View Mobile Site

It’s time to cut to the chase: We need to tax Halloween candy

Text Size: Small Large Medium
POSTED October 30, 2013 1:22 a.m.

San Francisco is the latest city to contemplate sin taxes on soda.

Supervisor Scott Wiener wants to place a measure on the municipal ballot that would slap a two cent per ounce tax on sugary drinks. That would add 24 cents to a 12-ounce canned soda and 88 cents to a Super Big Gulp. The money generated — estimated at $31 million — would be earmarked for health, nutrition, an activity programs for San Francisco’s youth.

Let’s quit the games and cut to the chase. It’s time those who want to use taxes to control individual behavior to roll out their end game.

In order to celebrate any holiday that involves the over-the-top consumption of sugar you should need to obtain a permit from the government.

Halloween, Christmas, and Easter would be an ideal target for the Mike Bloombergs and  Scott Wieners of the world. Who needs the Grinch when you have self-righteous politicians? And in the case of Easter and Christmas they can kill two birds with one stone by vilifying major dates on religious calendars.

Let’s say you want to give away candy to trick-or-treaters. We could have a Bloomberg rule that would require businesses selling more than one piece of candy to collect a $50 redistribution permit fee. The proceeds would be used to fund Pilates programs for impoverished children in Appalachia. Then those distributing free candy at their door would need to collect a two cent sugar tax per piece from trick-or-treaters. That revenue would be earmarked to purchase tofu for school lunch programs.

Of course it wouldn’t be a straight two cents tax per treat. Those who give out candied apples or chocolate covered bananas would only have to collect a penny for each treat since they do contain some wholesome food. Such a provision mirrors efforts by the soda tax crowd to appear to be reasonable when it comes to the ratio of some beverages that contain sugar but not enough to offend the politically correct crowd who still partake in the forbidden white crystals.

Such an exception is necessary to not alienate voters who have no problem imposing sin taxes even though they are not without sin. You notice Bloomberg and Wiener never propose taxing high-end desserts at upscale restaurants that are loaded with “empty” calories such as chocolate mousse. That’s because one dare not insult one’s voting base if you want support to pass laws that restrict those who find their affordable pleasure from the soda fountain at 7-Eleven and not the wine selection at the Four Seasons.

Christmas offers two opportunities to modify behavior of the masses to align with the elite’s perception of how things should be. Naturally, there’s a sweet tax on things such as candy canes, Hershey’s Kisses, and any dessert that doesn’t contain soy beans or seaweed.

But the biggest target for the anti-sugar crowd would be Santa Claus himself. The guy is a walking billboard for the evils of eating too much candy, too many cookies, and spending his time traveling the world in a sleigh instead of jogging.

First, there would need to be a law banning any new Santas that are fatter than Dobie Gillis of Gilligan’s Island fame. An instead of giving away candy canes new Santas would be required to give trail mix to kids.

As for the old Santas who are walking heart attacks waiting to happen, Wiener could pursue a law requiring them not to be jolly nor act as if they are healthy. After all, we all know you aren’t happy or healthy unless you are a DNA carbon copy of the ectomorph body type that both Bloomberg and Wiener share. Those with mesomorph body types just need a little pain to become skinnier while endomorph body types deserve to be ridiculed, bullied, taxed for eating the “wrong” foods. That is in addition to being forced into a tofu and water diet by the government because they have round physiques that have a greater tendency to pack on fat or muscle.

The Bloombergs and Wieners of the world subscribe to the Animal Farm theory that some of us are created more equal than others.

Christmas is also the perfect time to impose another genre of behavioral sin tax to tackle the unfairness of some having more than others.

After getting sin taxes in place on sugary drinks the next logical step is a wealth redistribution tax. Anyone buying a present for anyone that costs more than $5 at Christmas would be slapped with a 50 percent gift surcharge. That money would then be given to the less fortunate after the government siphons 80 percent off the top for bureaucratic overhead.

As for Easter, there is so much sugar involved candy bunnies that aren’t made out of tofu would need to have a $1 an ounce chocolate tax.

And if a family is as bold as to serve sodas, ice cream and other desserts at a family gathering that day, they deserve to take on a second job to pay the sin taxes.

After all, politicians got elected to tax us for all of our sins and not their sins.

Commenting is not available.

Commenting not available.

Please wait ...