Live data from Hacker News

Do “sin taxes” work?

economist.com

111–114 of 114 posts

Re: Do “sin taxes” work?

#111

Pollution should be taxed as well.

Taxing pollution would be very easy to implement by taxing oil and coal extraction and would help realign ecology and economy but it's not going to happen in the current political climate.

The way to make it palatable is to couple it with equivalent tax cuts, to make it revenue neutral.

Re: Do “sin taxes” work?

#112
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's milk-based drinks that are excluded, not Starbucks specifically. So it doesn't apply to things like chocolate milk, milkshakes, or milkshakes with a small amount of coffee in them.

What's so better about a drink with milk with tons of sugar than a drink without milk with tons of sugar? The drink without milk probably has fewer calories. This is just an example of a corporation buying out a local government.

Oh, it's certainly a sell out. I'm just saying it's not a sellout to Starbucks. It's a sell out to the dairy industry.

Re: Do “sin taxes” work?

#113
What has always bothered me about "sin taxes" is that it's been a way to divide and conquer the populace.

Most of the people in my city and state I've called home for a couple decades have been vocal about and voted consistently to not enact new taxes and higher taxes, even when people say "its for the children" (eg we need money for schools, need to raise property taxes)

However politicians can cut that group being vocal into pieces by coming out with alternatives like liqour taxes.

We recently enacted a new stripper tax, adding to the door fees of establishments that provide "adult entertainment".

People can debate if it's trying to reduce consumption for public health and all that, they say the money it going towards trafficking victims. I had never known there was a shortage of money there.

I don't think there is a shortage of money there, in fact our state has had a surplus of money for some time. But it makes for a nice boogey man to drum up emotions and try to make someone look like a golden knight fighting for what's right.

Sadly, the extra few bucks you take from someone at the door of these places is just reducing the discretionary spending of the patrons and therefor most likely just taking money away from the strippers (those extra few dollars would of likely ended up as tips on the stage).

Of course who is going to stand up and be vocal about not extra taxing strippers, or those self medicating with nicotine or alcohol? NOt enough of a crowd, they are easily divided and conquered.

It's often the minority that bears the burden of things like this from what I have seen, and not enough of the majority thinks about it.

Let the tourists suffer the outrageous hotel tax, let the gamblers pay for the colleges, the drinkers pay for whatever.

Divide and conquer. It's minority bashing usually.

Re: Do “sin taxes” work?

#114
I prefer sin taxes to income taxes. I'd rather be taxed for vice (gambling, prostitution, smoking, what-have-you (not that I do any of those things)) then virtue (getting up and working hard to earn a living and be a positive, value-added member of society).
Post reply on HN