ST Alpha - "because while people with lower incomes pay a larger share of their income as tax, they also are less able to afford the tax, and reduce consumption " (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 151

In response to "sure, but the data shows that they actually do work at reducing consumption across incomes." by mafic

because while people with lower incomes pay a larger share of their income as tax, they also are less able to afford the tax, and reduce consumption

Posted by mafic Jun 8 '16, 20:31

proportionally more.

they also make the point that the diseases/disabilities caused by sugar (obesity, diabetes) tend to be regressive as well. poorer people are less able to cope with them, and benefit proportionally more through reduced consumption.

Responses:

To summarize your IM, it is for their own good. -- nm - Spawn Jun 8, 21:07 3
- [deleted]
- Everyone likes individual choice as an idea, but people (not just some people, but people) make pretty lousy decisions. -- nm - Roger More Jun 9, 05:00
- for the state's good as much as that. they have an interest in people not dying of preventable disease, particularly if they're paying for it. -- nm - mafic Jun 8, 21:18
I always wonder if the argument about it being a tax on the poor is nothing more than a cynically clever argument created by the pop and cigarette com - . Jun 8, 21:05 1
- Who do you think is funding the anti-tax ads here? -- nm* - znufrii, dad. Jun 9, 06:33

Post a message top

because while people with lower incomes pay a larger share of their income as tax, they also are less able to afford the tax, and reduce consumption

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.