Pop tax kills jobs......at Pepsi
 

I will celebrate when the soft-drink industry goes belly-up ALTOGETHER.

That was the liberal weenie mayor Kenney who pushed hard for it The $ is suppose to go to the schools Sales are down in city 40%

Straight up or with water.:D

Hey, hey, hey... you do realize that a guy has to live... I finally banned myself from coffee... if I can't pound a twelve of soda each day, I'll go belly-up. :rip: :D

The mayor is a Democrat and an economic illiterate, pardon the repetition. He is blaming the "greedy" soft drink industry for the decline in sales and the job cuts because despite their huge profits, they are passing the tax on to consumers.

The tax is 1.5 cents per ounce. For you progressives, that's 18 cents per 12 ounce can, or $2.16 per twelve pack of Coke or whatever. What's a 12 pack sell for in the grocery store, $5? A $2 tax on a $5 sale and this idiot wants the industry to absorb it? :rolleyes:

From Forbes:

Forbes points out that the same principle applies to federal tariffs on imported goods.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffrey.../#1d17b3d336c7

Store brand soda at the Food Lion here is $2.69 a 12 pack. That would be an 80% tax if they did that here.

So how come not the same layoffs with Coke? Could it have anything to do with the Pepsi CEO...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pepsi-...155919576.html

I know I stopped using Pepsi products.

I don't buy the soda tax causing lay-offs. Since you can drive 5 miles from any point in Philadelphia and get out of town I would assume people who didn't want to pay the tax would just drive an extra couple miles to grocery shop. So while delivery of soda in Philadelphia would go down, it should be offset by increased orders in the surrounding towns.

Chicago is supposed to do a similar thing. Had me quite livid, and I'm still quite upset. Hasn't taken place yet. 1 cent per ounce. All sweet beverages (regular and diet), power drinks, ice tea (I believe), and fruity drink and 'juices' that are not at least 50% juice (IIRC).

Outragously disgusting, and I am expecting the retailers and the beverage companies to take a huge hit, as well as us consumers. I tend to buy my soda in 2-liter bottles, and stock up when it is on sale. I had admittedly overconsumed the last decade or so, going through 3 2-liter bottles of diet cola a day (total 6 liters). But at 68 cents a bottle x 3, $1.98 tax per day. Considering that I buy most of my soda on sale a $1 per 2-liter bottle, or buy the store brands when available at 88c per bottle, that 68 extra per bottle is over a 68% increase, a horrible outrage. I have now cut back my diet soda consumption down to 1 2-liter bottle a day, so they aren't going to get $1.98 from me a day, more like 68 cents on average if I don't cut back any further. Sure, the lead politician said, "Maybe it'll encourage people to cut back." Yeah, well, thanks a lot for what no one was asking for. Plus the retailers sure don't need the major hit this is expected to take. I expect the city will not see the $750 million in taxes they were projecting to collect. And hopefully these awful punitive 'luxury' taxes will die along with the political careers of those who force such abuses on us.

Jurisdictions are starting to run out of stuff on which to apply sin taxes. Spirit taxes in Washington state are over $35 a gallon. Cigarette taxes approach $6 a pack in New York City. The sugary beverages tax had been creeping up the list for a while now. How far behind can salty snacks, ding dongs, ice cream, candy bars, cookies - even Peppridge Farm - bacon, heart clogging beef - come to think of it, other than fresh organic vegetables and organic chicken, there is not much that you couldn't make a case for taxing because it might be bad for you.

The good news is that you'll be incredibly healthy because you won't be able to afford to buy all that junk anymore. Unless of course you move to the south where the iced tea is sugared up and everything that can be coated and deep fried is served at restaurants, and the taxes on everything bad for you are negligible.

I'm pretty sure it's time for Trump to get involved before they outsource production of Pepsi to Mexico and they get slapped with a tariff when they try to bring it back in that will make the sugary beverage tax look like a bargain.

Doesn't matter which side. We're always the ones that wind up paying.

Seattle's very own Mayor Moonbeam is also proposing this type of tax at the rate of $0.02 per ounce.

http://q13fox.com/2017/02/21/seattle...und-education/

If my math is correct, the tax will increase the price of a 12-pack by $2.88. I used to only buy soda if I could get one of those 4 for $11 deals. Thankfully, I don't live in Seattle.

The taxes make me frustrated, but the reaction by the guy interviewed for the story makes me furious. For him to say that he is for the tax because he does not allow his children to drink soda is beyond lame. I would love to know what he likes that I don't so that I could advocate for a tax on that.

The other thing that pisses me off is that education is already funded by property taxes, the lottery, and numerous levies.

I stopped drinking Pepsi, but the last time that I read a Pepsi can here in Texas, it was canned in Mexico.

I can choose Mexican Pepsi and Coke with real sugar or US Pepsi with fructose etc in several places here in North Houston.

An older friend of mine who used to come down from Washington every winter when I lived in California would bring back quite a load of booze when he returned to Washington. It was all as a favor to lodge brothers (VFW members). When it was time for the return trip we would go to the local supermarket, Pops, his son and I would leave with 3 full carts of hard alcohol.
I think he said you could legally take 4 bottles across, but with no checkpoints he didn't care. Wonder what the penalty would be to get snagged with his haul, I think he carried 100 or so of those 1.75 liter bottles.