Did the tea tax help the British?

Every once in a while I’ll see a commercial that’s so asinine that it makes me pull a Hank Hill and almost spit out my beer. It’s this new commercial from The Alliance for a Healthier New York that concerns bettering the livelihood of obese people in New York State by supporting a soda tax.

   However, nowhere in the confines of its commercial or Web site (http://www.healthiernynow.org) is there even a single fat person to be seen, in spite of the fact that these are the people they’re claiming to help. That’s great marketing; I’m sure they learned a thing or two from McDonald’s and Burger King when it comes to NOT showing the people who are your biggest customers.

   Instead of depicting obese people, the commercial and the Web site show a bunch of non-fat kids sucking soda out of straws, looking all desperate and innocent like they’re starving orphans from a third-world country or something. Instead of making you feel sorry about people who are going to die as a result of lacking basic sustenance, they want to make you feel guilty about people who overindulge on a daily basis? Please. The day I stand behind a sin tax to help people who can’t help themselves will be the day someone digs up my grave, attaches ropes to my appendages and does a marionette bit with my corpse.

   The Alliance claims that “over 10 million New Yorkers are overweight” on its commercial and Web site,  like it’s a confirmed statistic in spite of the fact that the United States Census Bureau’s 2009 estimate for New York’s total population was 19,541,453. There’s a reason why they don’t say “over half of New York State is overweight” in the commercial even though it has a better ring to it, because in that context the average person would’ve been able to turn over to the person sitting next to them and say, “Isn’t that a load of shit?”

   Basically, in order to help half of New York State, this group advocates that you support a soda tax, because in theory, it would curb obesity and unnecessary ailments like diabetes and heart disease. In reality however, it probably wouldn’t do jack aside from forcing fat people to dig deeper in their pockets to do the same thing they used to do for cheaper, trade name-brand soda for knock-off, store-brand soda, or find new alternatives for unhealthy drinking habits (like beer).

   Sin taxes haven’t had much success in this country, even before the United States was formally created. The British tried taxing their colonial residents’ daily tea-drinking habit, thinking that by doing so they could recoup the massive debt they accrued from the French and Indian War. They lost their whole New World investment in the process. Boy, did they pay the price for that one.

   I think there’s just something inherently wrong with the idea that because a minority pays or engages in some legal venue that’s adverse to the greater majority, there should be a tax on it. After all, taxing people that lack self-responsibility when morals or health are concerned makes perfect sense, because doing so gives a bloated, irresponsible congress more money to squander and mismanage like a fat kid in a chocolate factory.

   The soda tax commercial gave me a couple of new sin/vice tax ideas to spew on New York State television, in order to help out the sinners and pay off the state deficit and all:
   Beer and Liquor Tax: Beer is pretty fattening as it is. Anything that contains alcohol for that matter probably accounts for the greater majority of innocent deaths that occur in New York State on an annual basis. Why doesn’t New York just tax the shit out of alcohol, so that way only rich and responsible people can afford to drink?

   Reason why it wouldn’t fly: Because the greater majority of New York State residents who are 21 and older (and many people who aren’t) wouldn’t stand for it.
Porn Video and Sex Toy Tax: Isn’t there something inherently wrong and sinful about people who pay to look at graphic, uncensored sexual acts on video? Why would someone purchase a sex toy? Isn’t that weird and perverse? Shouldn’t there be a tax on pornography and sex toys in order to force people into not buying them any longer?

   Reason why it wouldn’t work: Because tons of Americans look at pornography and because of a little something called the “Internet.”

   Smoking Tax: Hell, smoking isn’t getting any healthier, so why don’t we make the people that are killing themselves and driving health care bills higher pay more? Gov. David Paterson’s budget proposal contains an additional dollar-per-pack tax.

   Reason why it’ll probably happen again soon: There will probably be a new bill driving a pack well over ten dollars in the near future, because we live in a society of self-righteous, soap-box-standing hypocrites. I know many smokers and none of them quit on account of the cigarette tax passed last year or show any sign of quitting soon.