New York governor David Paterson is enacting taxes on unhealthy foods including sugary soft-drinks because their calories and effects on obesity are costly to society. Paterson draws comparisons between the obesity-causing foods/drinks and (cue the evil music) cigarettes. Then in the last line of his diatribe, he uses the political “free parking” card like in Monopoly. “Isn’t it worth our kids’ lives?”
Horseshit. I am all for people being healthier and attacking obesity. I made a lot of choices in my own life over the last three years or so to help make myself better in these areas. But, I think you walk into dangerous territory if you are always working backwards from the question of whether the ends justify the means in terms of government legislation.
On top of that, the cigarette comparison is intellectually fraudulent. The two situations are completely different. The smoking bans came into effect in New York (and many other states) NOT because smoking is bad for smokers. It was passed because of second-hand smoke and employees’ rights to not inhale patrons’ poisonous emissions.
Until fast food joints and Coca-Cola bottles can make you fatter just by walking by them, I don’t think you can truly justify a tax on the foods and the sugary soft drinks for sale in 7/11. In one case you are making sure employees have the choice whether to inhale smoke in their lives no matter where they work. The other case you are legislating preference by discriminating against a certain set of choices.
So stop drawing fraudulent comparisons and please don’t hide behind the “kids” excuse.
Now, if you can make a compelling argument that isn’t fraudulent, I will listen. But as of right now, and your current argument, this dog won’t hunt.
