If you thought I exaggerated…
…in my last post about taxing fast food, don’t miss today’s New York Times article, “For a World of Woes, We Blame Cookie Monsters“.
The idea of using economic incentives to help people shed pounds comes up in the periodic calls for taxes on junk food. Martin B. Schmidt, an economist at the College of William and Mary, suggests a tax on food bought at drive-through windows. Describing his theory in a recent Op-Ed article in The New York Times, Dr. Schmidt said people would expend more calories if they had to get out of their cars to pick up their food.
“We tax cigarettes in part because of their health cost,” he wrote. “Similarly, the individual’s decision to lead a sedentary lifestyle will end up costing taxpayers.”
You think it’s limited to cigarrettes and tobacco products? Think again.
Technorati Tags: No on 86, tax initiatives
Sphere: Related ContentProp 86: Tobacco, but not Big Macs?
California’s Proposition 86 is a prime example of using emotional buzzwords to induce voters to stop thinking and follow the jargon trail like sheep. Helen Beebe of Simi Valley wrote an emotional and passionate editorial for today’s Ventura County Star calling for Californians to vote for Proposition 86 as a way to “fight back against the tobacco industry.”
She goes on to say :
The money that will come from Proposition 86 has been assigned to assist with a variety of health concerns. Tobacco education and cessation is one area of concern.
Let’s be clear: They intend to tax tobacco products to pay for unrelated health concerns. There is no oversight to how the money is spent and there is no accountability to anyone for how the funds are allocated.
But Helen glosses over that and calls us all to action in her final paragraph:
Proposition 86 is about saving lives! It is about keeping children from ever starting the addictive smoking habit. It is about increasing the availability of public health services for everyone. It is about creating a healthier California for all of us!
Baloney. Proposition 86 is about everything but saving lives. It is about shoving agendas down people’s throats, funding programs which would not otherwise be eligible for funding, and backdoor social engineering. If it were a computer virus it would be classified as a worm, spreading and infecting as many as possible.
If it were about saving lives, proponents would be slapping a $2.60 tax on Big Macs, or candy, or ice cream, since obesity is the number one killer and cause of health expenditures in the US.
If it were about saving lives, proponents would be directing the funds toward life-saving research.
But it’s not about saving lives; it is about an anti-tobacco agenda permitted to run amok.
If you’re comfortable with the idea of seeing this type of a tax on convenience foods or condoms or the Internet, or whatever the next target of the tax-em-Nazis might be, then by all means, vote for it. But success with a measure like this really means failure of a system in this country that has served us well for more than 200 years and one whose revolution began, in part, because of unfair and burdensome taxes for which the people saw no benefit.
Technorati Tags: Prop 86, taxes, tobacco, anti-tobacco, niconazi, No on 86
Sphere: Related ContentDemocracy for Dummies
Ventura County Star: Columnists
Ever hear of the Save Proposition 13 Committee? How about Citizens for Representative Government or the Council of Concerned Women Voters or the Coalition for Senior Citizen Security? Who runs Parents and Teachers for a Better California; who produces the Official Non-Partisan Voter guide and whom do they represent?
For example, the energy companies that have ponied up some $65 million to beat Proposition 87, which would impose a severance tax on oil extracted from California, have already paid $180,000 for a slot on the Voter Information Guide, which is pitched to Democrats, and $120,000 to the Police Officers Research Association of California Official Law Enforcement Guide.
Backers of Proposition 86, the tobacco tax increase designed to support health programs, have shelled out $100,000 to the COPS Voter Guide.
You may wonder what cops have to do with oil severance taxes or why they’d be against the alternative energy technology that the tax would support. But money talks, and as every political operative knows, it’s always good to have cops on your side.
This is what worries me. Prop 86 is designed to tap into the smoker-haters prevalent in California but closer scrutiny shows that almost none of that $2.60/pack tax goes to anti-smoking initiatives (less than 10%). It’s a backdoor way to fund hospitals with no accountability.
Prop 87 is the only ballot initiative on there that truly works to the benefit of Californians, yet so much money is being thrown at it in the form of negative campaigns and bought endorsements that it isn’t getting the kind of attention it deserves.
The political technology has now become more sophisticated, principally through “microtargeting,” which melds commercial databases with voter lists to identify and niche-market to particular subgroups of voters: Christian conservatives, for example, in predominantly Democratic districts. But the idea’s the same.
Like Santa Claus, the political ops now know when you’re sleeping and when you’re awake — know your age, what magazines you read, how many kids you have, what church you belong to and where you shop. If you’re a Wal-Mart customer, you’re more likely to be a Republican; if you drive a Volvo and sip lattes at Starbucks — well, you know.
Don’t be a dummy. Take time and get informed about who is funding these initiatives, what the true motive is behind them and why you choose to vote for and against them.
Otherwise we’re just microtargeted sheep.
Technorati Tags: California initiatives, Prop 86, Prop 87
Sphere: Related ContentCalifornia Students Vote
There was a mock election yesterday for California students, 7-12th grades. The preliminary returns worry me, particularly those related to the ballot initiatives. I am working on a larger post on these, but in the interim, some food for thought:
- Prop 83: Sex Offenders is not what it seems. SAY NO!
- California Voter Pamphlet: Follow the money and the support. Do people ever read these?
I’m very curious to know what the students were given to evaluate their choices before voting? Was it based on TV ads or other printed material?
Technorati Tags: mock election, california ballot initiatives
Sphere: Related ContentStay the Course?
…or not. I found this on Digg tonight — watch it, blog it, and encourage the Democrats to keep running it, preferably during prime time.
Update: Olbermann: Evidently, somebody at the White House needs a little help with “The Google.”
Technorati Tags: stay the course
Michael J Fox vs. Rush Limbaugh: Experts Speak
Was he exaggerating, as one radio commentator suggested?
Many people don’t realize how severe Parkinson’s disease can be. This is largely because most of us have never witnessed these symptoms unless we personally know someone struggling with this disabling condition.
Fox has a very severe form of Parkinson’s that affected him at a young age. And he’s been through many aggressive treatments, including brain surgery.
The symptoms he displayed on the commercial are common Parkinson’s disease symptoms.
And via Crooks & Liars, Olbermann gives Us the Visual to Limbaugh’s Attack. What a pathetic little man. And where’s his apology? The one he said he’d give if he was proven wrong?
FOX: I’m kinda lucky right now. It’s ironic, given some things that have been said in the last couple days, that my pills are working really well right now.
ANNOUNCER: That’s Michael J. Fox responding to a critic, radio powerhouse Rush Limbaugh. Michael J. Fox spoke out today in support of stem-cell research at a rally in Illinois. His response comes after the conservative commentator accused Fox of either “acting” or not using his medication during an ad for Missouri senate candidate Claire McCaskill. During the ad, Fox was trembling due to symptoms of his Parkinson’s disease.
And so does the Parkinson’s Foundation (via the Washington Post):
An official of the National Parkinson Foundation said movements like those exhibited by Fox are the result of taking medication to treat the disease, which would otherwise result in rigidity.
“When you see someone with those movements, it’s not because they have not taken medication but because they probably have taken medication for some time,” the official said. “If you don’t take the medication, then you freeze.”
Technorati Tags: Michael J Fox, Rush Limbaugh, Parkinson’s
Sphere: Related Content
