Government Attacks Obesity and Sugary Beverages with Tax

The concept of taxing a perceived harmful product to protect the citizenship from itself sounds good intentioned but ultimately strips freedoms from that same base. It takes away the free markets pricing mechanism and denies the individual their right to choose a product that reflects the true market value. Punitive consumption taxes are economically irresponsible and socially unacceptable.

The link between chronic illness and tobacco use is almost indisputable. The same can not be said for soda and obesity. It would be foolhardy to proclaim that soda can not contribute to obesity. The difference, however, between soda and tobacco is the proportion of use. Lung Cancer, for instance, can be directly attributed to the use of a very small range of products to include all forms of smoked tobacco. Obesity on the other hand is not caused solely by soda. Obesity expressed as an engineering problem is the result of habitually ingesting more calories in a given time period than is burned over that same period. Calories come from an incalculable number of sources and for weight management the body does not discern between good and bad calories. Certainly a low fat diet with healthy choices will lead to healthier living. It is irresponsible, however, to say that soda is the sole reason for unhealthy living. This policy is an attack on the beverage industry as it places the burden of obesity on them alone.

The idea of increasing the financial burden on American taxpayers during the greatest recession of the modern era over something as trivial as soda is fiscally irresponsible and socially reprehensible. A tax as low as one cent per ounce would increase the cost of many beverages by up to fifty percent. The hidden economic cost created by this proposed tax would be the damage taken by the beverage industry. Unemployment is at a peak and saddling a punitive tax on the beverage industry can only exacerbate the employment problem. According to the US Bureau of Labor and Statistics the Beverage and Tobacco industry employs over 190,000 Americans in the manufacturing sector. The beverage makers will have to make up the difference in lost revenue which would most easily be achieved through cutting human capital. The beverage industry is starting to recover from its July layoffs but there is no doubt a consumer tax on this industry will reverse those gains.

The obesity epidemic in America is undeniable but government intervention is not the answer. Personal accountability, which is almost foreign to this generation, is the most ready answer. Government intervention via a punitive tax on sugared beverages is economically unjust. A truly "fair" tax would be a calorie tax that affected all foods. When you look at the idea of taxing all foods based on calorie content the absurdity of taxing sugared beverages becomes obvious. More accountability for being obese in the first place is the answer. Higher insurance premiums, similar to smokers, or complete denial of coverage would be a more direct and motivating stimulus. An increase in premiums or denial of service to the habitually obese would tax only the offending patrons and directly life the burden on the healthcare system. We need to start putting responsibility for an individual's health in the hands of that individual because it is not a problem our government should be bothered with. If the government is called in to tax smoking and sugary beverages where will it stop? Can you envision a future where fast food is taxed? How about conventional sit down restaurants? How long will it be until groceries are taxed based on their nutritional content? Hopefully we will never find out.