Posted on 08/02/2014 10:11:36 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced this week the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Tax (SWEET Act), which aims to institute a tax of one cent per teaspoon—4.2 grams—of sugar, high fructose corn syrup or caloric sweetener.
The measure (HB 5279), introduced Wednesday says, “A 20-ounce bottle of soda contains about 16 teaspoons of sugars. Yet, the American Heart Association recommends that Americans consume no more than six to nine teaspoons of sugar per day.”
Even though the manufacturers of the sweet drinks are targeted to pay the tax, the text of the bill itself notes that the goal is to reduce public consumption through a price increase. …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
So giving in to the liberals’ way is the way to eliminate the alleged “crap”?
Nobody buys HFCS voluntarily, for the record; it’s an additive. If people want to vote with their feet and buy stuff that contains it, versus looking for the stuff that contains sucrose instead, then that’s the free market.
We should tax liberal idiocy, instead.
If we taxed ugly, she could pay off the national debt.
There is fructose in your sugar, shhhhhhhhh.
Seems that the comparisons with the archetypal witch go beyond the merely facetious. Why such a preponderance of female politicians with that same lack of “healthy” physical appearance among the liberals?
Feminism was created so as to give unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society. - Rush Limbaugh Undeniable Truth #24
I figured that I wouldn’t make any friends going after HFCS...but I do what I feel is right, and I actually do believe there is a place for governments to protect us. For example, I know that Houston’s smog would rival Peking’s if the EPA hadn’t cleaned up cars.
...of course there are limits and forcing California to close shop because some 2” fish wants fresh water (and thereby forcing most of California’s fresh water to drain directly to the ocean) is INSANE. But I still believe in some regulation, because BIG BUSINESS is simply incapable of regulating itself, as PROVEN by the mortgage crisis not long ago, when they JUMPING OVER EACH OTHER to loan $500,000 to people making $50k per year and never having a prayer of paying it back.
Anyway, hopefully the market will at least put an end to HFCS, even if the government won’t.
I'm trying to figure out why HFCS is bad, but the fructose in your real sugar is good.
Maybe you can explain?
If they Taxed Ugly, she would have to declare Bankruptcy.
“I’m trying to figure out why HFCS is bad, but the fructose in your real sugar is good.”
It’s the conversion of the sugar type, totally messes it up. Anyway, little old me won’t have any effect, but people are now moving away from that junk regardless.
What conversion? Where?
How does it "mess it up"?
This is what happens when you vote hippies into office.
He's afraid of big government.....but big government is ok.
Behold big government conservative logic at work.
This is beyond merely unattractive. This is monstrous appearance.
There isn’t generally any free fructose in sucrose (table sugar); fructose is one of the metabolic derivatives. It’s generally not good to actually consume simple sugars as food, including glucose; better to eat complex sugars and let the body break them down, because if you eat a simple sugar, the digestive juices will not let them get into the bloodstream in that form.
Why?
better to eat complex sugars and let the body break them down,
How long does it take the body to break them down?
if you eat a simple sugar, the digestive juices will not let them get into the bloodstream in that form.
What can your stomach do to the already simplest sugars?
tax every liberal representative 100%
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.