View Poll Results: do u agree, disagree w this statement?
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll
universal healthcare...
03-25-2010, 12:01 PM
#91
Contributors
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 535i w/ Sports & Permium Pkg. Silv/Blk
2008 VW R32 w/Nav.
1992 VW Corrado Silv/Blk-retired
2001 530i Sports/Premium-retired
Sure, you can drive that gas guzzling $100,000 car, we are just going to tax the hell out of you. Same context, different scale. Think about that.
Why should ANYONE be allowed to tax unhealthy foods, if people want to eat that sh*t, let them. But now that we will receive UH (I don't feel like writing Universal Healthcare every other sentence) that poses a problem, so we "have" to tax bad foods.
Why should ANYONE be allowed to tax unhealthy foods, if people want to eat that sh*t, let them. But now that we will receive UH (I don't feel like writing Universal Healthcare every other sentence) that poses a problem, so we "have" to tax bad foods.
03-25-2010, 12:10 PM
#92
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Sure, you can drive that gas guzzling $100,000 car, we are just going to tax the hell out of you. Same context, different scale. Think about that.
Why should ANYONE be allowed to tax unhealthy foods, if people want to eat that sh*t, let them. But now that we will receive UH (I don't feel like writing Universal Healthcare every other sentence) that poses a problem, so we "have" to tax bad foods.
Why should ANYONE be allowed to tax unhealthy foods, if people want to eat that sh*t, let them. But now that we will receive UH (I don't feel like writing Universal Healthcare every other sentence) that poses a problem, so we "have" to tax bad foods.
Um, Marc, there already IS a Gas Guzzler tax. Ask any M5 owner.
03-25-2010, 12:32 PM
#93
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Originally from Koeln, Deutschland. Enjoying it in Bonita Springs, Florida Now :)
Posts: 7,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never said we had UH, if you read my post, you will find it says will receive
I know, I meant to a degree like in England, Sweden, Denmark...
I know, I meant to a degree like in England, Sweden, Denmark...
03-25-2010, 12:37 PM
#94
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Ah, I see, but those are for different reasons. I meant as a way to finance proper preventative care, tax the stuff that makes you fat. Mayor Bloomberg was trying to get that done in NYC. To help fund smoking prevention smokers pay a high tax rate on cigarettes - fair enough, but if obesity kills far more people than smoking does and they keep telling us obesity is an "epidemic" in this country, then tax the hell out of the things that make people fat.
BTW, if I could just pay an additional tax and be able to drive with no speed limits, I would in a heartbeat
BTW, if I could just pay an additional tax and be able to drive with no speed limits, I would in a heartbeat
03-25-2010, 12:42 PM
#95
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Originally from Koeln, Deutschland. Enjoying it in Bonita Springs, Florida Now :)
Posts: 7,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have all the same foods over in Europe that we do here, granted maybe not to the same degree, abundance wise, but the mindset is totally different, you have a whole lot more cooking in Europe, and a whole lot less Hot Pockets...it's just the European mindset towards food.
I just think it's fundamentally wrong to tax foods that aren't considered "good"
03-25-2010, 12:46 PM
#96
Contributors
Thread Starter
Ah, I see, but those are for different reasons. I meant as a way to finance proper preventative care, tax the stuff that makes you fat. Mayor Bloomberg was trying to get that done in NYC. To help fund smoking prevention smokers pay a high tax rate on cigarettes - fair enough, but if obesity kills far more people than smoking does and they keep telling us obesity is an "epidemic" in this country, then tax the hell out of the things that make people fat.
BTW, if I could just pay an additional tax and be able to drive with no speed limits, I would in a heartbeat
BTW, if I could just pay an additional tax and be able to drive with no speed limits, I would in a heartbeat
Tax anything that has more than 50g of fat per sq inch and 30 g of sugar per 12 oz: yes
IMHO
03-25-2010, 12:48 PM
#97
Contributors
Thread Starter
Good point
They have all the same foods over in Europe that we do here, granted maybe not to the same degree, abundance wise, but the mindset is totally different, you have a whole lot more cooking in Europe, and a whole lot less Hot Pockets...it's just the European mindset towards food.
I just think it's fundamentally wrong to tax foods that aren't considered "good"
They have all the same foods over in Europe that we do here, granted maybe not to the same degree, abundance wise, but the mindset is totally different, you have a whole lot more cooking in Europe, and a whole lot less Hot Pockets...it's just the European mindset towards food.
I just think it's fundamentally wrong to tax foods that aren't considered "good"
03-25-2010, 12:50 PM
#98
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Good point
They have all the same foods over in Europe that we do here, granted maybe not to the same degree, abundance wise, but the mindset is totally different, you have a whole lot more cooking in Europe, and a whole lot less Hot Pockets...it's just the European mindset towards food.
I just think it's fundamentally wrong to tax foods that aren't considered "good"
They have all the same foods over in Europe that we do here, granted maybe not to the same degree, abundance wise, but the mindset is totally different, you have a whole lot more cooking in Europe, and a whole lot less Hot Pockets...it's just the European mindset towards food.
I just think it's fundamentally wrong to tax foods that aren't considered "good"
I agree that the European mindset is completely different. The same goes for where my parents are from. Chile produces wine, so it is not uncommon for children to be allowed a glass of wine with dinner - my parent used to offer me a glass with dinner. The effect? Since drinking is far from taboo, there is much less alcoholism in Chile than here. Americans are a very "take all they can get" culture, where many Europeans eat many more meals than Americans the also eat unprocessed home "like" foods that are healthier overall than ours. This is an entirely different culture here.
Americans need a "reason" to get healthier, and a tax on those foods would be a good one.
And are you saying you disagree with the tax on cigarettes and alcohol as well, since they aren't considered "good"? Then I would agree, since I smoke and I want to pay less for them too.
03-25-2010, 01:03 PM
#99
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Originally from Koeln, Deutschland. Enjoying it in Bonita Springs, Florida Now :)
Posts: 7,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the European mindset is completely different. The same goes for where my parents are from. Chile produces wine, so it is not uncommon for children to be allowed a glass of wine with dinner - my parent used to offer me a glass with dinner. The effect? Since drinking is far from taboo, there is much less alcoholism in Chile than here. Americans are a very "take all they can get" culture, where many Europeans eat many more meals than Americans the also eat unprocessed home "like" foods that are healthier overall than ours. This is an entirely different culture here.
Americans need a "reason" to get healthier, and a tax on those foods would be a good one.
And are you saying you disagree with the tax on cigarettes and alcohol as well, since they aren't considered "good"? Then I would agree, since I smoke and I want to pay less for them too.
Americans need a "reason" to get healthier, and a tax on those foods would be a good one.
And are you saying you disagree with the tax on cigarettes and alcohol as well, since they aren't considered "good"? Then I would agree, since I smoke and I want to pay less for them too.
It seems as though every single advertisement you see mentions the word "free" at least once...I think taxing the people for unhealthy food/products is the wrong way to go at it. Providing tax cuts and incentives to companies to produce healthier products with less shit in them is the way to go at it. Companies will still be able to produce "bad" food, but companies that produce healthier foods will get tax cuts and incentives that offset the cost of producing healthier foods. But, this would not yield government income, so it is unlikely to take the place of taxing. The same concept as red light cameras, many cities have shut them down because people don't blow enough red lights, and it doesn't create enough revenue to offset the cost of running the cameras, your safety/health is only important if the government profits from it.
03-25-2010, 01:11 PM
#100
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
I agree, there is no other culture in the world that is as wired to the word "free" as the US is. No other country has this extreme desire for free stuff, which is actually really really ironic, since so much in, say Europe, is free... It seems as though every single advertisement you see mentions the word "free" at least once...I think taxing the people for unhealthy food/products is the wrong way to go at it. Providing tax cuts and incentives to companies to produce healthier products with less shit in them is the way to go at it. Companies will still be able to produce "bad" food, but companies that produce healthier foods will get tax cuts and incentives that offset the cost of producing healthier foods. But, this would not yield government income, so it is unlikely to take the place of taxing. The same concept as red light cameras, many cities have shut them down because people don't blow enough red lights, and it doesn't create enough revenue to offset the cost of running the cameras, your safety/health is only important if the government profits from it.
It seems as though every single advertisement you see mentions the word "free" at least once...I think taxing the people for unhealthy food/products is the wrong way to go at it. Providing tax cuts and incentives to companies to produce healthier products with less shit in them is the way to go at it. Companies will still be able to produce "bad" food, but companies that produce healthier foods will get tax cuts and incentives that offset the cost of producing healthier foods. But, this would not yield government income, so it is unlikely to take the place of taxing. The same concept as red light cameras, many cities have shut them down because people don't blow enough red lights, and it doesn't create enough revenue to offset the cost of running the cameras, your safety/health is only important if the government profits from it.Exactly (I like the red light camera reference too BTW), the problem with giving tax breaks for healthier foods? It is more expensive to produce healthier foods so that would offset the tax breaks. Many of the unhealthy foods have fillers and byproducts in them that drive production costs way down at the expense of health.