|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by garhkal
on Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:05 pm |
|
| Well i called it a while back. On todays news, my mother noticed 2 seperate states are looking to put "fatty taxes" on soda, beer and fast foods... in their attempt to force us to slim down. |
|
|
garhkal

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 24, 2009
Posts: 278
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
by jcleitz
on Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:11 pm |
|
the megalomaniac in New York (bloomberg) loves that sh!t. He wants to tax everything. Ipods, fatty foods. Its bad enough that every menu now has the calories on the menu by law.. so stupid.. people know mcdonalds is bad for them, seeing that its 500 calories wont stop em There are already sin taxes on beer and cigs. Forcing people to be their version of heathy with taxes is ridiculus.. it started with cigs, it will continue to everything that is enjoyable. Demolition man wasnt far off
love sly... |
|
|
jcleitz

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 17, 2006
Posts: 463
Location: Jersey
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by activist0000
on Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:38 pm |
|
garhkal wrote: Well i called it a while back. On todays news, my mother noticed 2 seperate states are looking to put "fatty taxes" on soda, beer and fast foods... in their attempt to force us to slim down. Well, they are desperate for money and they know that eating habits are resistant to change. Most people just walk down the grocery aisle like robots throwing the same foods in their cart week after week. They probably won't even notice an extra tax because most people don't look at their grocery tape that closely.
The lawmakers have discovered a winning formula for generating tax revenue, namely taxing things people don't want to give up. Now all they have to do is look for more things that people are determined not to give up, and apply extra taxes under the guise of public health.
The best part is, most people feel ashamed and blame themselves for not being able to give up the overtaxed item, so they're embarrassed to speak out against the tax. If you saw a fat person on TV ranting about a food tax, would you take them seriously? Of course not! |
Last edited by activist0000 on Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
activist0000

Toker
Joined: May 26, 2009
Posts: 86
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by smallbird
on Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:19 pm |
|
activist0000 wrote: garhkal wrote: Well i called it a while back. On todays news, my mother noticed 2 seperate states are looking to put "fatty taxes" on soda, beer and fast foods... in their attempt to force us to slim down. Well, they are desperate for money and they know that eating habits are resistant to change. Most people just walk down the grocery aisle like robots throwing the same foods in their cart week after week. They probably won't even notice an extra tax because most people don't look at their grocery tape that closely.
Well, I think that any proposed tax should only be applied to the "obese".
Every store should install an obesity meter at the checkstand and taxes should be assessed accordingly. Of course, I will pass, because I weigh 105 pounds. I could start a new business, grocery shopper for the fat.
Woo hoo! |
|
|
smallbird

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Jan 03, 2007
Posts: 362
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by activist0000
on Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:19 pm |
|
smallbird wrote: Well, I think that any proposed tax should only be applied to the "obese".
Every store should install an obesity meter at the checkstand and taxes should be assessed accordingly. Of course, I will pass, because I weigh 105 pounds. I could start a new business, grocery shopper for the fat.
Woo hoo! They wouldn't be allowed to discriminate because then the tax could be deemed unconstitutional. The tax has to be put on the product, not on specific people who buy the product.
What's really bizarre is that partial smoking bans have been declared unconstitutional in the past, not because they discriminated against smokers, but because they had exemptions. Many of the bans that exempted bars, restaurants, race tracks, casinos, etc., were overturned because they let a few businesses escape the rules, while enforcing the rules on most others.
So partial bans were thrown out as unconstitutional. Then when the same bans passed through the legislature a second time with no exemptions, they were declared constitutional. That is really a bizarre outcome, I think. It's okay to limit freedom as long as you limit everyone's freedom, and don't allow anyone to escape the rule.
End result: Zero freedom is okay; 2% freedom is unconstitutional.
100% oppression is okay; 98% oppression is unconstitutional. |
|
|
activist0000

Toker
Joined: May 26, 2009
Posts: 86
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by runamok
on Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:05 am |
|
activist0000 wrote: What's really bizarre is that partial smoking bans have been declared unconstitutional in the past, not because they discriminated against smokers, but because they had exemptions. Many of the bans that exempted bars, restaurants, race tracks, casinos, etc., were overturned because they let a few businesses escape the rules, while enforcing the rules on most others. These are fairly rare cases and when it has happened, it simply gives them ammunition to come back with the full ban within the next year....two at the most. |
|
|
runamok

Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Dec 20, 2004
Posts: 1288
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by smallbird
on Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:31 pm |
|
| I think we should start advocating for the obese! No fat taxes! No tobacco taxes! No car taxes (my teeny little Nissan 200SX is being charged a weight fee of $10)....Yaargh! Maybe we should start assessing taxes on the mentally incompetent (including 100 Senators)... |
|
|
smallbird

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Jan 03, 2007
Posts: 362
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by garhkal
on Tue Jun 09, 2009 5:32 pm |
|
| Was listening to Schnitt on the way to do a little food shopping when he was on about a bill to tax methane from animals... a farm tax so to speak. |
|
|
garhkal

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 24, 2009
Posts: 278
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by libertarian99
on Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:27 pm |
|
garhkal wrote: Was listening to Schnitt on the way to do a little food shopping when he was on about a bill to tax methane from animals... a farm tax so to speak. What an idea! It's even better than taxing smoking. Just affix fart meters to all the cows and start a whole new revenue stream. It's an involuntary behavior, so there would be no way to keep the cows from doing it. |
|
|
libertarian99

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: May 01, 2009
Posts: 453
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
by smallbird
on Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:08 pm |
|
libertarian99 wrote: garhkal wrote: Was listening to Schnitt on the way to do a little food shopping when he was on about a bill to tax methane from animals... a farm tax so to speak. What an idea! It's even better than taxing smoking. Just affix fart meters to all the cows and start a whole new revenue stream. It's an involuntary behavior, so there would be no way to keep the cows from doing it.
LOL! Then you can affix those same meters to guys (metaphorically speaking) who sit around watching sports on TV and drinking beer!  |
|
|
smallbird

Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Jan 03, 2007
Posts: 362
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|