Thursday, February 18, 2010

Thought of the Day - 2/18/2010

This morning’s Boston Globe features an editorial in favor of Governor Patrick’s plan to levy a sales tax on soda and candy.

I disagree strongly with their rationale in favor of the tax.

The Globe editorial is centered around a belief that raising taxes is a good way to encourage social behavior; in this case, deterring children and obese adults from eating too much soda and candy. It suggests that reducing intake of soda and candy would have numerous health benefits, including possibly lowering the risk of cancer. The editorial also suggests optimistically that other, similar steps to reduce the consumption of unhealthy items could come in the future.

Even if all of the Globe’s facts and markers about nutrition are correct (I don’t argue with them here), I still think this tax is a bad idea. It’s the latest in a series of proposals on Beacon Hill that use arguments smacking of paternalism to justify taxes and spending that taxpayers can’t (and shouldn’t have to) afford. And that’s wrong.

First, state leaders wanted to raise the gas tax as a way to encourage conservation… and, of course, to help balance the state budget without making further spending cuts. Some wanted to raise the cigarette tax to discourage smoking… and to preserve spending that otherwise would have to be cut. Now, they want to take the first step in taxing foods on the basis of their nutritional value… supposedly as a way to encourage healthy eating, but also as a way to pay for health programs that we otherwise can’t afford.

These are all mixed messages for taxpayers, but in the end, the message is clear: government wants to tell people what to do, and it expects people to pay extra for it.

I believe government does a disservice to those it represents whenever it views taxes as anything more than the necessary price taxpayers need to pay for core government services and priorities. Using taxes as a way for government to exert itself over wholly-private decisions, like what people should eat, is just as bad as using taxes to pay for government spending that’s not essential to run our state.

What do you think? Is taxing people for their consumption of unhealthy foods a good idea, or is it just plain wrong? Please post a comment below and let me know your thoughts.