Soda sales down 50%

[Deleted]

Because its not the governments job to tell you what you should drink, and they are NOT drinking less, they are just driving 5 miles out of the city to buy it

That's some backwards cost saving

[Socialhealer]

trump is literally hitler



edit- shit my bad , i seen we were in general off topic and just assumed

cmon you were just unlucky when posting in gen-OT it's a 95% chance if you say Trump you're automatically on topic.

[TITAN308]

No, people are just not entertained by crying foul with nothing to back it up. If you have a problem with something, tell us your problem with real events. If you're just crying to hear sound come out of your mouth and get your post count up, don't.

Thanks for making my point.

Anyhow, off to see a movie. Ya'll have fun.

[Torgent]

Thanks for making my point.

Anyhow, off to see a movie. Ya'll have fun.

You haven't had a point. At all. Stop pretending like you know what you're saying.

[Tonkaden]

Yes, but bringing the price up on all things to match the currently expensive healthy options, is not going to be good for anyone without millions in the bank account.



Not high enough, if you can buy rust bucket for some hundreds, instead of that very expensive electric. Make the rust buckets cost the same

Oh I know. I agree with you 100% on that.

[derpkitteh]

Okay, cool. Soda is shit for your health.

might be, but it shouldn't be up to other people to tell you what you can or can't drink.

this is pretty damn shitty.

[Deleted]

Thanks for making my point.

Anyhow, off to see a movie. Ya'll have fun.

So you had no intention in discussing this?

[Shadowferal]

Because its not the governments job to tell you what you should drink, and they are NOT drinking less, they are just driving 5 miles out of the city to buy it

The government isn't telling you anything though.
You're still free to make your purchase of whatever you want to drink.

Actually that is somewhat the definition of short sighted.

So you're saying that's you're short-sighted and you're trying to figure things out??

Some of you are some angry bitter people. You literally lose your shit the moment someone doesn't have full compliance with your personal opinion.

Seems to me you have a problem when your own opinion gets challenged...why not try going on a twitter rant? I hear that's the thing to do these days.

[Orby]

Soda makes me super gassy and bloated, so I stopped drinking it. Havent drank any soda in over 15 years lol :P

[Varaben]

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-as-much-as-50



In the most simple terms what this boils down to is 12 pack of soda now cost nearly double its old price due to the new 1.5 cent per ounce tax.

I understand and can even get behind taxing certain items that are more prone to health concerns, but doubling of the price is pretty retarded.

In other news, I'm sure soda sales outside of city limits has increased by 50% lmao

Aren't cigarettes taxed even more? You're setting an arbitrarily line at "doubling of the price," so why isn't tripling bad? Or 50% more?

The reality is that sodas offer absolutely no positive benefits to the drinker, and all studies agree that they wreck your kidneys and teeth. Unfortunately, sometimes you have to save people from themselves. Didn't the government do the same thing with incandescent light bulbs? People kept buying incandescents even though they were only slightly less expensive, but terribly inefficient and burned out faster than CFL or LED. Unfortunately, facts don't sway a lot of people, so you have to put in regulations or taxes or whatever.

It sucks that these retailers are losing revenue, but is it any different from drug dealers losing revenue? Do we really care that the crack dealers are in dire straights? Sugar is just as addictive and probably more harmful than drugs or at least just as bad: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5281670.html and http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2015/...ealth-research

You're saying it's "retarded," but I think it's a step in the right direction. Tax the hell out of things that are demonstrably unhealthy with no benefits to us, nutritionally, and use the money to subsidize healthy things.

[Torgent]

So you had no intention in discussing this?

...It's Titan. Are you really asking or just calling him out? This thread is just another example of someone not understanding the content but wanting to be upset.

[Nihilist74]

Raise taxes on alcohol, junk food and tobacco too! Subsidize healthier vegetables and not corn.

[Azadina]

Aren't cigarettes taxed even more? You're setting an arbitrarily line at "doubling of the price," so why isn't tripling bad? Or 50% more?

The reality is that sodas offer absolutely no positive benefits to the drinker, and all studies agree that they wreck your kidneys and teeth. Unfortunately, sometimes you have to save people from themselves. Didn't the government do the same thing with incandescent light bulbs? People kept buying incandescents even though they were only slightly less expensive, but terribly inefficient and burned out faster than CFL or LED. Unfortunately, facts don't sway a lot of people, so you have to put in regulations or taxes or whatever.

Please. The old ones were 70 cents a piece, and would last me half a year or so. These new ones are close to 3 a piece, and it's miracle if they last 3 months. Usually not. So, "slightly less" = ~400% increase? "burns out faster" = 50% of the lifetime if that (which combined with the first, actually makes it 800% price increase per piece). Great, thanks for saving me from those evil slightly less expensive and faster burning bulbs. Totally loving the new ones.

Oh, a note on the inefficiency: I've noted no change in electricity bills from back then to now, from just light bulbs. Maybe there's couple cents difference, but I dare say the 8 times price increase per bulb more than enough eats any lifetime savings you'd possibly get, per bulb purchase.

[Grimbold21]

might be, but it shouldn't be up to other people to tell you what you can or can't drink.

It was the price that increased. This isn't prohibition.

[Baracuda]

People become fatties because they don't exercise, not because they drink sodas.

Diet is a lot more important than exercise, not exactly a secret...

[Sinyc]

I understand and can even get behind taxing certain items that are more prone to health concerns, but doubling of the price is pretty retarded.

No that is the old way of thinking. You SHOULD pay more for doing/consuming things that are more dangerous. Just like with smoking cigarettes. You pay more for your health insurance, and usually a significant amount more.

You should be rewarded for eating and being healthy. Being punished for doing something bad for your health is not "retarded", it's common sense and in the end saves everyone money.

[Sykol]

Please. The old ones were 70 cents a piece, and would last me half a year or so. These new ones are close to 3 a piece, and it's miracle if they last 3 months. Usually not. So, "slightly less" = ~400% increase? "burns out faster" = 50% of the lifetime if that (which combined with the first, actually makes it 800% price increase per piece). Great, thanks for saving me from those evil slightly less expensive and faster burning bulbs. Totally loving the new ones.

Those CFLs suck so much balls. The old ones are way cheaper and last so much longer. You can't even give someone a CFL as a present because they'll take it as an insult.

[alexw]

You don't just automatically get hired for a job, and most places won't hire as many workers as another lets go. Even with an increase in profit, they'd be more likely to increase the workload on those already there, and bring in as few workers as necessary to keep up with demand, since the increases would likely be spread across the board to the point that hiring more than a couple new employees wouldn't make sense.

What on earth?????? This is gobbledygook.

The system adjusts. After we started raising taxes on cigarettes we didn't suddenly end up with permanently elevated unemployment. After the computer replaced the filing clerk, we didn't end up with tens of millions of permanently unemployed filing clerks. This will be no different. There will be zilch zero nada effect on unemployment as the system will adjust.

[TJ]

They're on about doing this or something similar in the UK, think it's a load of shit personally. Why should us normal people have to suffer because some fatties can't stop guzzling it down their gobs? Ah yeah, let's punish everyone because some people have 0 will power to stop themselves.

[Mad_Murdock]

You're saying it's "retarded," but I think it's a step in the right direction. Tax the hell out of things that are demonstrably unhealthy with no benefits to us, nutritionally, and use the money to subsidize healthy things.

Is red meat good or bad? Heart disease is on the rise and heavy red meat consumption gets most of the blame. Red meat is also fairly nutritious. So does it get a pass on the taxes? A Big Mac is less healthy, but we can't say it has no nutritional value at all, yet we've have several attempts at a fast food tax and I think it's just a mater of time before we get it started somewhere.

You CFL comparison does have health risk in terms of exposure when broken. Will the average person be exposed to enough broken bulbs to see an effect? It will probably take another 20-30 years to get a bigger data pool. Sure they are better, but some folks have a legit concern about a light bulb that has special clean up procedures. For the record, I switched to CFL long before they were cool, sadly, I didn't know there was a danger and have improperly cleaned them up a few times now.