Philly soda tax working as expected.

[USN_Hokie]

The tax has generated revenue of $39.3 million, or about 15 percent shy of the original projection of $46 million.
Sales of carbonated soft drinks, the largest sweetened beverage category, fell 55 percent inside the city, according to a study from Catalina. Just outside it, sales rose 38 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/philade ... d-for.html

[CFB Apologist]

No different than speed cameras. Cities mismanage massive tax revenue on social programs and democratic politician promises, and public schools, thus need more massive tax revenue. Speed cameras work when you first install them, and then people (duh) figure out where they are and stop speeding there. Same with this.. philly needs to prop up its massive welfare, so tax evil people that drink a coke- god forbid. Notice none of the revenue goes to diabetes care, health education, obesity programs, etc. Its a scam

[oaktonhokie]

It's a regressive tax. Hits to poor much more than the wealthy.

No matter. The tax was not designed to "work." It was designed to make liberals feel better about themselves while they crow about how much they care about schools.

No different than speed cameras. Cities mismanage massive tax revenue on social programs and democratic politician promises, and public schools, thus need more massive tax revenue. Speed cameras work when you first install them, and then people (duh) figure out where they are and stop speeding there. Same with this.. philly needs to prop up its massive welfare, so tax evil people that drink a coke- god forbid. Notice none of the revenue goes to diabetes care, health education, obesity programs, etc. Its a scam

[Florida Hokie]

The tax has generated revenue of $39.3 million, or about 15 percent shy of the original projection of $46 million.
Sales of carbonated soft drinks, the largest sweetened beverage category, fell 55 percent inside the city, according to a study from Catalina. Just outside it, sales rose 38 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/philade ... d-for.html

Not trying to be difficult but isn't that evidence that it did achieve its desired result? If they wanted soda consumption to decrease (which requires an assumption that the same amount was then purchase outside the city - maybe, maybe not), then it did work.

[USN_Hokie]

The tax has generated revenue of $39.3 million, or about 15 percent shy of the original projection of $46 million.
Sales of carbonated soft drinks, the largest sweetened beverage category, fell 55 percent inside the city, according to a study from Catalina. Just outside it, sales rose 38 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/philade ... d-for.html

Not trying to be difficult but isn't that evidence that it did achieve its desired result? If they wanted soda consumption to decrease (which requires an assumption that the same amount was then purchase outside the city - maybe, maybe not), then it did work.

1. The reduced spending was at least partially (perhaps much more, I don't know what the respective market sizes are) offset by increased expenditures outside the respective area.

2. This story highlights the duplicitous nature of the action. It's a "sin" tax, yet the budget is set on an assumed amount of revenue (usually based on sales before the additional tax is added). Nobody (except for idiot bureaucrats, I guess) debates that sin taxes work - the problem is that the government will inevitably increase spending with the forecast windfall and then inevitably scream that they need to raise taxes or police/EMTs/firemen won't get paid.

Speed cameras in DC are another great example. DC's budget got destroyed because they expected hundreds of millions in revenue from their roadside slot machines. Only, people figured out where they were and slowed down for 100ft. Then DC had a budget crisis because they already spent the money.

[Vienna_Hokie]

The tax has generated revenue of $39.3 million, or about 15 percent shy of the original projection of $46 million.
Sales of carbonated soft drinks, the largest sweetened beverage category, fell 55 percent inside the city, according to a study from Catalina. Just outside it, sales rose 38 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/philade ... d-for.html

Not trying to be difficult but isn't that evidence that it did achieve its desired result? If they wanted soda consumption to decrease (which requires an assumption that the same amount was then purchase outside the city - maybe, maybe not), then it did work.

If the goal was to raise taxes on the poor who have fewer options to buy outside the city and to drive business (think the only thing people are not buying in the city is soda?) out of the city, then they did a bang up job.

Not only does the tax hurt the poor in the pocket, it reduces the value of their food stamps as well as more of it is paying taxes than buying food.