After reviewing the problem it is clear that our organization cannot sit back idly and hope for the best. Soda companies have continued to struggle with the political interference in the market. In the past few years, nations all over the world have passed taxes on soda beverages. France passed a tax on soda and sales dropped by 3%. In Mexico, sales dropped by 2% after a similar tax was passed. And though the drops in sales are alarming, it is not event the biggest threat. Ultimately, the goal of the politicians is to drastically decrease the consumption of soda drinks. Their attempt to pass these taxes is a power play to make soda beverages viewed as similar to cigarette companies. It is imperative that we do everything in our power to stop these taxes from occurring. So far we have been successful in combating taxes in San Francisco and New York City. We have done this through a combination of business and political actions. Through our research we have been able to come up with a comprehensive list of strategies to counteract the soda tax. This list can be broken down into two main areas, business actions and political actions. Political: The political strategies would be utilized to strike down all efforts to pass a soda tax or any other legislation aimed at reducing the consumption of Coca Cola products. These strategies would include political marketing, and financial donations. Option 1: Political Marketing In this approach we would attempt to external with our
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
As an attempt to reduce the rising obesity and obesity-related disease rates, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City has proposed a ban on soft drinks larger than 16 oz. According to an infographic created by the Huffington Post, extra large soft drinks have accounted for an average of 301 extra calories in people’s diets across the US. Although measures need to be put into place to improve the unhealthy diets and lifestyles of many Americans, a ban on large soft drinks is not the solution. The ban on soda would be an ineffective attempt at reducing obesity and obesity-related diseases, as well as an infringement of civil liberties and an attack on businesses in New York City.
Their advertisement proclaimed that all they wanted to do was “protect their Freedom of Choice.” “This is New York City; no one tells us what neighborhood to live in or what team to root for,” says the narrator, as Yankees and Mets fans shout in the background. (Grynbaum, 2012). Since May 30 when Bloomberg wanted to ban the sale of soft drinks over 16 ounces in regulated food establishments such as movie theaters and sport arenas. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, recommended there be a federal study linking together sugary beverages and obesity. “The talking points are ‘Nanny State,’ that it won’t work, because people will just buy as much as they ever would, and that this disproportionately hurts the poor,” said Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University. (Grynbaum, 2012). People that are not middle or low class would buy as much soda as they wanted and the rest of the people would be stuck with whatever drink is leftover. The lower class minority groups seem to always get the shorter end of the stick and in most cases unless a big group of them get together their voices will not be heard. The mayor or the city council should not have the right to tell you what size soda to drink or what kind of soda to drink; We live in The United States of America and there is no law that says anything about a specific size or flavor of soda so until that day comes nobody should
On October 11th, 2016 Cook County, which includes the city of Chicago passed a one cent per ounce soda tax. Due to a lawsuit by the Illinois Merchant Association the new law did not even come into effect until August 2nd 2017. Now, due to a repeal, the law will cease to be in effect by December 1st, giving this law an effective life of about four months. The tax seems a no brainer with about 25% of United States boys and girls suffering from obesity. However the law had two major shortcomings. First, it had a bad start due to a poor implementation of the tax, since the tax was originally levied on producers instead of at the point of sale. This caused what is known as a double tax situation, soda companies were being charged two taxes in
Recently, people have become worried about the health issues associated with consuming sugary drinks, especially soda. The rate of people being diagnosed with type-2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease has been going up primarily because of beverages with added sugar (Cited in Crawford, 2016). Several studies have found that soda is linked to over 180,000 deaths per year (Cited in Crawford, 2016). An article by the Huffington Post (2011) said that an average American drinks about 44.7 gallons of carbonated beverages a year, which adds up to over 350 pounds of soda. Comparatively, in 2005 an average American drank only 0.5 gallons, making soft drinks the most consumed beverage in America (n/a, 2011). The way the government is trying to fix
“Soda Taxes: Gaining Steam or Getting Steamrolled?” is an enticing article by Anna Gorman that focuses on the issue of taxing sugary beverages and the effect it will ultimately have on the health of the general population. She mentions that the tax could reduce the rates of obesity and diabetes in the affected areas. She also points out the counter to this claim, that soda taxes may not have any effect on obesity rates at all and may give the government too much power over the consumer choice. Overall, she seems to advocate that soda is an unhealthy beverage and should be cut down among consumers. Soda however, is not the only unhealthy options out there. There is a plethora of products on the shelves of supermarkets and sold at restaurants.
The debate on weather sugary drinks, especially soda, should be taxed or not has been a topic for years. Some people believe that they should be taxed for the improvement of health while on the other hand some people think that taxing the drinks won't do much and actually hurt people. Taxing sugary drinks is helpful to those who have a hard time with temptation for the drinks. In the article "Do Soda Taxes Really Work?" Sifferlin states that when researchers looked at Berkeley residents, they found that when taxing soda started "sales of sugary-sweetened drinks fell by close 10% and sales of water increased in Berkeley by about 16%" (4) Just by the percent difference rasing prices on soda made people decide against buying the sweet drinks,
How is this plain old bubbly drink, soda, such a huge controversy in New York? The new soda ban is the answer. Soda isn't being banned completely. But at many of your favorite food places the maximum amount of soda that is allowed to be purchased is a 16 ounce cup. Back and forth, is this a good thing or bad? Believe it or not the soda ban will actually be beneficial to a serious and fatal health problem you yourself might not even know that you or somebody close to you is suffering from. This extreme health issue is known as obesity and more than 1/3rd of our population is suffering from it today. Dr. Joel A. Forman, a board member and professor of medicine has been quoted saying "I can't imagine the board not acting on another problem that
Although this may be true, the soda ban “... produces a false sense of accomplishment in the fight against obesity” (Gross,1). In brief, the soda ban won’t reduce the ever-growing obesity rate in America. After all their are other contributors that damage America’s health. Without delay, this law gives the thought of the U.S. becoming forcefully controlled by the government. As described by Sidney Anne Stone “ It starts here and it will spread throughout the nation..before you know it, it won’t be the “land of the free and home of the brave”...we are all going to wake up in the land of “Big Brother” with a list of things we can and cannot do, eat, drink, say, and so on, and we’ll be wondering how we got there. Well, this is how”(Stone,288). For this reason the soda ban devices those who may agree with the law. If more bans or laws like this one were to occur, the U.S. would become what it hates.Overall, the ban may bring a horrid future for
This memo is an application of some of the policy ideas Cass Sunstein has described in his book “Simpler,” to a proposed “soda tax” in Oakland California. The introduction of the tax, contained in “Measure HH” (as it appears on the ballot) has been met with stiff opposition by some members of the Oakland area while others have embraced the idea. Three ideas from “Simpler” will be tested in this California case.
The government believes by cutting back the soda Americans will be less likely to get diabetes and hart problems. The government dose not understand that people will continue to buy fating
"' They are literally holding hostage the jobs of hardworking people in their battle to overturn the tax.'" ( Sifferlin 5). How could the taxing of sugary drinks, specifically soda, be beneficial if it's the cause of soda companies like Pepsi putting the jobs of their employees in the hands of taxes? How do people expect these taxes to work if they are being misguided on their cause? How will these taxes work if the drinks are still available, and if all these questions arise, how is it possible for these taxes to actually be anything but a hassle? The questions that surface can support the fact that as they are enforced,the taxes are unnecessary and causing less help than people think; they can be presented as an inconvenience
Congress hereby finds and declares that the United States of America has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of obese people and the number of deaths caused by the symptoms of obesity. Obesity is the leading cause of preventable deaths and accounts for 18% of all deaths in America (Fox 2013); thus, a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugary beverages will decrease consumer rates and lower the obesity level. The rise in sweetened beverage consumption is parallel to the increase in obesity rates. Soda and other sugary substances are the largest contributors to sugar and calorie intake; soft drinks, energy drinks, sweet teas, and sports drinks are considered the top most consumed beverages in America (Kickthecan 2014). The annual medical costs due to obesity and overweight Americans is also staggering. The proposed solution will not hinder the necessary diet and nutritional value of one 's meal, but rather improve it by reducing the amount of sugar American 's consume, especially since sugary beverages are a large factor of obesity that can be costly and life threatening.
By carefully analyzing and breaking down the soda tax with considerations to all of Kass’s criteria, it can be determined that the soda tax passes all of the ethical considerations that are relevant to public health, and is thus ethically sound.
Starbucks is a major reason why things have changed for Coca-Cola and Pepsi Co, they have emerged in the market with balancing their menu with gourmet, coffee beverages that offer sweet and sugary options for their customers. In 2016, the soft drink industry is in the middle of the growing policy debate in the United States regarding taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages. Therefore, it hasn’t been a great year for Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co, and Dr. Pepper Snapple due to the public’s concern on the health issues of sugary sodas. The health problems with the sugar content in soft drinks have increased political pressures, as well as slowed the growth of these giant beverage companies.
Considering that soft drinks are one of the most popular drinks to a lot of people all around the world, unfortunately, a lot of them love to drink it almost every day and may not live without it. Soda becomes addictive, preventing one from drinking what the body needs the most which is water. In the market, there is a infinite amount of choices with multiple varieties of flavors, different tastes, ranges from classic soda to diet soda. However, consumers do not recognize clearly the negative effect of soft drinks that have a high chance of eroding their health away. Some of these examples include dental erosion, energy intake, obesity and other health issues. Nowadays, people live a healthy life to avoid health problems, so taxes on soft