Instead of Taxing Babies, How About Taxing CapriSun?


Well if taxing babies wasn’t enough, now I read that San Francisco, that hotbed of conservatism, is considering a tax on sugary drinks.  The story reads as follows:

SAN FRANCISCO (KCBS)  — For years, the idea of taxing soda to beat back obesity has been tossed around in medical circles. But now, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is proposing a tax on beverages high in fructose corn syrup.   Newsom says obesity accounts for tens of millions of dollars in city health care costs. He cites a recent San Francisco Health Department survey that found nearly a quarter of the city’s 5th, 7th and 9th graders were overweight and that high sugar drinks make up a tenth of a kid’s daily calorie count.  Newsom reportedly wants all big box retailers and chain drug stores to pay into his new “Shape up San Francisco” program, which started this past summer with a walking regimen.  This comes as the state of California is considering slapping caffeine-infused sodas, and energy drinks with warning labels, saying consumption can contribute to diabetes.

Obviously, in San Francisco, the mayor cares more about the little children than do their own parents.  I mean isn’t that the message here–if you parents aren’t going to quit allowing your child to drink Capri Sun then by golly we will just tax you until you comply.

Taxes like this always amuse me because we all know how Government works–here is the order:

1.  Create a shiny new, fun and exciting tax.

2.  Create a beauracracy to collect and enforce the shiny new tax.

3.  Use the tax to pay for the beauracracy.

4.  Realize you have some money left over–jump for joy, payoff your lobbyists and then…

5. Create a new and wonderful entitlement program that will be funded by the leftovers from the shiny new tax.

I like to call this the cycle of bull.  See, first the mayor says, “I just want to save the children by punishing the evil parents who buy junk food and the evil companies who make it.”  Then, after about 3 minutes, the 5 steps are put in place and completed–suddenly the Government now NEEDS people to continue to buy more and more sugary foods so that they will pay the taxes so that the new entitlement program can be funded.  Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y ?

For a lengthly list of what products this law might include see the Accidental Hedonists Blog Article.  Much to my horror, some of my favorites are on the list like Starbucks Frappacino  (blech!).

 This mayor is being way to “conservative” in his thought process though.  If he wants to tax things that harm children, he shouldn’t stop there.  I think he should tax the following items as well because after all–we need to protect the children!

1.    Any parent who allows a child to see one of his movies should be taxed–and Pee-Wee should be taxed himself.

2.   Any parent who allows their child to visit Neverland Ranch should be taxed and Michael should be taxed himself.

3.   This product should be taxed.  Everytime I see a kid eat this within minutes the kid starts to shake from the intensity of the sugar. 

4. Lindsay should be taxed for being bad for kids.  See–kids see this:

  and then they think she is so cool and then they google her and see this:

5.  Just the concerts are harmful–to parents first because the tickets are impossible to get and after being online for an hour trying to wedge into a ticketmaster site to buy 2 tickets and ultimately being booted off the system only to face the sad teary eyed mug of your young daughter, the parents are so stressed that they have to go to therapy–that, of course, ultimately leads to being told that all of your anxiety comes from your childhood and the fact that your mother abandoned you emotionally which, of course, leads to heavy medications, the cost of which is not covered by your employer’s cheap-butt health insurance plan, which of course, leads to less money to spend on healthy things for your kids like carrots and granola.  So let’s tax Hannah. 

6.    Yep, let’s just tax Gavin Newsom–let’s make him pay a tax everytime he opens his liberal, government expanding grill.  Let’s tax him for suggesting ideas of how people’s lives can be controlled by his brilliant vision of the future.  Thank you Father Newsom for protecting all the little children from Sprite and Capri Sun and Kool-Aid because we all know that in San Francisco, our children will fare much better if they drink less sugar and instead, get outside and enjoy a wholesome parade like this one from last summer:

-(Apparently we need to tax skinny balloons and male make-up)

Explore posts in the same categories: 1, Current Events, Democrats, funny, Government, Humor, Life, News, Parenting, Politics, Satire, Thoughts on the World

9 Comments on “Instead of Taxing Babies, How About Taxing CapriSun?”

  1. pistolpete Says:

    Not to offend your conservative sensibilities, but I fully support a luxury tax, provided it replaces, not adds to, other taxes. I don’t think people should be made to pay for such things as earning a living (income tax), for saving and investing (capital gains tax), or for having a home (property tax). I would propose we exempt necessities (like food and heat), then raise any necessary funds from sales taxes on non-essentials. This would be sort of like a luxury tax in baseball. You could still spend like the Yankees and Red Sox, and the league as a whole would benefit from it.

  2. mklasing Says:

    No offense ever taken on this site–if I dish it, I have to be able to take it. In all candor though, I agree with you…mostly. I think taxing consumption of non-essentials is a great idea as well provided all other taxes are abolished. Taking ONLY luxury items I have a problem with because I hate taxes aimed at punishing those who are wealthy simply because they are wealthy. I think a national sales tax takes care of that. Having said all of that–my comments on this San Francisco thing are directed at the WHY of the tax not the tax itself. I am much more put out by the fact that the reason the tax is being proposed is to “allegedly” protect children from bad parenting—not the role of government (except in cases of actual abuse of course)–I disagree with the tax idea in general–but I especially disagree with the reasoning behind it. The mayor needs to worry about crime and infrastructure–not cavities and fat kids.

  3. Nigel Says:

    Tax Hannah Montana? Nah, she’s one of the few wholesome role models for kids. Parents should get a tax credit for springing for Hannah tix.

  4. mklasing Says:

    Nigel-you are of course correct–I was just simply frustrated by the ticket purchasing process. She is decent –for now–hopefully she won’t get whatever disney disease seems to infect these young girls when they leave the Walt Disney fold. My kids love her and her show by the way–so I’m kind of inundated with her.

  5. pistolpete Says:

    Good point. Even the concept of taxing as punishment is rather ridiculous. When somebody buys a pair of designer jeans at 600% mark-up, are we punishing them for their stupidity? Well, bad example. I do agree with you the wealthy shouldn’t pay a higher taxes simply because they are wealthy. I actually trust big business more than I trust big government.

    One of my greatest frustrations as a Christian pastor is that if “my people” would voluntarily give the minimum tithe (10%) God prescribes in the Bible, we could just about provide all the needed social services without having to rely on government and taxation. Then, our taxes could go where they can do the most good – arming tribal chiefs in warring nations to kill each other, then turn their weapons on us.

  6. yojoe Says:

    If the good mayor wants sin taxes to change behavior, he should consider taxing men who have sex with men. This activity is far more dangerous than drinking soda.

    Note: I mention this only to show the mayor’s hypocrisies. I believe that the sole purpose of taxes should be to raise revenue; never to coerce behavior.


  7. I have 6 kids. We’re raising them to be little Rah Rah America, freedom-loving, moralistic, and righteous individuals. I think that greatly outweighs their “carbon footprints” they’re “burdening” the earth with. That Australian blowhole should be paying people like me and my husband for producing future assets to the world at large.

  8. Mark, I’m 100% with you on the national sales tax, especially the FairTax.

  9. mklasing Says:

    Yojoe: You are absolutely right–taxing to coerce behavior sounds similar to…what was it…oh yeah, the reason we fought the British for Independence.

    Elastic: You go girl! Keep up the burdening–I love it! I have 3 and might have had more if we started earlier–I think the best way to pollute the atmosphere is to have more moralistic and upstanding children. 😉

    Crush: Me too–too bad it will never happen–I don’t think ANY of the current candidates would touch the income tax system. Dangit!

Leave a Reply to yojoe Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: