[Sacajaweau]

Here in NYS, we’ve been taxing that stuff for years. One of the newest taxes, IIRC, is on bottled water. Of course, add the bottle “fee” to your bill. Gotta love NY!! NOT

[Red Badger]

She wants congress to put an extra tax on drinks that contain sugar or any other sweetener with calories.

Well, she has ignited the ire of both the Sugar Lobby and the Corn Lobby at the same time. This will not go anywhere.....................

[Noamie]

These piecemeal taxes have nothing to do with health.

Anyone who permits a new tax on anything is out of their minds. On anything.

[Sacajaweau]

http://www.tax.ny.gov/pubs_and_bulls/tg_bulletins/st/candy_and_confectionery.htm

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Democrats look upon other human beings as sources of revenue.

Period.

[GeronL]

Uncle Sam does not need the money.

These assessments on Christmas Trees and stuff sure sound a lot like unconstitutional national sales taxes to me

[Minsc]

This has zero chance of getting out of Congress now. If you drink that much soda where you would have to worry about this you’re most likely a fat ass. Sugar is about the worst. I’ve seen many people shed a LOT of weight just by cutting soda out of their diet.

[Persevero]

An elitist tax. Notice she is not lobbying for a tax on creme brulee or fancy Starbucks drinks filled with syrup.

Just soda. What the poor typically drink for a treat. Cheap, tasty, refreshing.

I don’t drink sugar soda but twice a year, so I am not posting in “my own defense.” I find the attitude behind such propositions sickening. Yuppies can go to the food trucks and buy $8 organic custard ice creams and feel all holy about taxing the poor’s $1 soda pop.

[oldtech]

So,if Delauro is proposing a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks,then am I to assume she is favorable towards the poisonous artificial sweeteners which are much worse?

[Zeppo]

And when you do, you can thank the gentle woman from Connecticut, Rosa Delauro.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

I'd place my bets on "escaped harpy from Pandora's box", but I suppose that it could just as well be some other type of malevolent fiend...

[DaveyB]

An immutable law of economics is that taxing a good or product will retard consumption and a good or product which is subsidized will increase its consumption.

Subsidizing the poor will ensure more poor, and taxing production stifles productivity. This is why the democrat economic schemes are backwards; they punish profit and reward parasites.

So I purpose a tax on laziness, liberalism and stupidity, and that we subsidize, in the form of lower taxes, productivity. This is paid dollar for dollar so every billion collected in the new tax is the reduction of taxes back to the producers. In essence, take from the leaches and give to the host in order to have more production and fewer leeches. Under this proposal, proposing taxing products that some do-gooder doesn't like would trigger both the stupidity tax and the liberal tax, resulting in subsidy to sugar growers and soft drink producers. Which in turn would allow the producers to hire more workers from the leech roles, who in turn would buy more soft drinks and smart phones increasing production in nearly every market segment except the government poverty pimping sector.

[ExCTCitizen]

Rosa DeLauro needs to have an ugly tax if anyone seen her picture... she makes Ruth Buzzi look beautiful...

[Ouderkirk]

How about we put a tax on UGLY...and Rosa DiLauro is one UGLY woman.

[Joe Boucher]

instead of a “sugar tax,
How about just stop subsidizing big Florida sugar?
We par big sugar about a dime subsidy for every pound they make all the while big sugar is polluting the hell out of Florida.

[grundle]

Why don’t they just stop subsidizing high fructose corn syrup?