Off Topic Political Debate

No your comments for trade deficits are incorrect. Please check on the HRMC web site and check for yourself

 

Interesting that most of the noise in the press emanating from the Budget has been about the "Sugary Drink Tax" - personally I think it's a great idea. The argument that I do understand is that this would mostly impact poor families - in my simplistic view of life, if you were poor, why would you buy such quantities of the horrible stuff that it would impact you? The argument is made, but not the logic behind it - can anyone help me understand?

 

Because they're making something more expensive and poor people have less money?

 

But why do poor people need to buy sugary drinks? Surely if you were poor, these would not be on your shopping list as an essential. The argument used to tax cigarettes and alcohol is surely the same - tax it to make unattractive and as unavailable as possible.

 

Because it's more aimed at corner shop purchases, poor people don't have the luxury of pre-planning their weekly shops.

 

I still do not see the connection, why does a poor person need to buy a sugary drink because they have to shop in a local store rather than a weekly run to a supermarket? Surely if you are poor you would only buy absolute essentials and I would not consider sugary drinks as essential.

 

It's none of your business what they spend their money on? If they like sugary drinks, they should have every right to buy a can of whatever.

It's because the clueless coke-snorting chancellor is offering free money to rich people and taxing things that will affect poor people that people are getting annoyed.

 

DOWN WITH THE GOVERNMENT

 

To be fair you could say that with any taxes implemented on any product. I'm sure rich people drink sugary drinks as well as smoke or drink alcohol. Any tax on any product be it sugar petrol alcohol is going to hit and affect the the working class more than it will on the rich).

Am i in favour of this, I'm not sure but the argument on the tax is that sugary drinks are unhealthy and likewise with alcohol and cigarettes they are trying disincentivise people from buying it by making it more expensive.

If there is anything to be complaining about it is the giving money away to middle classes for free with the tax free isa or with the continued reduction of benefits.

 

Exactly, the argument that it impacts poor people more is ridiculous. Reality is, it's going to impact stupid people, whether they are poor or not, they are stupid.

 

That's what I said?

 

Not entirely true. If you have a couple of cans a week there is nothing wrong that health wise so you're being penalised for the actions of others.

Clever move in that it is relatively low risk in itself - although it will be interesting if they now act in the same way over similar reports that tell us something is bad for us...

 

But if you only have a couple of cans a week it's only going to cost a few extra pence and if you really need to have that sugar then what is the impact? But clearly this is aimed at those drinking large quantities that is damaging their health and so they will have to pay a lot more - anyone stupid enough to drink 2L of Coke a day, deserves to be taxed.
But there is a simple solution, they could drink a zero sugar version - Coke Zero works fine for me.

 

Yeah....all those other things which are unhealthy for us such as car fumes, bad air, worrying about bills, not being able to afford heating costs etc.

 

Are you suggesting they should be taxed as well? - strange response and most of those are very difficult to deal with. Stopping drinking crap that is very bad for you and you struggle to afford to buy is something that is relatively easy to deal with....looks like no-one can provide a coherent & logical answer.

 

I would also tax take-away meals, microwaveable meals and canned beers and lagers to the hilt. Oh and horserdish sauce - can't stand the stuff.

But the best tax of all would be on morbidly obese people - £10 per lb over recommended BMI per annum. The National debt would be paid off in 6 months or so (I think).

But perhaps others may disagree?

 

First of all, you have no idea what it's like to be poor nowadays. A few pence more? If something costs 10p more (at least, everything is always rounded up) then it'll have an impact in the long run. Why should the rich get free money whilst people on benefits/low wages/the disabled lose money?

Also, your 'I'm alright, Jack' option of drinking your Coke Zero filth won't save you money, as there's no chance that all fizzy drinks won't increase in line, it'll just be another way of slowly increasing the cost of living.

 

Charge people a having kids and remove all child benefits would be another step in the right direction.

Don't touch the beer though

 

To be honest w_y, I would be serious about this (or at least a part of what I said). I would have monstrously high taxes on everything to do with cars - also kerosene (to hit the cheap flights on the head) - and channel all of the revenues from this into alternative energy.

 

Most seem reasonable, in the past budgets always had a couple of pence on alcohol, ***s and petrol. It seems to have stopped over the years and supermarket beer is very cheap (relatively speaking) - I would be happy to pay the £20 per annum for my weight over BMI. But please, not horseradish, I am rather partial to it...