Do you think this is a good thing? Why or why not?
Apparently the bill would put an excise tax (tax the manufacturer, who will then pass the cost on to consumers) on "soda, certain fruit drinks, energy drinks, sports drinks and ready-to-drink teas", but would not tax diet sodas (and presumably "fruit drinks" that are sweetened with artificial sweeteners!).
And why not diet sodas too? Recent research seems to indicate that diet sodas are just as "bad" and contribute to weight gains as much as the sugar containing ones do!
As a low carber, I never drink sugar-containing sodas and only rarely drink non-sugar sodas. I also never drink fruits drinks, whether they have had sugar added or not. I prefer to eat my calories! This tax, then, would have little or no effect on me!
As a consumer, I hate to see a measure like this pass because I'm afraid it will open the door to taxing other foods and drinks that are considered "unhealthy" or "bad" for us! What's next? Foods that contain trans-fats? Would that be ones that contain more than "0 grams per serving" or foods that have ANY trans-fat? What about snacks? High salt snacks? High fat snacks? Snacks that are essentially little more than sugar? How about fat content? Should I pay more for my 70/30 hamburg because the higher fat content is "bad" for me? Would they tax butter but not margarine? Coconut oil but not soy or corn oil?
(AP Photo/Lisa Poole)