Y regressive.” 9 9 9 Singling out SSBs for taxation is unfair when other
Y regressive.” 9 9 9 Singling out SSBs for taxation is unfair when other unhealthy foods PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20067270 are certainly not regulated The government is acting as a “nanny state” that restricts individuals’ personal selection Governments can’t be trusted to make use of tax revenue responsibly and transparently Taxing an market that has sponsored nearby infrastructure and scholarships is counterproductive “Why need to we have to spend a lot more for soda when it is just. . .CCT245737 terrible management in the city level The city has a good amount of income, plus the city just desires to be smarter about how it really is spending that money.” 8 “A lot of groups had been struggling using the dollars question. Either they had a partnership with a beverage organization or vendor, they had been acquiring grants from them, or they had some sort of deal where they promote for them, and they would build a center there or one thing. They had been in bed with those corporations.” six Taxes normally are terrible policy “Especially in rural parts, smaller communities in California, a great deal of Tea Celebration individuals and conservatives want much less government manage, significantly less government intrusion, significantly less government all round. So something that’s about taxes is type of a third rail, no matter what it’s for.” six SSB taxation is not going to decrease consumption; men and women can invest in their drinks in other places “You frequently hear `People are not going to cease drinking soda anyway,’ which can be sort of not the point.” “Unlike tobacco, `people have to eat’ is actually a frequent pushback you get in the market. ‘Why choose out sugar-sweetened beverages All meals has calories.'” “Nanny state generally comes up as the favourite buzz word.”850 | Investigation and Practice | Peer Reviewed | Jou et al.American Journal of Public Overall health | Might 2014, Vol 104, No.Research AND PRACTICEthe ethnic drinks (horchata, Tampico, boba) [and] in saying, `Look, they are attacking not simply your drinks, but your preferred ethnic drinks.'” Numerous interviewees perceived that limited resources prevented them from targeting messages to a related extent.Future DirectionsWe concluded our interviews by asking interviewees about the lessons drawn from their experiences and their outlook on the future of SSB taxation. Two problems associated to messaging content material have been identified as possible concerns. First, numerous interviewees expressed aggravation more than legal restrictions that impeded successful messaging. In California, policymakers in El Monte and Richmond anticipated the difficulty of winning a supermajority for a special tax under Proposition 13 and opted instead for a basic tax. This selection eliminated advocates’ ability to wield an efficient protax message (investing income into overall health initiatives) and bolstered an effective antitax message (gifting city officials with a “blank check”). Second, interviewees discovered the term sugarsweetened beverages difficult to clarify, describing attempts by the beverage sector to spread misinformation in regards to the varieties of beverages subject to tax, such as “your infant formula and your grandmother’s Ensure.” Yet another lesson associated to paying close attention to the messenger. Quite a few Richmond interviewees located voters reluctant to support a measure noticed as proposed and promoted by outsiders (“do-gooders” from “outside the community” telling them they have been “obese and needed to acquire rid of sodas”). Conversely, interviewees reported that messages delivered by community members have been better received, specifically in jurisdictions with large communities of color. Tax opponents were noticed as quick to capitalize around the difficulty of.
