Free Markets, Free People

Sin Taxes To Fund Health Care?

First they came after the smokers. But I didn’t say anything because I don’t smoke. And then they came after the soda drinkers, and I didn’t say anything because I rarely drink soda.

But then they came after beer, but I couldn’t do anything because the precedent had been set (with apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller).

Yes, sinners, you are going to pay for health care. You and the evil rich. “Sin” taxes are seemingly the chosen method of this administration for paying the bill for the upcoming health care debacle.

Consumers in the United States may have to hand over nearly $2 more for a case of beer to help provide health insurance for all.

Details of the proposed beer tax are described in a Senate Finance Committee document that will be used to brief lawmakers Wednesday at a closed-door meeting.

Taxes on wine and hard liquor would also go up.

Apparently they’re still discussing sugary drinks as well (although it seems diet drinks are not yet on the table) because, you know, obesity is a problem and since government will be paying for all of this (can taxing Oreos be far off?).

But remember:

“If you make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year, you will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000 a year or less, your taxes will go down.”

Unless, of course, you’re a smoker, a fattie or a boozer (or, heaven forbid, all three).

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

15 Responses to Sin Taxes To Fund Health Care?

  • I guess once those taxes go into place it would be a great time to give up drinking.  I do like my wine and I LOVE my beer, but there comes a time you just have to refuse to feed the beast anymore.  (Prior to the increase I can stock up on wine since it can last quite some time.  But beer, alas, doesn’t have a very long shelf life.)

    • Except they will then find some other “vice” to tax…fatty foods, bottled water, oxygen…whatever.  It will never end.

  • Next up is taxes on breathing. After all we expel CO2 which is a greenhouse gas so taxing breathing is a natural extension of that.

  • pedro is rippin’ again!  keep your manos off my agave!  if you want to double down on los gordos pedro is okay with thees.

  • When pedro starts complaining, then Obama has gone too far.

  • Time to legalize all drugs and prostitution and they can make a real bonanza.  Off course then Hollywood would complain about it being unfair

  • Typical democrat (spit) ploy: pitting groups against each other and making SOMEBODY a villain who justly deserves to be punished. 

    The thing is, sin taxes are pretty obviously stop working once they get to be too onerous.  As jjmurphy points out, people will simply stop buying beer, wine, Cokes, cigs, or whatever other nasty product the government wants to tax to fund itself; the expected tax revenues will not meet their targets, with the result that the government will have to find something ELSE to tax.

    Further, what happens to the companies who make these items when people stop buying them?  What happens to the employees at Coke or Pepsi or Miller when people go from drinking several beverages per week to one or two on special occasions every year?

    Once again, libs demonstrate just how stupid they are.  And they are running things.

    We’re so, sooo, screwed.

  • Once again, we find from the stupid left the theory that if you just keep taxing people more you will get more money.

    Have I told this story before? I forget, so I will tell it like I was doing it for the first time…so please indulge me for a moment or two: In the time between when Clinton took office in January 1993 and when the Democrats got their heads handed to them in November 1994, the liberals who control Congress believed that if they placed a large tax on the yacht and boat industry that it would raise tons of dough. After all, the Democrats reasoned, who else buys yachts and large boats but THE RICH?

    Of course, the rich have a power that all consumers have: they can choose NOT to buy, which they did. And so they stopped buying yachts and large boats. What happened? The industry died, and thousands of people who manufactured yachts and large boats – the middle class workers – were thrown out of work. Good thinking, Democrats!

    Now, they want to tax things like soda, and cigarettes, and the like. Guess what? People will stop buying them, and then what happens? More unemployment, less money for the government (they will have to pay out more in unemployment bennies), and, once again, dimwitted thinking from the Left.

    Liberals and common sense: never the twain shall meet.

    • The “luxury tax” on boats actually originated in 1990, as part of the “bipartisan” deal between GHWB and Congress that would balance the federal budget [insert bitter laugh here].

      “The rich” stopped buying boats and luxury cars, which trickled down to the middle class workers who did the manufacturing. So yes, the tax didn’t bring in as much as expected. It’s worse, though. I’ll dig it up later, but I think it was the NCPA that calculated that when you consider the unemployment payments that went out to those newly unemployed, the tax cost money in the end.

  • “Taxes on wine and hard liquor would also go up.”

    You can tax my whiskey when you pry it out of my cold, dead hand.

    • That’s just the way my grandfathers felt about it!

      Hmmm…

      I AM a chemist… and moonshining DOES run in my family.  I smell a potential opportunity here.

  • So will Indian Reservations start selling untaxed beer over the internet?

  • One of the things I liked about Europe was that they had the decency and good sense to not tax beer. Excellent beer at affordable prices. Religion may be the opiate of the people, but beer beats opiates every time..

  • President Obama in February 2009: “But let me perfectly clear, because I know you’ll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people:  if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.  I repeat: not one single dime.”

    Oh really? Then, in his first month in office, he signed into law the SCHIP bill which is to be partially funded through the cigarette tax — $0.61 per pack, so, actually six dimes per pack to be precise. I think it’s fair to say most smokers buy many tens of packs a year. Then we have this talk of soda tax, beer tax, other “sin” taxes.

    Which is supremely ironic, because those are absolutely the most regressive taxes possible. It’s elementary that the vast majority of smokers, obese people, and beer and hard liquor drinkers are in the lower income brackets.

  • Six dimes? That’s nuthin’. SCHIP raised the Federal tax on loose cigarette tobacco (“roll your own”) from a around a dollar a pound to around $24 per pound, a 2200% increase. What’s sad is when you realize that the folks who roll their own are people like the homeless, people on fixed incomes, etc.