a lot of people that go to church enjoy it and have much pleasure in attending, so am I mistaken or can you not be a Hedonist if you go to church?
Most church members are "taxed" in the form of tithing. But back to the original question, and Kevin knows my thoughts on this already - I'll all for taxing the people that use the services/products. If you don't drink - you don't pay this tax. If you don't smoke, etc. Many products are taxed this way so it's not just "SIN" items.
My point was that the so-called "sin" taxes historically are proposed by and supported by religious conservatives. Hence the term "sin" tax. I'm tired of our government determining which lifestyles should should shoulder the taxation burden of others.
Ok...this conversation has come around nicely. That last statement is what I was getting at.
A use tax is something like a road toll being used to pay for highway repair...the users pay for the maintenance of what they use.
A "sin" tax is when an activity is taxed to pay for a wholly unrelated expense. ... Read More
Me buying a beer has nothing to do with someone else having no health insurance. If the taxes collected were to pay for the preservation of barley fields or better distribution efforts to equalize the playing field of liquor sales, that would be a use tax.
Before we get into church vs. hedonism...they're not opposites and they are not exclusive. Besides, this isn't just taxing hedonists...it taxes everyone who partakes, in a culture where beer, liquor and soda sponsor just about everything under the sun.
I certainly understand the differnence in sin tax vs. use tax and I agree the sin tax is completely unfair. My point was I thouight the tax people as they go to church comment wasn't a fair argument. I don't know anyone that goes to church that claims they never sin. And I'm pretty sure the Obama administration is not filled with religious conservatives.
It's safe to say there are religious conservatives in both the Republican and Democratic parties and "sin" taxes a usually levied by those who find legal actions to be sinful, damaging, or punishable
not to be the devil's advocate but as great as it sounds, we can't COMPLETELY eliminate all taxes...how ever will we take care of everyone else?
Actually your buying a beer DOES have everything to do with someone not having health insurance.
Health insurance premiums are out of control, in large part because people are uninsured resulting in hospitals being stuck holding the bag. The hospital still has to pay for doctors, medicine and equipment for all these people who do not pay their ... Read Morebill. Then they crank up the costs for the rest of us. Now you have the health insurers paying these inflated costs which is why the premiums run $800+ a month. Low income and the aged can't afford these premiums. Hell, if my company didn't pay for 60% of it, I couldn't either!
Now, factor in that a large fraction of health costs are to heal us from ourselves (unhealthy eating, smoking, drinking). These illnesses generally occur after years of abuse ... in other words, when you are old. And many elderly people do not have insurance (fyi, we pay for medicare), so throw all that $$ into the pool too.
That said, remember that many of these conditions are preventable. Eat better, stop smoking and stop drinking and you dramatically reduce the number of people going to the hospital; particularly the large part of the population which does not have insurance and is most likely to have the illness.
I personally quit smoking because it was getting ... Read Moretoo expensive (and I disliked the effects). Had cigarettes only been $1.25/pack, there would be no financial incentive to quit.
Long story long ... I am for the tax. We need health care reform and kudos to Obama for paying attention to this (and many other) issues and getting them addressed. We have been hearing about this for over 10 years and nothing ever happens. Glad it is back on the burner.
Ok, so if I'm reading your argument correctly...uninsured people go to the hospital and don't pay their tab, which puts a bigger financial burden on the hospital, the hospital in turn jacks their expenses into the costs of the insured, which in turn jacks our insurance premiums, which makes insurance something that is too expensive for a lot of people?
If you remove the first part of that equation, making it illegal to go to the hospital and not pay for it (by some means), then all the following effects don't happen...and it reduces the cost of healthcare for EVERYONE!
Now the second part of your argument is beautiful. It's health maintenance as a cost-savings measure. At that point you are legislating choice and there is no constitutional precedent for such action. I have as much right to be a glutton, lush, or smoker as you do to be healthy and taxing my legal addiction is a value call that I personally don't want government making.
Now, on the other hand, if they wanted to make health insurance more expensive for gluttons, lushes, and smokers I would be completely in favor of that. THAT is a use tax and it makes perfect sense.
I agree to an extent...this may be part of the reason for the rise in healthcare but it certainly isn't the only reason. What about all the people out there that refuse to work and take care of themselves? They still can't be turned away for medical treatment, is it fair that I work hard and take care of myself and have to pay not only for unemployment because others aren't working but also for their healthcare and for their public assistance so they can buy alcohol and cigarettes (including the SIN tax)?
Another reason...lawsuits...we are so damn sue happy that we sue for everything and anything. Accidents happen, we are human after all. The malpractice lawsuits are out of control. This increases insurance for healthcare workers which is reflected in our premiums and billing.
Another reason...the drug market. Granted I work for a biotech and they keep food on my table, but drug costs are ridiculus. I can certainly argue the other side of that coin but if a company owns the patent they can charge whatever they want to and if we are sick and need it we pay it.
Excellent points! There are quite a few contributors to the high price of healthcare...including freeloaders, malpractice suits, and pharmaceutical companies. All the more reason why taxing one group of people for the net effects of a consortium of contributors is, I believe, unjust.
Post a Comment