Should High Fructose Corn Syrup be taxed?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes. Tax it so much it's no longer cost-efficient and companies can quit using that stupid sh!t.

[Gabu]

If I recall correctly, the stuff started to be used because crops were being subsidized so much that they had tons of excess that they could then use to turn into HFCS.

If that's the case, it seems to me that the obvious path to take would be to simply end those subsidies.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Yes. Tax it so much it's no longer cost-efficient and companies can quit using that stupid sh!t.

What don't you want to tax besides strip clubs?

[memphis]

If I recall correctly, the stuff started to be used because crops were being subsidized so much that they had tons of excess that they could then use to turn into HFCS.

If that's the case, it seems to me that the obvious path to take would be to simply end those subsidies.

The trouble with ending subsidies on food crops is that it will cause Americans to buy cheaper foreign food. For security purposes, I'm not too comfortable with America importing staple grains.

[Bacon King]

Rather than taxing HFCS, it would be more benificial to decrease corn subsidies and eliminate the tariff on cane sugar, both of which make corn syrup cheaper relative to real sugar.

[John Dibble]

Rather than taxing HFCS, it would be more benificial to decrease corn subsidies and eliminate the tariff on cane sugar, both of which make corn syrup cheaper relative to real sugar.

Agreed. That's basically what I've been saying all along.

[HardRCafé]

Rather than taxing HFCS, it would be more benificial to decrease corn subsidies and eliminate the tariff on cane sugar, both of which make corn syrup cheaper relative to real sugar.

Prescient.

[CPT MikeyMike]

Rather than taxing HFCS, it would be more benificial to decrease corn subsidies and eliminate the tariff on cane sugar, both of which make corn syrup cheaper relative to real sugar.

Absolutely.

Besides, I'm against ANY form of taxation.

[Bono]

The trouble with ending subsidies on food crops is that it will cause Americans to buy cheaper foreign food.

I wish I had that kind of troubles.
We'd be able to buy cheaper food, OH NO!

[Gabu]

If I recall correctly, the stuff started to be used because crops were being subsidized so much that they had tons of excess that they could then use to turn into HFCS.

If that's the case, it seems to me that the obvious path to take would be to simply end those subsidies.

The trouble with ending subsidies on food crops is that it will cause Americans to buy cheaper foreign food. For security purposes, I'm not too comfortable with America importing staple grains.

Well, I'm not proposing to end all subsidies, but if corn farmers have such a huge excess in their crops that HFCS is a cheaper alternative than cane sugar, then that may be an indication that the subsidies are a little too high.

[MaC]

If I recall correctly, the stuff started to be used because crops were being subsidized so much that they had tons of excess that they could then use to turn into HFCS.

If that's the case, it seems to me that the obvious path to take would be to simply end those subsidies.

Damn Gabu, that's pretty FF of you!

[MaC]

The trouble with ending subsidies on food crops is that it will cause Americans to buy cheaper foreign food.

I wish I had that kind of troubles.
We'd be able to buy cheaper food, OH NO!

but, but, Bono....  it's FORIEGN!!!!111 American workers... insert silly crap about not finding job,ect, you know the drill...

[Gabu]

Damn Gabu, that's pretty FF of you!

Subsidies tends to be my one renegade topic on which I'm more free market-y than usual.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Damn Gabu, that's pretty FF of you!

Subsidies tends to be my one renegade topic on which I'm more free market-y than usual.

Urban dwellers tend to be. (I'm presuming you live in a decent-to-big sized city, no?)

[Gabu]

Urban dwellers tend to be. (I'm presuming you live in a decent-to-big sized city, no?)

What do you consider "decent-to-big sized"?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

It has Shopping centres, Cinemas, Theatres, etc..

[Gabu]

It has Shopping centres, Cinemas, Theatres, etc..

By that definition, there kind of are a lot of "decent-to-big sized" cities, but yes, mine would fit that definition, then.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

It has Shopping centres, Cinemas, Theatres, etc..

By that definition, there kind of are a lot of "decent-to-big sized" cities, but yes, mine would fit that definition, then.

I'm Irish.. Anything over 20,000 people is considered a "major city" here. And 10,000 a "rapidly developing hub".

Now what was the point of this thread again?

[KEmperor]

It has Shopping centres, Cinemas, Theatres, etc..

By that definition, there kind of are a lot of "decent-to-big sized" cities, but yes, mine would fit that definition, then.

I'm Irish.. Anything over 20,000 people is considered a "major city" here. And 10,000 a "rapidly developing hub".

Now what was the point of this thread again?

I would call those villages, maybe towns.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No--this is ridiculous!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If I recall correctly, the stuff started to be used because crops were being subsidized so much that they had tons of excess that they could then use to turn into HFCS.

If that's the case, it seems to me that the obvious path to take would be to simply end those subsidies.

The trouble with ending subsidies on food crops is that it will cause Americans to buy cheaper foreign food. For security purposes, I'm not too comfortable with America importing staple grains.

Hence my idea.

Or we can just flat out ban that awful, evil sh!t.