I work at a bar, so I see how much the sugary drink tax affects consumers and business. We have to charge an extra $1 when people want a chaser for a shot. A cup of pineapple juice is $4 and a vodka redbull will be $9 (redbull on its own is $5!). Now, alcohol and drinking culture is not nearly exclusive to any demographic, but this is just a view of how the significant the price difference is because of the tax.
A few other cities, including San Francisco, Oakland, Philadelphia and Chicago have implemented similar taxes, and there have been virtually no results. Chicago reversed their tax, and Mexico implemented a soda tax in 2014 but obesity rates have risen since. So why did the city allow this tax to be proposed? Clearly there is no relation to health and tax rate.
The reason this has classist and racist roots is because typically lower income folks tend to buy more sugary foods. Those people tend to be people of color in this city. People in financially stressful situations are targeted to fund their own welfare, essentially.
I do not subscribe to Michael Pollan’s dense and dry solution to pay more in order to have healthier food. I do not think a half-hearted solution can solve this problem. Individual solutions for systemic problems only treat the wound but do not heal it. Spending more money on food means more time spent cooking, less time working and earning money for oneself.
People are told this false narrative that cooking is easy, it’s cheaper and better. While home cooked whole foods are better than fast, processed foods, it’s a whole lot easier than traveling to the store to spend way more on perishable food that takes time to make. Also, considering places like Beacon Hill, not everyone even has a grocery store nearby and easily accessible to them. And guess which people mostly live in Beacon Hill?
I enjoyed your post and found it to be very thought-provoking. We should consider equity in taxes. Maybe there is another legislative way to address obesity that does not disproportionately impact people of color and those with low income. I have one critique of the piece. I could be wrong but from what I understand there have been studies that show a correlation between the tax and decrease in obesity. So I would not say that “there is no relation to health and tax rate.” However, even if there is a relationship does not mean that the solution, as you suggested, is the most equitable solution. Maybe, we should fund more public services that promote health rather than taxing the poor.
This is my first reply
Tatiana,
I fully agree with you here. The tax has been proven in various other cities not to change anything, like you’ve mentioned above. I didn’t know actually, that bars have to charge more for chaser and Red Bull, and I find that really interesting now. While drinking is surely not limited to a specific demographic, it makes it more difficult for people strapped for cash to go out and have a drink with friends.
I would also agree with your comments regarding Michael Pollan and his ideals of paying more to eat healthier. I wrote about this in my post, that his solution of everyone eating healthier disregards the lower classes and those who don’t have access to the kind of money that requires. Like you mentioned, this is a systemic problem and simply telling everyone to eat healthier is putting a band-aid on the bullet wound. People of a lower class status, who often tend to be people of color, do not get the same opportunities in life that a white, middle class person would. They don’t inherently have all the privileges and advantages that a lot of middle class “just eat healthier” people do.
What would you suggest instead of Michael Pollan’s solution of everyone eating better? How would you implement true change that would better not just the eating habits/situations of those living with less money and food, but also change life for generations to come?
Thank you for sharing!
Hey Tatiana,
I’ve worked in Downtown Seattle for the last few years, so I’ve also experienced first-hand the effects the beverage tax has had on myself and others. Most days I work I’ll start around 8 am, which means I’ll need coffee or an energy drink to get me going for the day. With the beverage tax, I’ve definitely felt discouraged to buy one as I’m not trying to spend $5 every day for a Red Bull or a small cup of coffee. I feel as if I’m being priced out of energy drinks, much like the average American feels as if they’re being priced out of fresh, local food products. Obviously, I share the opinion with others in this thread that we shouldn’t be discouraging buying these foods through the use of taxes such as the Beverage Tax here in Seattle. But I would then challenge others to think about ways in which we can give more people access to fresh and local food. I would also ask others what other avenues could be taken to implement taxes if we didn’t want the Beverage Tax. Daniel says we should be funding more public services to promote health (which I agree with). But for a government to spend money, they have to be able to bring in money. So if we didn’t want to keep the Beverage Tax, we’d still need to be taxed in another area if we want to have the funds to support programs such as the ones Daniel suggests.
Response #2
Tatiana, I am not here to change your mind, BECAUSE YOU ARE RIGHT! The soda tax is just another attack on the impoverished within the city of Seattle. You touched on a lot of good points about its lack of effectiveness and the burden it places on lowered socioeconomic individuals/communities. To further your point, sugary beverages where milk is the first ingredient are not taxed. Such as a Starbucks frap, something that has enough sugar and calories to replace 1.5 of your daily meals, is exempt. This beverage also is one of the more expensive sugary drink options, something that is associated with upper-middle/upper class white folks.
Cooking and eating homemade meals is a privilege, one that I never grew up with, as did many of the other folks in this class. For those who really want our communities to eat healthier, I think the first thing to do is stop taxing lower income communities so much, and raise their wages. that would allow them not only to make enough money to get out of poverty, but it would also allow them to spend their time cooking at home or even eating out at a sit-down restaurant. Both healthier options that require money and time, so lets give that to them and not punish them for trying to survive.
Response #2