Skip to content

It’s Not a Drink. It’s a Treat.

Okay, so this will probably be the last time I mention the proposed tax on sugary drinks. (Here’s the first time.) Why the last time? Well, first of all, it’s not going to happen here in New York, which makes me mad. Like so many states, New York has a budget crisis and needs cash. Also, these drinks are basically poisonous. One shouldn’t drink them as a means of hydration. One should drink them as a dessert.

Maybe these drinks need to be reclassified as something else. Liquid candy, perhaps. Because that’s what they are.

This article in the New York Times explains why the effort failed, and it too makes me mad, because reasonable people haven’t yet figured out how to speak to the emotions that motivate.

And then this tidbit flies into my view [via TPM]. It features a chart demonstrating how the USDA expects the tax on liquid candy would affect the health of Americans. Turns out it would affect our health positively. Imagine that.

I have a bit of a beef with the coverage from Business Insider (which TPM picked up). They include this passage as the 2nd paragraph of the article:

Not surprisingly, since you wouldn’t expect a government agency to say that a tax wouldn’t help the government, the USDA’s conclusion is that such a tax would work.

I’ve never studied journalism, and here at B&E I have no journalistic standards. But what the fuck kind of sentence is that? It seems like the facts conclude that such a tax would work.

I hate the anti-tax movement so much. We actually do live in a society, you know.

Oh, it just makes me so mad.

One comment on “It’s Not a Drink. It’s a Treat.

  1. The article I’ve attached was written by a journalism student at NYU. I share it not because of a WTF sentence in the very first paragraph (she smashes a singular noun together with a plural verb), but because of the related subject matter:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags are not allowed.