20% of food stamps spent on soda & junk food.

[Shadowferal]

Hmf...the problem that so many here refuse to see is that the businesses themselves were the problem as much so as those that indulged their collective sweet tooth.

As per the article:

PepsiCo lobbied the federal government to prevent restrictions on food stamp purchases in 2011, 2012 and 2013, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit that tracks money in politics. Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods and the sugar industry lobbied against a Florida bill in 2012 that would have banned using food stamps to buy soda and junk food. And in 2011, the Snack Food Association teamed up with beverage industry lobbyists and the National Confectioners Association, which represents candy companies, to defeat New York City’s proposed ban on using food stamps to buy sugar-sweetened beverages.

Government did want to ban this stuff from getting SNAP money, but big business cried the blues.

[Spectral]

But which way should the argument go?
Should people have the choice?
If not, then you're saying that businesses shouldn't benefit either.

My position has pretty consistently been that we should just be taxing sugar rather than subsidizing it. If people still choose to spend their money that way, I don't really much care. I don't think fine-grained regulations are practical because regulatory costs/burdens are non-trivial.

[Alydael]

...And yet what happens when someone tries to legislate a law saying that they have to purchase healthier options?

Those complaining about their taxes being used to buy the bad stuff will complain about "nanny state" stuff...

The hypocrisy is telling.

You are misinformed, my friend. They surveyed the wealthy. The wealthy are fine with tax hikes, as long as the government can show it is actually going to help the poor (and not in some politicians pocket). The government then decided not to hike taxes. Jay-Z was one of the "wealthy" interviewed.

That is the falsehoods that the politicians tell you about "the wealthy." Most wealthy people give a ton to charity and would be fine with helping more. They just don't want politicians (who have a terrible track record on corruption, both parties) taking their money because they don't trust the politicians. Let's be honest, who does trust the politicians?

The real fault lies with our "leaders." If they weren't so damn corrupt, we wouldn't have a lot of these social problems. They also exploit these problems for their own gain, that is why they never "fix" them. If the "fix" the problem, they can't exploit it next time they run.

Couple of examples of the corruption:

Billions spent on the "War on poverty" results in more people in poverty than before (funny how that worked out, isn't it?).

Billions spent on the "war on drugs," results in more people using than ever. Hmm.... now where did all that money go?

So, you see why anyone would be wary to give more money to the government. It has nothing to do with the poor.

[PC2]

Does this mean we need to control the eating and spending habits of billionaires and millionaires who pay no taxes?

Their wealth was taxed and if they make millions more each year they are taxed at the highest bracket.

[Post]

I thought it would be a lot more to be honest.

[Draco-Onis]

Their wealth was taxed and if they make millions more each year they are taxed at the highest bracket.

That's not how our tax system works thanks to loopholes countless millionaires, billionaires and corporations pay nothing in taxes.

[Spectral]

Hmf...the problem that so many here refuse to see is that the businesses themselves were the problem as much so as those that indulged their collective sweet tooth.

As per the article:

PepsiCo lobbied the federal government to prevent restrictions on food stamp purchases in 2011, 2012 and 2013, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit that tracks money in politics. Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods and the sugar industry lobbied against a Florida bill in 2012 that would have banned using food stamps to buy soda and junk food. And in 2011, the Snack Food Association teamed up with beverage industry lobbyists and the National Confectioners Association, which represents candy companies, to defeat New York City’s proposed ban on using food stamps to buy sugar-sweetened beverages.

Government did want to ban this stuff from getting SNAP money, but big business cried the blues.

Seems like a pretty typical high-low alliance situation. Big businesses benefit, poor people benefit (at least if believe in revealed preferences, although I'm somewhat skeptical), W-2 wage earners that pay the bulk of income taxes can fuck off and keep ponying up money to buy sodas. People need their beetus-juice after all and believing that dumping $10 billion or so dollars of government money into such isn't a great idea clearly makes me the asshole.

The one bit of dark amusement I get to take away is knowing that the people that take the holier than though attitude and stand up for the imagined right to use SNAP on Pepsi are actually just useful idiots for megacorps.

[minteK917]

Their wealth was taxed and if they make millions more each year they are taxed at the highest bracket.

Your very own president told you he didnt pay taxes lol.

[PC2]

That's not how our tax system works thanks to loopholes countless millionaires, billionaires and corporations pay nothing in taxes.

That can only happen with write-offs such as expenses and losses.

[Spectral]

Because people have ridiculous attitudes and act like they are some "good" person while trying to judge others.

Soda's is probably one of the few "luxury" items they can afford that makes the day nice. You're being difficult and terrible by judging them and arguing they shouldn't.

You're terrible, as a human, because you think they should run their life by your personal standards. It's quite an arrogant and judgemental attitude to have.

Yeah, I think the word "histrionic" is the appropriate description of your posting style on this. No one's life is being ruined. Musing about sugar taxes on a message board doesn't actually make me a terrible person. There's no need to perform as though you're going to be awarded official good person points for sufficiently chastising me.

[Alydael]

My position has pretty consistently been that we should just be taxing sugar rather than subsidizing it. If people still choose to spend their money that way, I don't really much care. I don't think fine-grained regulations are practical because regulatory costs/burdens are non-trivial.

I am against the sugar tax because I just feel that politicians should not be able to tell you what to eat, or penalize you with a tax for eating it. As long as you are spending your own money.

However, if you have no money and have to live off charity- I don't think it is so "out there" that we expect you to make an intelligent choice with other people's money.

Instead of buying three candy bars- you can get a box of cereal. The box of cereal will last you longer and is better for you.

What are you going to eat after you spend all your food stamps on candy bars and then don't have enough to last until your next stamp pay out? Ask for even more charity? If you can't buy food, you probably can't afford insurance. So should everyone pony up and pay for your diabetic supplies and teeth replacements from all that sugar?

It's ok to buy a treat here or there, but if you are in desperate straits and need charity to eat, you have to start making some smart choices or you will never dig yourself out.

[Khaza-R]

I don't see why people get so worked over this. Who cares

[PC2]

Your very own president told you he didnt pay taxes lol.

That's a myth, Trump does pay taxes. The IRS would seize his assets in a heartbeat if he didn't.

[Draco-Onis]

That can only happen with write-offs such as expenses and losses.

No income is taxed differently than capital, I should not have to explain this it is common knowledge.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a myth, Trump does pay taxes. The IRS would seize his assets in a heartbeat if he didn't.

How is it a myth when he admitted it?

[Daedius]

God forbid people spent a fifth on indulging themselves!

[PC2]

No income is taxed differently than capital, I should not have to explain this it is common knowledge.

Capital wealth has already been taxed. Taxing capital for existing without it having appreciated and re-transacted would be illegal confiscation.

[Alydael]

You honestly think people drink soda's for their health? Err, sodas are not healthy. They drink them because they taste good and sugar is quite an amazing thing. I'm sure you've eaten candy before, yes? You are aware how much sugar is in it? It's not a coincidence.

But I find it interesting how people don't realize it's trashy to expect others to live by your personal definition of life because they are on food stamps. As though you are some particular deity of understanding while simultaneously arrogantly throwing around opinions. I'm having a heart time believing you aren't the bad guys or pretty terrible people.

I am not trying to force anyone to live to my standards. It is just that if you have a limited supply of cash (like food stamps) you need to start making some smart choices. A box of cereal will last you a lot longer than some candy bars.

There were times in my own life where I had to really watch my money (like during college and grad school). When you are in "survival" mode you have to make smart choices or you will never get out.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see why people get so worked over this. Who cares

Because, if you don't pay attention to these things- they just get worst and worst. Before you know it- people will be abusing the program all over the place (it is already happening) and the people that really need the help and are trying to do the right things will not get the help they need.

I don't mind the government using my money (through taxes) to help people. I just would like to feel confident that people are really being helped.

[Draco-Onis]

Capital wealth has already been taxed. Taxing capital for existing without it having appreciated and re-transacted would be illegal confiscation.

The money the capital generates is taxable it is no different than income, also thanks to tax laws the original money doesn't have to be taxed by the US government. How do you excuse trillions of dollars not being taxed every year? Oh right if the rich get the money then it is not welfare.

[Spectral]

God forbid people spent a fifth on indulging themselves!

It actually is kind of a lot though, right? Put it this way, the median SNAP household receives $255/month. Spending a fifth of that on junk food is ~$51/month or ~$1.70 per day.

Who the hell drinks that much soda and eats that much chips and candy? While granting that in absolute terms, $1.70 is not much money at all, it actually is a shitload of soda and chips to consume on a daily basis.

[PC2]

The money the capital generates is taxable it is no different than income, also thanks to tax laws the original money doesn't have to be taxed by the US government. How do you excuse trillions of dollars not being taxed every year? Oh right if the rich get the money then it is not welfare.

Wealth is not taxable unless certain criterion are met. It grows in value and changes in party or form(such as in real estate). If that happens then yes capital gains tax comes in.