First | Prev || Next | Last
¿Question #3334?
familygaming: Do you think a 1% sales tax on fast-food and junk-food is a good idea if the funds go to community parkland and recreation?

ocdspectrum: Yes. But I’d prefer higher taxes on the rich.
puffinge: sounds good to me
heli: no, because sadly those consuming the fast food are the poor -- bad food costs less -- and this will just make their lives even more difficult. The problem is not so much that people are eating too much, but that they can't afford the food that is healthy for them. The real thing we need to do is ban corn syrup because that's causing the fast food addiction in the first place.
Auramine O: Yes
Woelf: Sure, call it the "fat tax".
Felimid: Yes!
Caerid: Yes, make it 10%
pakruse: It isn't a bad idea. We have other vice taxes - why not one on the most common vice?
atrium: This is a superb idea. I like that the funds go towards something everyone can enjoy.
MamaRat: No, that's a poor tax, which is just uncool. I think a 20% additional tax on cigarettes and first-generation electronics would make more sense--that's a stupid tax.
spayne: no
acetylcholine: I think the funds should go to health care as well
Phil Fleischmann: Absolutely not! It's not up to the government to tell us what we should eat. What we need is less taxes, not more. We don't need any further precedent for the government deciding "for our own good" to put a tax on the thing it disapproves of this month.
DKahnt: yes
Alazabba: Nope, screw that crap unless recreation includes strip joints and gaming
ckotchey: Additional taxes on ANYTHING is always wrong.
ZeroZilla: As an additional tax? No. I think some of the money spent on 'National Deffense' should be redirected into the much worthier funds you mentioned.
Pigs Breakfast: Sure. But don't tax my lattes.
traininthedistance: Well, how do you define "fast food" or "junk food"? It's a good idea in theory (I'm all for more parkland), but deciding where to draw the line (if such a clear line even exists!) is just going to be a lawyer's nightmare.
fezzwick: yes
Rockhead: I was born in a satellite dish outside of Muncie, Indiana, and raised on a diet of Ding-Dongs and polysorbate-80. So this is an emotional issue for me...
terp8in: No. Taxes suck. Period.
jeffwolfe: No.
DHEK: Yes, for the good of society, that's a good cause and worth applying that tax.
aleo09: no
Brentoon: needs to be a higher percent
AKARed: No, it should be a 10% sales tax that goes directly to local emergency rooms to defray some of the expenses they incurr when the kind of people who live on fast food start getting sick and dying from their fast food habits and naturally, they have no way to pay.
dmomo: I would be open to discussing it, but my gut says it could go to something even better.
MaksimSmelchak: Talisman, Cosmic Encounter and Robo-Rally.
echdareez: No
Cromaa: Nope
BakeliteTM: no. the funds should go to support mandatory fat farms
vampywife: sure, why not, there is a tax on tobacco and alcohol and people still buy them. at least that would go for a good cause.
Shotmagnet: yes but 10% would be better
ct_cruiser: maybe that would be okay
wretchedw: No
WatchmanX2000: only 1%?
mrbeankc: no
Jim_P: Sure
Connal: Absolutely.
top_o_class: no
skrutsch: Probably not.
shawn_low: Yep. Definitely.
bigbadsteve: It wouldn
Loquutus: No, the funds should go to educate people how to feed themselves better and to treat obesity related diseases.
jasta6: NO!
scriptorum: No, I don't like it when the government tries to alter citizen behavior through taxation. (In this case, eating healthier.)
Evilnames: Yes
GI Joe: No
kimapesan: No, it should be 5%.
Belash: yes
GrandpaDave: Yeah
Randy Cox: I think a 50% duty on fast food and junk food should be funneled directly into a national health care system. 100% duty tacked on to tobacco and spirits.
Longbow: depends on the specific area and circumstances
obob: no
POvidiusNaso: Why not a 5% tax?
sourwyrm: no
Lord_Prussian: No
Ludocrazy: yes
The Unbeliever: 42
chaddyboy_2000: Yeah.
skelebone: No, that's taxing one area to spend on another, and I'm not a fan.
rdmasters: Provided it is legislated into the bill that adminstrative overheads cannot exceed 10% of the funds, sure!
djlg: Sure. Its a good idea even if the funds just go into consolidated revenue.
CDRodeffer: No, that's crazy. It would be only taxing the poor.
jttm: Sure
snoozefest: sure
Spielfreak: What's the cost to administer such a plan? It better not be more than the 1% being collected.
CortexBomb: Absolutely, I think the tax is a good idea in general just to mildly dissuade people from eating the stuff
2amp: yes
familygaming: Yes