1. The public is becoming aware of this as an issue.
2. The public has no clue
and a side observation:
3. Leonhardt tried to do some numbers but he is way off. But I compliment him of doing what the economist fellow from Harvard should have done in the first place. Numbers do have some merit, especially if they are obvious and even more so if done on the back of an envelope.
You see if you are out trying to raise money as I have done many times for my own businesses in foreign lands, then when you make your pitch, you need eye contact, to assure the person on the other side that you know what you are doing, and even though you have all those power point slides they want to know that you know the numbers in your heart...they look at your eyes. The numbers have to be on the napkin, the envelope, whatever, but the numbers must be there. Mankiw in my opinion did not do his homework.
Leonhardt states:
A soda tax obviously would not solve the obesity epidemic. But it appears to be one of the most promising responses, given the central role that sugary drinks play in the epidemic and the fact that they have no nutritional benefit. A tax would also help reverse the big decline in the price of soda over the last few decades, at the same that the price of fruit and vegetables has been rising. Finally, as with a gasoline tax, a soda tax would help cover the broader costs that the product imposes on taxpayers.
Thus the heavy load 18 wheelers should pay a tax for their costs. Should we weigh people when they file a tax return each year, we already check their health care payment status, why not the weight, we already have invaded parts of the body, why not go for the gold!
Posts
