View Single Post
  #8   ^
Old Sat, Jan-28-17, 08:50
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,684
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grav
I thought Lustig made a really good suggestion that would bypass the tax question altogether: cut the government subsidies that encourage such high levels of sugar production in the first place. All at once, you're simplifying the administration rather than adding to it, you're reducing supply through having reduced the incentive to produce it, you're increasing prices as a consequence of that reduced supply, and you're reducing consumption through higher prices. The same higher prices you'd get by imposing a tax upfront, except that now you're allowing market forces to play out across the board.


I think this is a far better idea. Why should we taxpayers pay them to make more sugar, then charge the taxpayers who want to consume it?

Let them, like the tobacco companies, find another line of work.
Reply With Quote