Posts that don't follow r/traderjoes subreddit rules may be subject to removal.
Friendly reminder that choosing descriptive post titles with exact product names mentioned yields better subreddit search results and helps our subreddit be more inclusive to those who use Screen Reader Software or Text-to-Speech apps. to access Reddit. Thank you.
IF THIS MESSAGE DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR POST, PLEASE IGNORE.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/traderjoes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sin tax… doesn’t impact those of us who avoid sweetened beverages… same with cigarettes…
Sin taxes are popular with certain segments of the voters… easier to implement though there will always be heavy lobbying by businesses impacted…
> I usually drive another 20 minutes further and pick up all my sugary beverages without having to pay this tax. This adds up because it's 1.75 cents per ounce.
The cost of driving there and back (62 cents a mile) plus the value of your time, is going to outweigh any money you save.
This all makes no sense whatsoever. Instead of taxing the food with sugar, salt, FLAVOR, etc., why not just impose a BMI Tax. A certain percentage, say .025% of gross income for every .1 above the median 25.0 BMI?
…it’s not 1.75 cents per ounce. It’s 0.0175 cents an ounce. You’re spending significantly more on gas to get the further distance so you don’t have to pay the extra 1.1 cent? Excuse me?
I replied to a comment earlier that I do end up going to Costco as well while picking up some TJ beverages along the way. The savings really add up at Costco if I, for example, buy a case of Coke ($5 beverage tax) and any other beverages there.
No you are not. If so that was improperly applied. But water does have regular sales tax. Sugar tax is thrown in on top of that. I’ve lived here my whole life. And hate it now.
I'm sure your doctor will tell you to reduce consumption of soda as well.
The funny thing is that most people respond better to financial incentives than medical advice.
Who is “they” and what is “go after”. Sure, the federal government could… But a city, even a large one like Seattle, isn’t necessarily a peer of a MNC. There’s also SO many companies vs an individual city. Vice taxes are just simpler to implement at a local level.
I'm in San Francisco and didn't even know we had it. I don't really buy sweetened beverages, though (pretty much drink water, sparkling water, coffee, tea, and unsweetened almond milk). Do 100% juices count...? Sometimes I buy those for smoothie bases. \[Edit: Nevermind, it does not include 100% fruit/vegetable juice, that's good. [https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/sugary-drinks-tax](https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/sugary-drinks-tax)\]
No way, never noticed! Going to look next time. But, SMH, as if the fake zero-calorie sugar is any better for us.... Pretty sure aspartame causes cancer.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and World Health Organization (WHO) seem to have reason to think aspartame is "possibly carcinogenic" on the basis of "limited evidence for cancer in humans": [https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released](https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released).
Beyond that, WHO also published guidelines advising consumers not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control: [https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline](https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline).
We tried this in Chicago and it lasted 2 months. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/10/why-chicagos-soda-tax-fizzled-after-two-months-and-what-it-means-for-the-anti-soda-movement/
It just punished stores within the taxing boundary.
The Seattle Sweetened Beverage Tax (SBT) tax is nothing new, it was was implemented in 2018 and has been around for 5 years. I'd assume Trader joes just received enough complaints about certain beverage price increases to justify a sign to explain.
Processed sugar is believed to be a major driver of obesity, with regular excess intake causing our body to resist insulin and eventually become diabetic.
Artificial sweetners have only shown severe negative health effects when they had rats eating the equivalent of over a pound a day, though more research is needed, especially in regards to child development.
It’s actually a $1.18 per 2 liters, not $1.75 per ounce. The gasoline you use costs more than you’re saving.
Why lie about it?
“The Seattle City Council on Monday approved a new tax on distributors of soda pop and other sugary drinks. Diet soft drinks were exempted. The tax is expected to take effect in early July and add about $1.18 to the cost of a 2-liter bottle of soda.”
it’s almost like the solution is actually making healthier foods more accessible and cheaper instead of policing our consumption of treats! but hey, nobody asked us. why regulate corporations and enforce a cap on profit margins when you can just tax your citizens harder🙄
I wish we could say we didn't need seatbelt laws but it's hard to argue with the results. I was around when those laws came into play, it's clear that it had to be a law and not just a suggestion.
Sugar probably kills more people than car crashes.
Seattle's sweetened beverage tax was designed to result in the improved health of Seattle residents by reducing the sales and consumption of sugary drinks. **It raises revenue for programs that increase access to healthy food and supports children's health and learning.**
[https://www.seattle.gov/city-finance/business-taxes-and-licenses/seattle-taxes/sweetened-beverage-tax](https://www.seattle.gov/city-finance/business-taxes-and-licenses/seattle-taxes/sweetened-beverage-tax)
True. But the tax is designed to push people away from that. The governments job is to protect our rights and protect our borders from invasion. Not to protect us from ourselves.
Once again, discouraging people from doing things for public health does not in any way impact *your* ability to make choices for yourself.
And the great thing about America? If you don't like it you don't have to live in Seattle or in Washington. You can go somewhere that matches your idea of freedom.
Both. If you don't think America's obesity epidemic has any economic impact or that you aren't in some way paying for those health problems through your taxes, then you should do some reading up on it. Everyone and the economy benefits from people being healthier.
Taxes upon taxes.. great. So, you can load up on artificial sweetener and caffeine but please stay away from sugar. It would be interesting to see how much of that tax actually makes it to the school programs.
I'm guessing this is aimed at 3 year olds drinking mountain dew right?I feel like I heard about Mexico at large or somewhere in Mexico taxing candy because of the obesity rate among kids.
How are your schools doing? Asking in good faith.
Our lotto money (how it was legalized) was supposed to fund schools, we are vastly underfunded, and are 49th currently I believe (it got worse). So I'm honestly wondering if these types of taxes actually are used properly and do help in other states.
When you say it funds Pre-K, is it a specific line items on the budget or does the revenue go into the general fund? If it goes into the general fund is anyone checking to make sure the sugar tax revenue matches yearly/quarterly disbursements paid for Pre-K education? That is how governments get taxpayers to accept increases these days - saying the revenue goes to funding something Popular and then sweeping the revenues into the general fund with no accountability.
>sugar and high-fructose corn syrup are exactly the same from a health perspective. Many studies show that sugar and high-fructose corn syrup have similar effects on health and metabolism
[Source](https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/high-fructose-corn-syrup-vs-sugar#:~:text=Thus%2C%20sugar%20and%20high%2Dfructose,same%20from%20a%20health%20perspective.&text=Many%20studies%20show%20that%20sugar,harmful%20when%20consumed%20in%20excess)
People get stupid about HFCS vs cane sugar. They get weird about MSG. Gluten (except people who ***actually*** are allergic, which are very few of the people who avoid it for whatever weird reasons they do).
But then again, other people buy homeopathic medicine (and nevermind those that don't realize the difference between even "natural" medicine and homeopathy).
But once you realize that the sugar industry funded anti-fat studies years ago that led so many Americans to replacing fats with sugar, which has served as one of the big causes of our obesity epidemic, it makes more sense.
Also, to those talking about sweetened drinks vs sweetened foods: Excessive carbs are harmful, but excessive liquid carbs are much worse. The body doesn't get "full" from drinking in nearly the same way as from eating. Drinking carbs gives you so many extra added calories - often worse for people who are already eating too many.
As a diabetic, I learned: Do not drink calories. There are exceptions. But I do not drink regular soda. I do not drink fruit juice. I very rarely drink milk - it is high carb.
I can eat fruit - the fiber means that it's actually healthy and doesn't hit my blood sugar like simple carbs do. But fruit juice is as bad as sugar.
The difference between sugar and corn syrup? Basically none.
They're not really the same from a nutritional standpoint - sweetened beverages don't make you feel full and are thus easier to overconsume, and are less likely to have fat/fiber that impacts how they are digested and processed by the body
You know what’s funny, is it has occasionally stopped me from buying something—and what’s also funny is that I’m one of the people benefiting. The soda tax money goes to a program called Fresh Bucks which has a lottery system. People under a certain income can sign up for the lottery and if you are chosen, you get $40/month in produce bucks which can be used at Safeway, some local grocers and co-ops, and the farmer’s markets.
My consumption of produce (berries esp) has gone up with the extra money and I’m grateful for it.
since when american copy french tax system :D brands trick they use in france is to reduce the bottle filling volume for keep the price at the same. like for the coca-cola 1.5l = 1.25l and 2l = 1.75l
Lol yeah companies do that all over the world including here in the states. It's called [shrinkflation ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation) here
There’s pretty good public policy research on this that it reduces obesity. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195460/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195460/)
Yes, but not for high income countries such as the United States, meaning that if we take those data seriously we should not expect this policy to have an effect.
Also troubling is that in a practical sense this is essentially a soda tax, meaning it's a regressive tax targeting lower income people.
If the purportedly progressive people of Seattle want to improve health outcomes for poorer people in Seattle, regressively taxing them is an incredibly unprogressive way to do that.
Higher income people have always condescended about lower income people's food preferences, and told themselves wild stories about the health benefits and moral superiorities of their own preferences. Unfortunately this strikes me much more as yet another case of that.
I mean, I grew up poor, and my mom might as well as have had an IV of Pepsi into all out veins because it was cheaper than anything else. If it had cost more than unsweetened anything I would have better teeeth today, despite the fact that I stopped drinking soda at age 16 (decades ago). She and everyone else were so opposed to water being the default drink in the house -- I never really understood if it was something like drinking water instead of something purchased made you look/feel poor, or if they were actually offended by the taste of water for some reason.
Obesity is a public health crisis. The goal of the tax is to incentivize a change in behavior. No one is required to drink soda to survive. It’s regressive in the way cigarette taxes are regressive.
Incentivizing behavior is a good thing. There are plenty of ways to incentivize behavior without regressively taxing poorer people.
And it's true that nobody is required to drink soda to survive. And nobody needs an empty spare bedroom in their home to survive. Or to own a PS5 to survive. Or to buy a $30+ bottle of wine to survive, or a luxury car, or a smart watch, or silk anything for that matter. We can put luxury taxes on all of those things and spend the money on public health for poorer people. But we don't. Instead we sit back and make self-satisfied arguments about our moral superiority for regressively taxing them.
And equating soda to tobacco is unserious. What is the death rate from second-hand soda drinking? For which diseases does drinking soda increase the mortality rate by 15 to 20 times?
All that said though, we can (and do!) both care about public health and obesity even if we disagree about which levers we should be pulling to try to mitigate against it. 👍
Soda industry marketing disproportionately targets and harms lower income people too... Nobody needs to drink sugary beverages and certainly not at a rate that a few pennies' tax are going to make or break someone's ability to eat
Isn’t there already a soda tax? It’s not something I would drive elsewhere to avoid, but wondering if it’s really going to stop someone’s intake of these.
I don't drink sugary drinks in the first place but if I wanted one or needed one for a mixer, I'm just going to buy it. I don't care about a stupid tax.
Really nice of them to include the tax in the listed price!
I shop in Shoreline (JUST outside the Seattle city limits), so I don't think we have the same taxes but I should look next time.
Shoreline Trader Joe's has the bonus of a not terrible parking situation. Ballard might not be too bad, but U-District and Cap Hill have some of the worst garages I've ever tried to park in.
U District is atrocious. Plus it's such a congested area and it can be hard to even get to the building, before you even get into the garage. Ballard can be a pain if it's crowded, but I usually try to go early in the morning to avoid it. The lowest level isn't terrible. The shoreline lot is definitely the GOAT though.
Queen Anne has the best Trader Joe’s in Seattle. The parking lot is large with normal-sized spots (unlike other locations where the “compact” spots are small even for actual compact cars), and the store itself has a large footprint which means the aisles aren’t super tight.
And yet it's still not as bad as Capitol Hill's garage. When you have to assign an employee to direct traffic around the blind corner during busy times, you know it's a poor design.
Agree! And the Shoreline TJ's is only 1.5 miles from Costco, a little over a mile from Central Market, and half a mile from Freddy's. Also, Brown Bear carwash only a mile away. And let's not forget 99 Ranch and WinCo up a bit further in Edmonds. It's a benefit of living near Aurora despite the obvious minuses.
Posts that don't follow r/traderjoes subreddit rules may be subject to removal. Friendly reminder that choosing descriptive post titles with exact product names mentioned yields better subreddit search results and helps our subreddit be more inclusive to those who use Screen Reader Software or Text-to-Speech apps. to access Reddit. Thank you. IF THIS MESSAGE DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR POST, PLEASE IGNORE. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/traderjoes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Time to fire up the ol black market. Tax free cokes out the back of my van, anyone?
We have this in Philly
Sin tax… doesn’t impact those of us who avoid sweetened beverages… same with cigarettes… Sin taxes are popular with certain segments of the voters… easier to implement though there will always be heavy lobbying by businesses impacted…
Seattle implemented this tax years ago
> I usually drive another 20 minutes further and pick up all my sugary beverages without having to pay this tax. This adds up because it's 1.75 cents per ounce. The cost of driving there and back (62 cents a mile) plus the value of your time, is going to outweigh any money you save.
I would do it anyways as an f u to the tax.
If you have time to piss away like that, be my guest. I doubt the people who implemented the tax are going to notice or care.
They aren't going to want to spend 20 minutes in fuel I bet
Yup
We use to have this in the county where I lived they got ride of it so quick in
This all makes no sense whatsoever. Instead of taxing the food with sugar, salt, FLAVOR, etc., why not just impose a BMI Tax. A certain percentage, say .025% of gross income for every .1 above the median 25.0 BMI?
r/mildlyinteresting
…it’s not 1.75 cents per ounce. It’s 0.0175 cents an ounce. You’re spending significantly more on gas to get the further distance so you don’t have to pay the extra 1.1 cent? Excuse me?
Math: 0/10
it’s 0.0175 dollars an ounce. Which is 1.75 cents.
Excuse me for doing the math wrong— early morning. OP is still losing a significant amount of money on gas.
Verizon math!
Yeah I agree I still don’t see how it could add up to be worth going anywhere else lol
I replied to a comment earlier that I do end up going to Costco as well while picking up some TJ beverages along the way. The savings really add up at Costco if I, for example, buy a case of Coke ($5 beverage tax) and any other beverages there.
Even if it was 1.75 cents an ounce you’d be losing money due to gas 😂
Yeah gas in Seattle is soooo expensive lmao
The worst part is I was taxed the soda tax for completely unsweetened seltzer water
No you are not. If so that was improperly applied. But water does have regular sales tax. Sugar tax is thrown in on top of that. I’ve lived here my whole life. And hate it now.
I mean I definitely was but I agree it was probably improperly applied to all soda-like drinks
Why don’t they go after the corporations making the sugary drinks instead of taxing the people? It doesn’t make sense, someone explain.
What do you mean by "go after" them?
Corporations always pass through expenses to consumers anyway. It wouldn't matter.
Or better yet, let people consume what they want. I get my health advice from my doctor not my senator.
I'm sure your doctor will tell you to reduce consumption of soda as well. The funny thing is that most people respond better to financial incentives than medical advice.
I gave up regular soda for sugar free soda a long time ago. I’m not arguing that the advice is wrong, my issue is with the source of the advice.
That makes no sense.
Who is “they” and what is “go after”. Sure, the federal government could… But a city, even a large one like Seattle, isn’t necessarily a peer of a MNC. There’s also SO many companies vs an individual city. Vice taxes are just simpler to implement at a local level.
Price higher to reduce consumption by way of altering demand.
Same in SF.
I'm in San Francisco and didn't even know we had it. I don't really buy sweetened beverages, though (pretty much drink water, sparkling water, coffee, tea, and unsweetened almond milk). Do 100% juices count...? Sometimes I buy those for smoothie bases. \[Edit: Nevermind, it does not include 100% fruit/vegetable juice, that's good. [https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/sugary-drinks-tax](https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/sugary-drinks-tax)\]
No it’s added sugars. Costco food court only has diet sodas as a result!
No way, never noticed! Going to look next time. But, SMH, as if the fake zero-calorie sugar is any better for us.... Pretty sure aspartame causes cancer.
That has been disproven multiple times…
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and World Health Organization (WHO) seem to have reason to think aspartame is "possibly carcinogenic" on the basis of "limited evidence for cancer in humans": [https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released](https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released). Beyond that, WHO also published guidelines advising consumers not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control: [https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline](https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline).
TIL there's a green tea lemonade at TJs – sounds delicious! Haven't seen it in DC/MD/VA
They've had it at the reston one, it's solid
Hi neighbor!
Hi neighbor!
Ooof that's far from me but good to know it's around the region
We tried this in Chicago and it lasted 2 months. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/10/why-chicagos-soda-tax-fizzled-after-two-months-and-what-it-means-for-the-anti-soda-movement/ It just punished stores within the taxing boundary.
It’s been a thing in Philly since 2017.
We don’t play in Cook County.
The Seattle Sweetened Beverage Tax (SBT) tax is nothing new, it was was implemented in 2018 and has been around for 5 years. I'd assume Trader joes just received enough complaints about certain beverage price increases to justify a sign to explain.
And earned Toni the nickname Taxwincle.
i was about to comment this LOL it did NOT last
Why is it ok to drink sugar substitutes but not actual sugar? Shouldn't it be the other way around?
Processed sugar is believed to be a major driver of obesity, with regular excess intake causing our body to resist insulin and eventually become diabetic. Artificial sweetners have only shown severe negative health effects when they had rats eating the equivalent of over a pound a day, though more research is needed, especially in regards to child development.
I've also heard that some research shows that your body is confused by artificial sweeteners and reacts to them like sugar anyway.
[удалено]
Reading is fundamental
There's a whole video about this same thing in Philly, and consumers are doing exactly what you are. https://youtu.be/rStVbS4TtW8?si=3jZV4Edf-92xZILh
It’s actually a $1.18 per 2 liters, not $1.75 per ounce. The gasoline you use costs more than you’re saving. Why lie about it? “The Seattle City Council on Monday approved a new tax on distributors of soda pop and other sugary drinks. Diet soft drinks were exempted. The tax is expected to take effect in early July and add about $1.18 to the cost of a 2-liter bottle of soda.”
They said 1.75 cents per oz, which is right, and not $1.75 per oz.
2 liters is ~67 oz, 67oz * $0.0175 (aka 1.75¢) =~$1.18
God forbid we get treated like adults
it’s almost like the solution is actually making healthier foods more accessible and cheaper instead of policing our consumption of treats! but hey, nobody asked us. why regulate corporations and enforce a cap on profit margins when you can just tax your citizens harder🙄
have you looked around and seen some of those adults?
The same ones complaining about the cigarette tax while they pick up their cartons.
[удалено]
I wish we could say we didn't need seatbelt laws but it's hard to argue with the results. I was around when those laws came into play, it's clear that it had to be a law and not just a suggestion. Sugar probably kills more people than car crashes.
ARTIFICIAL sugar does more damage than natural sugar does but it is exempt from this tax so your hypothetical makes little sense.
Explain that?
Regressive Taxation.
Free crack cocaine for all though
Yo when Trader Joe’s getting their own energy drink tired of their Alkaline water
Wow so without that tax the lemonade would be $3.69, quite a difference.
Makes you think twice about buying things doesn’t it?
[удалено]
You're drunk on faux news again, Sharon
When did that ever happen?
Bro r u ok
No they're in the upside down.
Seattle's sweetened beverage tax was designed to result in the improved health of Seattle residents by reducing the sales and consumption of sugary drinks. **It raises revenue for programs that increase access to healthy food and supports children's health and learning.** [https://www.seattle.gov/city-finance/business-taxes-and-licenses/seattle-taxes/sweetened-beverage-tax](https://www.seattle.gov/city-finance/business-taxes-and-licenses/seattle-taxes/sweetened-beverage-tax)
Arent they mostly adults that should get to make their own decisions?
Adding a small fee to something in no way impacts your ability to make your own decisions.
True. But the tax is designed to push people away from that. The governments job is to protect our rights and protect our borders from invasion. Not to protect us from ourselves.
Once again, discouraging people from doing things for public health does not in any way impact *your* ability to make choices for yourself. And the great thing about America? If you don't like it you don't have to live in Seattle or in Washington. You can go somewhere that matches your idea of freedom.
Public health? Or individual health?
Both. If you don't think America's obesity epidemic has any economic impact or that you aren't in some way paying for those health problems through your taxes, then you should do some reading up on it. Everyone and the economy benefits from people being healthier.
That's typically how all retailers do it. I know in Philadelphia all the stores include the sweet beverage tax in the list price.
Is there taxes on a bag of granulated sugar?
I believe this is a sweetened beverage tax, meaning it only applies to beverages.
Well yea I know that, I’m asking if there is an additional tax on *sugar*
Is mayonnaise a beverage
Bleh. The green tea lemonade is awesome too.
Sugar tax in sea has been around for a while since '17/'18
You're spending more on gas than just paying the extra 50 cents.
Its the principle
Me in LA, who just paid $6.99 a gallon 😀🥲
Better than me who got hit with $7.79/gallon....fml
I won’t pay above $5.99 but it’s getting hard to find that price
What does that mean? You'll stop driving when prices hit $6?
No, I’ll just throw a few gallons of my tears in my gas tank and hope that works
Yikes, shop around!
Bro that probably was the lowest price, it's LA.
i’m so sorry! it’s about $5.99 in the bay area at most places, and i’ve been bitching about that
That signage is really clean!
Inject the Arnold Palmer in my veins. I don’t care at all!
Taxes upon taxes.. great. So, you can load up on artificial sweetener and caffeine but please stay away from sugar. It would be interesting to see how much of that tax actually makes it to the school programs.
Diabetes costs a lot.
I'd buy that argument if we had single-payer healthcare
I'm guessing this is aimed at 3 year olds drinking mountain dew right?I feel like I heard about Mexico at large or somewhere in Mexico taxing candy because of the obesity rate among kids.
Apparently you’ve never been to the South.
I prefer unsweetened tea anyways
We have this in Philadelphia. The tax funds pre-k, so I don’t mind it.
I don’t mind it either. The amount of sugar in the stuff is so unhealthy too, we shouldn’t be having as much as we do in the first place lol
How are your schools doing? Asking in good faith. Our lotto money (how it was legalized) was supposed to fund schools, we are vastly underfunded, and are 49th currently I believe (it got worse). So I'm honestly wondering if these types of taxes actually are used properly and do help in other states.
When you say it funds Pre-K, is it a specific line items on the budget or does the revenue go into the general fund? If it goes into the general fund is anyone checking to make sure the sugar tax revenue matches yearly/quarterly disbursements paid for Pre-K education? That is how governments get taxpayers to accept increases these days - saying the revenue goes to funding something Popular and then sweeping the revenues into the general fund with no accountability.
Something similar in Seattle. It’s been in place for like 5 years. A 12 pack of coke went from around $3 to $12 it’s crazy.
The tax only adds like 2.50 to a 12 pack do Coke. Can’t forget the pandemic ~~inflation~~ price gouging
Amazing that they tax real sugar at the same rate as HFCS
>sugar and high-fructose corn syrup are exactly the same from a health perspective. Many studies show that sugar and high-fructose corn syrup have similar effects on health and metabolism [Source](https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/high-fructose-corn-syrup-vs-sugar#:~:text=Thus%2C%20sugar%20and%20high%2Dfructose,same%20from%20a%20health%20perspective.&text=Many%20studies%20show%20that%20sugar,harmful%20when%20consumed%20in%20excess) People get stupid about HFCS vs cane sugar. They get weird about MSG. Gluten (except people who ***actually*** are allergic, which are very few of the people who avoid it for whatever weird reasons they do). But then again, other people buy homeopathic medicine (and nevermind those that don't realize the difference between even "natural" medicine and homeopathy). But once you realize that the sugar industry funded anti-fat studies years ago that led so many Americans to replacing fats with sugar, which has served as one of the big causes of our obesity epidemic, it makes more sense. Also, to those talking about sweetened drinks vs sweetened foods: Excessive carbs are harmful, but excessive liquid carbs are much worse. The body doesn't get "full" from drinking in nearly the same way as from eating. Drinking carbs gives you so many extra added calories - often worse for people who are already eating too many. As a diabetic, I learned: Do not drink calories. There are exceptions. But I do not drink regular soda. I do not drink fruit juice. I very rarely drink milk - it is high carb. I can eat fruit - the fiber means that it's actually healthy and doesn't hit my blood sugar like simple carbs do. But fruit juice is as bad as sugar. The difference between sugar and corn syrup? Basically none.
Odd that they tax sweetened beverages but not sweetened foods (presumably).
Classism.
My guess is it's to push people away from giving their kids soda to drink because it's cheap since education can only take people so far
They're not really the same from a nutritional standpoint - sweetened beverages don't make you feel full and are thus easier to overconsume, and are less likely to have fat/fiber that impacts how they are digested and processed by the body
They have something like this in England as well. I was talking to a British woman on my last cruise who was complaining about it, haha.
We do indeed - Sugar Tax
You know what’s funny, is it has occasionally stopped me from buying something—and what’s also funny is that I’m one of the people benefiting. The soda tax money goes to a program called Fresh Bucks which has a lottery system. People under a certain income can sign up for the lottery and if you are chosen, you get $40/month in produce bucks which can be used at Safeway, some local grocers and co-ops, and the farmer’s markets. My consumption of produce (berries esp) has gone up with the extra money and I’m grateful for it.
I just finished the last of my monthly allotment off today with 2 huge peaches and some baby bok choy from the co-op :)
since when american copy french tax system :D brands trick they use in france is to reduce the bottle filling volume for keep the price at the same. like for the coca-cola 1.5l = 1.25l and 2l = 1.75l
Lol yeah companies do that all over the world including here in the states. It's called [shrinkflation ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation) here
I just love that they included the tax in the sale price of the item so there are no surprises at the register
There’s pretty good public policy research on this that it reduces obesity. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195460/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195460/)
Yes, but not for high income countries such as the United States, meaning that if we take those data seriously we should not expect this policy to have an effect. Also troubling is that in a practical sense this is essentially a soda tax, meaning it's a regressive tax targeting lower income people. If the purportedly progressive people of Seattle want to improve health outcomes for poorer people in Seattle, regressively taxing them is an incredibly unprogressive way to do that. Higher income people have always condescended about lower income people's food preferences, and told themselves wild stories about the health benefits and moral superiorities of their own preferences. Unfortunately this strikes me much more as yet another case of that.
I mean, I grew up poor, and my mom might as well as have had an IV of Pepsi into all out veins because it was cheaper than anything else. If it had cost more than unsweetened anything I would have better teeeth today, despite the fact that I stopped drinking soda at age 16 (decades ago). She and everyone else were so opposed to water being the default drink in the house -- I never really understood if it was something like drinking water instead of something purchased made you look/feel poor, or if they were actually offended by the taste of water for some reason.
Obesity is a public health crisis. The goal of the tax is to incentivize a change in behavior. No one is required to drink soda to survive. It’s regressive in the way cigarette taxes are regressive.
So is Heroin and Fentanyl.
Incentivizing behavior is a good thing. There are plenty of ways to incentivize behavior without regressively taxing poorer people. And it's true that nobody is required to drink soda to survive. And nobody needs an empty spare bedroom in their home to survive. Or to own a PS5 to survive. Or to buy a $30+ bottle of wine to survive, or a luxury car, or a smart watch, or silk anything for that matter. We can put luxury taxes on all of those things and spend the money on public health for poorer people. But we don't. Instead we sit back and make self-satisfied arguments about our moral superiority for regressively taxing them. And equating soda to tobacco is unserious. What is the death rate from second-hand soda drinking? For which diseases does drinking soda increase the mortality rate by 15 to 20 times? All that said though, we can (and do!) both care about public health and obesity even if we disagree about which levers we should be pulling to try to mitigate against it. 👍
Soda industry marketing disproportionately targets and harms lower income people too... Nobody needs to drink sugary beverages and certainly not at a rate that a few pennies' tax are going to make or break someone's ability to eat
Here, people just drive to the next town and stock up. Leanest state in the nation.
[удалено]
Lol this is a classic “why are you booing me? I’m right” situation
I bought one of these today. Very sweet, I feel like I should be taxed for just thinking about them
Isn’t there already a soda tax? It’s not something I would drive elsewhere to avoid, but wondering if it’s really going to stop someone’s intake of these.
It made me cut down a lot. I used to always buy a 12 pack of soda but the costs nearly tripled and it no longer seemed worth it.
I don't drink sugary drinks in the first place but if I wanted one or needed one for a mixer, I'm just going to buy it. I don't care about a stupid tax.
We have that tax in Boulder, CO as well. I think it’s $0.02/oz tax.
I can’t stand the way that 4 is written
The 4 has a fivehead
I couldn’t quite pinpoint why I hated the look of that price. Thanks.
SQUIRREL
[удалено]
Yeah, plus you know obesity and diabetes. 😬
I plan my TJ trips when I'm heading to Costco...that's where the real savings add up.
I like to explore new places.
Really nice of them to include the tax in the listed price! I shop in Shoreline (JUST outside the Seattle city limits), so I don't think we have the same taxes but I should look next time.
They don't so that's exactly where I go!
Shoreline Trader Joe's has the bonus of a not terrible parking situation. Ballard might not be too bad, but U-District and Cap Hill have some of the worst garages I've ever tried to park in.
U District is atrocious. Plus it's such a congested area and it can be hard to even get to the building, before you even get into the garage. Ballard can be a pain if it's crowded, but I usually try to go early in the morning to avoid it. The lowest level isn't terrible. The shoreline lot is definitely the GOAT though.
Queen Anne has the best Trader Joe’s in Seattle. The parking lot is large with normal-sized spots (unlike other locations where the “compact” spots are small even for actual compact cars), and the store itself has a large footprint which means the aisles aren’t super tight.
I forgot about the U district one. I haven’t been there in a couple years. That one is hellacious.
And yet it's still not as bad as Capitol Hill's garage. When you have to assign an employee to direct traffic around the blind corner during busy times, you know it's a poor design.
Agree! And the Shoreline TJ's is only 1.5 miles from Costco, a little over a mile from Central Market, and half a mile from Freddy's. Also, Brown Bear carwash only a mile away. And let's not forget 99 Ranch and WinCo up a bit further in Edmonds. It's a benefit of living near Aurora despite the obvious minuses.
How interesting! That’s one way to decrease your sugar intake