What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

We should have more sin taxes (1 Viewer)

Otis

Footballguy
Seriously.  You fat dudes who sit around drinking Mountain Dews all day, crapping all over our healthcare system?  And worse yet, instilling in your children the absolute worst and most slovenly habits you possibly could, ensuring another loser generation that will die of some medical complication far too young?  Or you dudes who smoke a pack of cigarettes a day (seriously?!?!  Is it ####### 1990 still???)

Look, I get it.  I'm a fat dude.  But even as fat a dude as I am, I'm not a FAT dude, crushing the keyboard with cheese doodle-crusted fingers sitting in a puddle of mountain dew.  And here's the thing: if I WANTED to be that, well then, to hell with me.  I'm totally taxing our healthcare system, and making my own life miserable, and it wouldn't hurt me to make a 10% donation on all the garbage I'm stuffing into my cake hole.  And hell, who knows, maybe that'll cause me to think twice before jamming that second box of Twinkies into my grocery basket.

I know, I know.  Murica.  Trump.  MAGA.  We're free.  I'll do what I want with my body and my guns and my rusted out 1978 Camaro on my front lawn,  I get it, I get it.  But let's just pretend this is for the greater good.  For 0.3485 milliseconds, do us a favor and try to think beyond your own small mind and immediate satisfaction.  How does this NOT make sense to the one billionth power?

PS - I love booze.  Tax the jesus out of it.  I'll live.  And it's a good idea.

I'll put down my Yodel and listen.

Thanks,

Oats

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But Otis, I love neck pillows, and my own personal comfort is most important, and I think put bulls and neck tats are cool, so you're a snowflake.

LOGIC VOMIT 

 
But Otis, why would we want to generate more revenue for good causes, and why would we want to discourage bad, destructive behavior?

OH GEE I DUNNO

 
You seem really stressed lately. I'm sure your choices have a lot to do with that.  Stress really isn't good for you.  Pay up.

 
You seem really stressed lately. I'm sure your choices have a lot to do with that.  Stress really isn't good for you.  Pay up.
Stress tax seems like a stretch. Imagine my stress was Dipsy Doodles. Relate now?

 
Yeah but Otis Murica and guns and Mountain Dew and pit bulls and don’t step on snek!!!

EXACTLY 

 
Yeah but Otis Murica and guns and Mountain Dew and pit bulls and don’t step on snek!!!

EXACTLY 
I feel like we're a couple of years away from Otis adopting his first Pitbull. They absolutely suck in the wrong hands, but in the right environment every other breed is second place. Caveats abound - no babies allowed, etc.

 
First they came for the smokers. But I did not speak out, because I was not a smoker.

Then they came for the fatties. But I did not speak out, because I was not a fatty.

Then they came for the sexual degenerates. But I did not speak out, because ... hey what’s going on here? Where are you taking me? Wait ...

 
120% tax on bottled water in high income zipcodes
Actually, I think a lot of the sin tax should be on just packaging the product comes in. Especially now that China isn't buying much recycling anymore. Those small bottles of water shouldn't have as big a sin tax as a small bottle of soda but it should still have a significant sin tax just based on the environmental effects of the packaging alone. 

This is one of the better Otis threads. I've long thought everything should have some level of a sin tax unless you are buying something like organic vegetables at a local farmers market with no packaging(you bring your own bag) and works it's way up in sin tax to cigarettes and those giant plastic trashcans of cheesy puffs they sell at Costco that have no nutritional value at all. 

 
This is one of the better Otis threads. I've long thought everything should have some level of a sin tax unless you are buying something like organic vegetables at a local farmers market with no packaging(you bring your own bag) and works it's way up in sin tax to cigarettes and those giant plastic trashcans of cheesy puffs they sell at Costco that have no nutritional value at all. 


This is where the idea of an expanded sin tax would break down for me.  A heavily meat-based, high fat diet is seen as very unhealthy by many, so sin tax it.  But those Ketoguys think it's the miracle diet and the solution to all health problems, so sin tax everything else and discount the bacon.  But meat consumption is relatively crappy for the environment, so the sin tax is back on.  Obviously veggies are good - no sin tax there, unless you dare to not buy organic, of course.  However, there are good arguments that organic is actually worse for the environment.  Sin tax on organic!  I think you get the point. 

Yes, is seems like there's some low-hanging fruit like candy, chips, and plastic bags and bottles. But like you alluded to in the other part of your post, just don't pretend that a plastic bottle with water in it is any worse for the environment than one with soda/tea/lemonade/gatorade/organic raw kombucha.  And no, Pirate's Booty shouldn't be considered different enough from Cheese Doodles from a health standpoint to escape a tax.   

Basically, the problem comes when there's disagreement over what's a "sin."

 
Seriously.  You fat dudes who sit around drinking Mountain Dews all day, crapping all over our healthcare system? 

Thanks,

Oats
I am pretty sure that there is plenty of data that shows that the people you are talking about aren't a bigger burden on our healthcare system because they have lower life expectancy.

They don't live long enough to become Super Users in our healthcare system.

I totally want to agree with you, sincerely I do, but I think the reality is that it may be a push.

 
I am pretty sure that there is plenty of data that shows that the people you are talking about aren't a bigger burden on our healthcare system because they have lower life expectancy.

They don't live long enough to become Super Users in our healthcare system.

I totally want to agree with you, sincerely I do, but I think the reality is that it may be a push.
There is no link between how long you live and obesity.  At least none that studies have proven. 

 
Seriously.  You fat dudes who sit around drinking Mountain Dews all day, crapping all over our healthcare system?  And worse yet, instilling in your children the absolute worst and most slovenly habits you possibly could, ensuring another loser generation that will die of some medical complication far too young?  Or you dudes who smoke a pack of cigarettes a day (seriously?!?!  Is it ####### 1990 still???)

Look, I get it.  I'm a fat dude.  But even as fat a dude as I am, I'm not a FAT dude, crushing the keyboard with cheese doodle-crusted fingers sitting in a puddle of mountain dew.  And here's the thing: if I WANTED to be that, well then, to hell with me.  I'm totally taxing our healthcare system, and making my own life miserable, and it wouldn't hurt me to make a 10% donation on all the garbage I'm stuffing into my cake hole.  And hell, who knows, maybe that'll cause me to think twice before jamming that second box of Twinkies into my grocery basket.

I know, I know.  Murica.  Trump.  MAGA.  We're free.  I'll do what I want with my body and my guns and my rusted out 1978 Camaro on my front lawn,  I get it, I get it.  But let's just pretend this is for the greater good.  For 0.3485 milliseconds, do us a favor and try to think beyond your own small mind and immediate satisfaction.  How does this NOT make sense to the one billionth power?

PS - I love booze.  Tax the jesus out of it.  I'll live.  And it's a good idea.

I'll put down my Yodel and listen.

Thanks,

Oats
Maybe we should just start with taxing corporate profits.  :shrug:

 
Chaka said:
I am pretty sure that there is plenty of data that shows that the people you are talking about aren't a bigger burden on our healthcare system because they have lower life expectancy.

They don't live long enough to become Super Users in our healthcare system.

I totally want to agree with you, sincerely I do, but I think the reality is that it may be a push.
To make sure all the bases are covered, let's go ahead and throw a sin tax on running shoes and kale too. 

 
jhib said:
Basically, the problem comes when there's disagreement over what's a "sin."
I think this is a great point, although I think that already happens with food. For instance the school lunch program already goes to great lengths(with varying levels of success admittedly) to determine what defines healthy and balanced meals. That's certainly not the only program that does this as W.I.C. programs also goes a long way in deciding what is eligible and not eligible for expectant mothers. Mostly, I'm just saying there would be shades of grey in all of this and there would be(and should be) on going debate as to what "tier" any certain food should land in and how high it should be taxed based on that tier. If anything a national "sin tax" on foods would put that debate out in the open in one all encompassing place that all these smaller, niche programs already try to debate on a smaller likely inefficient scale. I'm also not Pollyana and completely realize political realities would weigh in on how some foods would be tiered as well. The key would be several tiers with a super-food, grown locally, with very little packaging towards one end and something completely processed with next to no nutritional value wrapped in plastic closer to the tiers on the other end of the scale. It wouldn't be a perfect process and it would constantly change based on our understanding of food and nutrition does. 

 
Maybe a 0.1 BAT tax on each forum post?
I was actually thinking how much better the world would be if everyone that tweeted had to pay a nickel each time.

Not sure it's fair though because if I added up all the tweets that are forced in front of my eyes(I don't even have a twitter account but you can't read the news and avoid reading tweets) I'm not sure the entire collection would be worth a nickel.

 
jhib said:
Basically, the problem comes when there's disagreement over what's a "sin."
Pretty easy to solve this problem if you only tax things that are undeniably bad and have no nutritional value, e.g. cigarettes, cola, etc.  You’re right that going for specific foods don’t work because there is legitimate debate as to whether or not those particular diets are healthy. 

 
Pretty easy to solve this problem if you only tax things that are undeniably bad and have no nutritional value, e.g. cigarettes, cola, etc.  You’re right that going for specific foods don’t work because there is legitimate debate as to whether or not those particular diets are healthy. 
There would have to be rulings on individual foods that are on the fringes.  Stuff like Vitamin Water that is basically sugar water with a few vitamins pumped in.  And, without a doubt, wherever you set the bar, there will be products developed that provide just enough benefit to get on the untaxed side.

Don’t get be wrong, I’m on your side in this.  But we have to accept a lot of messiness.

 
IC FBGCav said:
There is no link between how long you live and obesity.  At least none that studies have proven. 
A little misleading - obesity is one of the indicators of metabolic syndrome and it absolutely shortens your life.  Yes, there’s fatties that don’t have metabolic syndrome but those aren’t the norm. 

 
Assuming Otis' OP is genuine, I agree 100%.  People don't want to be told what to do, but leave them to their own devices and they get fat and put an unsustainable cost burden on the healthcare system.  The government has to do something about the healthcare crisis and disincentivizing people to eat unhealthy food is one way to lower costs.  If it makes sense for cigarettes, it makes sense for soda.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Assuming Otis' OP is genuine, I agree 100%.  People don't want to be told what to do, but leave them to their own devices and they get fat and put an insurmountable burden on the healthcare system.  The government has to do something about the healthcare crisis and disincentivizing people to eat unhealthy food is one way to lower costs.  If it makes sense for cigarettes, it makes sense for soda.  
We can (and should) start by not subsidizing corn, wheat and sugar.  

 
I think what he’s saying is “being fat, in and of itself, doesn’t shorten your life”.  I think that’s mostly true if you happen to be healthy but overweight.  In reality, most people aren’t that way.
Well thats a silly road to go down. Smoking doesnt kill you either then.

From the first search result, nih study....

Adults with extreme obesity have increased risks of dying at a young age from cancer and many other causes including heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and kidney and liver diseases, according to results of an analysis of data pooled from 20 large studies of people from three countries

 
Well thats a silly road to go down. Smoking doesnt kill you either then.

From the first search result, nih study....

Adults with extreme obesity have increased risks of dying at a young age from cancer and many other causes including heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and kidney and liver diseases, according to results of an analysis of data pooled from 20 large studies of people from three countries
I understand what you are saying and that’s what I said it’s misleading.  

But I do think it’s important to remember that there are some people who are just overweight (not morbidly obese).  It’s tough to tell someone they have to pay more when they’ve done nothing “wrong”.  That’s why taxing bad stuff is a better way to go about it than just taxing fat people.

 
I understand what you are saying and that’s what I said it’s misleading.  

But I do think it’s important to remember that there are some people who are just overweight (not morbidly obese).  It’s tough to tell someone they have to pay more when they’ve done nothing “wrong”.  That’s why taxing bad stuff is a better way to go about it than just taxing fat people.
I am against sin taxes on food. I think they are dumb. 

 
Seeing as obesity is simply the amount of calories you consume over the amount needed for daily survival it sounds like you advocate a consumption tax. Good! Me too. So we’ll now be in agreement to abolish the income tax and everything will be good. 

 
Sin tax could be based on your BMI or body fat %

Once a year go to the weighing station and pay your sin tax at that time.

 
Are you against sin taxes on cigarettes?
Those are already in place and are a completely different issue. 

Sin taxes on food require new legislation, regulation, etc. It also then becomes a never ending cycle. Hohos will get remade using previously unlegislated ingredients. Those will get added then, along with a desk for the governor, a bridge, a new state park, and whatever other stupid crap will get thrown in. 

All so we can tax poor people more so we can give more money to poor people. 

I am obviously over simplifying and using hyperbole, well...somewhat.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top