Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
instapanel.com
Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#2I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices.
Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax at the distributor level, so businesses will just get their soda from outside the city. It's a regressive tax. On and on.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#3I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices. Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax…
The "drive out of the city to buy" still is a form of disincentive/tax. Its just paid to the oil companies instead of schools :(
I also like how the myth of fatty food causing obesity is repeated a few times in the panelists. Clearly not experts on nutrition or its effects on the human body.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#4Yet another example of the disaster of craziness that is the California Proposition system. What a distraction and waste of resources all around.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#5lol at "jason:"
"programs for exercise and to combat childhood obesity, I feel like should come from somewhere else besides the sources"
no, jason, that doesn't make any sense.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#6I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices. Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax…
Why would you ever think adding additional taxes to other products is the best way to make up for a government deficit? Certainly makes things more complicated and may have unintended consequences. Shouldn't we be trying to simplify the system?
Anyway, I'm not economist either. Perhaps it's best if someone could referred to economic theory, instead of what feels right.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#7lol at "jason:" "programs for exercise and to combat childhood obesity, I feel like should come from somewhere else besides the sources" no, jason, that doesn't make any sense.
oh god, the videos keep going.
this is a compelling argument for dictatorship.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#8I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices. Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax…
The "drive out of the city to buy" still is a form of disincentive/tax. Its just paid to the oil companies instead of schools :( I also like how the myth of fatty food causing obesity is repeated a few times in the panelists. Clearly not experts on nutrition or its effects on the human body.
If you watch Jude's video, she says she bicycles to Daly City to buy her cigarettes because they're too expensive in SF, and threatens that she'll just start doing that for soda too.
Get people to bicycle an hour for cigarettes and soda? That's a public health official's dream.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#9I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices. Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax…
Why would you ever think adding additional taxes to other products is the best way to make up for a government deficit? Certainly makes things more complicated and may have unintended consequences. Shouldn't we be trying to simplify the system? Anyway, I'm not economist either. Perhaps it's best if someone could referred to economic theory, instead of what feels right.
We tax income, even though we agree that income is a good thing.
Why not tax cigarettes, soda, pollution, and other bad things. The dead-weight loss from the tax is actually a good thing in these cases.
Agreed that there are always unintended consequences, I don't really know for sure, and democracy is unfortunately usually about feelings.
Re: Show HN: How to vote on SF's sugary drink tax
#10I was really surprised by the results. When I created this instapanel I was a strong "Yes" on Prop E - governments need to raise funds, so why not tax vices. Watching the responses, I've changed my vote to "No". The panelists raised a lot of great points about the holes in Prop E. It's only SF so people will just drive to Daly City to stock up on soda. There are tons of sugary products that won't be taxed. It's a tax…
The "drive out of the city to buy" still is a form of disincentive/tax. Its just paid to the oil companies instead of schools :( I also like how the myth of fatty food causing obesity is repeated a few times in the panelists. Clearly not experts on nutrition or its effects on the human body.
> I also like how the myth of fatty food causing obesity is repeated a few times in the panelists. Clearly not experts on nutrition or its effects on the human body.
Do you really believe this or is it some kind of satire?
edit: not snarking, I genuinely can't tell if parent thinks fatty food does not contribute to obesity. Obese people aren't obese just because they eat far too much sugar. They're obese because they eat far too much sugar, starch, and fat. It is ridiculous to think that the amount of fat in an obese person's diet has no influence on that person's obesity.