RSS
Home
Government is not your nanny; reject the federal soda tax.
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Mises.org photo
In order to cover the exorbitant cost of President Obama’s universal health care program, the Senate Finance Committee has proposed, among other things, that the government levy additional taxes on alcohol, soda, and other sugar-sweetened beverages.
The committee members and their supporters in the health community like the idea because it will raise some of the necessary funds and also discourage consumption of high-calorie beverages like soda and sports drinks. Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, for example, approves of the tax because “[s]oda is clearly one of the most harmful products in the food supply, and it's something government should discourage the consumption of.” Jacobson has also argued that the tax will “compensate society for the costs” of treating medical conditions which result from soda and alcohol consumption.
The argument has a veneer of plausibility. After all, if people who consume excessive amounts of sugary soda or alcohol impose additional costs on the public they should have to pay up.
Unfortunately for the health nannies, their assertion is entirely at odds with the facts. Preventative health care measures—such as taxes to discourage consumption—actually increase health care costs to the government. Pacific Research Institute President Sally Pipes explains that “healthier people live longer -- and thus consume more health care in their extra years of life. Individuals who live into old age require some of the most expensive health care around: late-life care. As people age, they become more susceptible to illnesses like osteoarthritis, prostate cancer, osteoporosis, and cognitive disorders like Alzheimer's disease. Treating illnesses like these in the final years of a person's life is incredibly expensive.”
Even if we assume that it's the government’s responsibility to pay the health care expenses associated with unhealthy behaviors like soda and alcohol consumption, these behaviors don’t drive up health care costs, and therefore the only real justification for levying additional taxes on them is no justification at all.
If the Senate continues to push for a scientifically dubious beverage tax as a means to pay for Obama’s health care scheme, we should inform them that their chances of re-election are bleak. If politicians respond to anything, they respond to the possibility of being thrown out of office. Let’s use that to prevent any further encroachment on our liberties.
Related Articles:
Comments
