Denmark to abolish tax on high-fat foodswww.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20280863The Danish government has said it intends to abolish a tax on foods which are high in saturated fats. The measure, introduced a little over a year ago, was believed to be the world's first so-called "fat tax". Foods containing more than 2.3% saturated fat - including dairy produce, meat and processed foods - were subject to the surcharge.But authorities said the tax had inflated food prices and put Danish jobs at risk. The Danish tax ministry said it was also cancelling its plans to introduce a tax on sugar, the AFP news agency reports.DB2
Hope the lefties over here learn a lesson from this.
Hope the lefties over here learn a lesson from this.Instead of taxing high-fat foods, how about simply not subsidizing grains & soy (animal feed, HFCS, ethanol). It would help if we stopped using Iowa as the presidential campaign kickoff state, forcing all pols to kowtow to big ag, especially corn. Iowa doesn't have a single big city and is far more Caucasian than the US as a whole--not representative of the American electorate. Illinois, Pennsylvania, Virginia or Ohio make more sense--still plenty of rural voters plus urban (more singles, naturalized, and highly educated Americans) and suburban, manufacturing, black and Hispanic Americans in more accurate proportions.
I think they ought to change kickoff states every presidential election, but taking it away from Iowa and New Hampshire would piss them off, and they seem to have enough pull to make it stick. I agree with you about not subsidizing stuff like ethanol. A) That screws up the market, and B) what gets subsidized, if anything, should vary from year to year depending on things like crop yields and market conditions. Political pull should not buy you a subsidy. But we both know that ain't how the world works, don't we?
I think they ought to change kickoff states every presidential election, iirc, the Constitution says the states are responsible for running their elections. There is no Constitutional provision for primaries or caucuses.iirc, the parties have tried to limit the rush to be an "early state" by telling state parties that they will not be allocated convention deligates based on a primary earlier than when the party wants their primary to be.If you really want to sort this out, it would have to be by Federal Constitutional amendment for a formal primary structure. But it wouldn't pass because an amendment has to be approved by 3/4ths of the states, so the states that like the curren randomness would block ratification.Political pull should not buy you a subsidy. But we both know that ain't how the world works, don't we?Yup. I recall a candidate's debate during the primaries a few years ago, when the question of offering a child tax credit came up. It sounded like an auction as each candidate vowed to pass a larger tax credit than the others. Steve
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |