We’re all being punked, right?

Now that Lukey gave up on that laughably bad idea called the Tuition Tax, he has  laced his gloves up for an equally ludicrous fight.  He wants to tax sugary drinks.

Because, you see, Burghers, sugar is bad for us and taxing things that are bad for us is what government likes to do.

That’s why there’s a tax on cigarettes and alcohol.  Because the government thinks we should pay extra to partake of these life-shortening demon agents, because the government wants us to live as long as possible, because the longer we live, the longer they can tax us, and then they’ll death-tax us, and then they’ll tax any money we’ve left behind for our descendants until those descendants become old and die and on and on.  It’s called the Circle of Life.  Elton John wrote a song about it and everything.

Luke got this brizzilliant idea from Philadelphia’s mayor.

Mr. Ravenstahl on Tuesday said he’s interested in emulating Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter’s plan to impose a 2 cents-per-ounce tax on the sale of drinks such as soda, sweetened tea, energy drinks and flavored water.

Diet drinks and fruit juices would be exempt.

This is hilarious.  The cities of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have determined that natural sugar, real sugar, is unhealthy and artificial sweeteners are A-OKAY!  They want you to dump the man-made chemicals in your body and eschew the natural stuff.  They are encouraging you to drink soda with aspartame in it versus water with natural flavoring.

What a slap in the face of Mother Nature.  I guess they’re still pissed at her about her outlandish behavior this winter.

Also, please don’t forget this about Lukey:

Formerly an avid BlackBerry user, he retired the device in June. Too distracting, he said, adding that he is now forced to delegate better. Instead of drinking coffee, he keeps his energy up with help from 12 Diet Pepsis a day.

That’s right.  Lukey has a dozen-a-day Diet Pepsi addiction.  It’s in his best interest to leave the artificial sweeteners alone, even though articles like this are rampant all over the mainstream media, like this one from CBS which states:

People who drink diet soft drinks don’t lose weight. In fact, they gain weight, a new study shows.

Lukey is not only taking this sugary drink tax idea and hopscotching down the sidewalk with it, he’s offering his full support to Philadelphia’s mayor:

Ms. Doven said Mr. Ravenstahl and Mr. Nutter were to discuss the tax proposal by phone Tuesday. Mr. Ravenstahl also sent his counterpart a letter of support.

“Know that you have an ally across the state that is ready and willing to join you in this fight,” the letter said.

OMG, the hyperbole.  It is SUGAR for the love of God, not meth.  Is Mr. Nutter going to go to his council waving Lukey’s letter all, “Hey, look!  That kid over there in Pittsburgh thinks this is a fantastic idea, too!”

Also, I should note that Philadelphia is considering taxing sugary drinks to support healthy living initiatives for its residents, whereas Lukey is looking to tax sugary drinks to fund the pension.   Makes TOTAL sense.

What next? The Hydrogenated Fats Tax to benefit the purchase of police cruisers?  A Processed Cheese Food Tax to fund road repairs?  The White Bread Tax to help fight the war on potholes?  The Chocolate Tax to fund firefighting training?  The Little Debbie Tax to fund –

Gasp!

DON’T YOU EVEN THINK ABOUT IT, LUKEY.  You want to go after Little Debbie, you’ll have to get through me and my army of Nutty Bars to get to her.

[awkward kung fu moves]





76 Comments


  1. Bojacques
    March 17, 2010 8:20 pm

    “D” is for duhhhhhhh…….



  2. Clementine
    March 17, 2010 8:33 pm

    TWELVE Diet Pepsi’s every day??!! Is that cans or bottles? Doesn’t that equate to something like 24 pee breaks in a day? And we wonder why he can’t be found… Lukey’s in the bathroom, people!



  3. Bojack
    March 17, 2010 8:43 pm

    @Empirechick-

    UPMC’s $100 mill surplus??

    Try @11 BILLION !!!

    And it (all the Blues) was originally given non-profit status cuz
    it’s supposed to be an insurance “co-op” for people with out money.

    Meaning, it was supposed to operate at bare bones, without a profit, to keep rates down and affordable for people who couldn’t afford retail. LOL

    So, why the @11 BILLION stash???

    THAT’s the $11 BILLION question!



  4. Bojack
    March 17, 2010 8:43 pm

    TYPO- I meant Highmark.



  5. Bojack
    March 17, 2010 8:52 pm

    @Monty-

    Why do you think they want to take away your 2nd amendment rights now?

    Look what happened with the tea thingie!



  6. Sexy Jesus
    March 17, 2010 8:59 pm

    Luke Steelerstahl,

    Pretty sure that the suburbs have little to do with the City’s inability to run an effective, non-corrupt government or elect someone other than the Boy Blunder. If you need a bogey-man, stick with UPMC.

    As for the tax, I say anything that might make Pittsburgh thinner (good God that rolls) is a good thing, but – as mentioned above – this tax won’t accomplish that. Lukey fails again. Shocking!



  7. Donncha
    March 17, 2010 9:06 pm

    I used to be addicted to tobacco taxes. Now I’m addicted to sugar taxes. The sugary drink tax: the methadone of revenue enhancers.



  8. Dan (Not Onarato)
    March 17, 2010 9:39 pm

    OK before he taxes this…NOW…can I just ask (again) where is the $16 million from the G20.

    Did we get that and I missed it? Ive been out of the loop



  9. Steelman
    March 17, 2010 10:21 pm

    When we get Obamacare it will be necessary that people die sooner so that they are not a burden on the health system. So the government will abolish all alcohol and cigarette taxes to expedite the death process. In fact, they may takeover the alcohol and tobacco industry and give subsidies to needy people to facilitate the purchase of alcohol and cigarettes. So don’t worry about a “soda tax” – it will be short-lived.



  10. PittinDC
    March 17, 2010 11:17 pm

    I’m pretty sure that getting ideas from Philly is never the right thing to do. I’m pretty sure that getting ideas from Patterson in NY is even worse.

    However, just because you change the party of the person in charge doesn’t automatically mean better. Maryland tried that when they elected a republican to be governor while I was in college. He made things worse. They are back to a democrat now.



  11. Mayor Luke Doggy Dogg
    March 18, 2010 12:03 am

    Bow wow wow, yippee-yo, yippee-yay, Luke Doggy Dogg is in da hizzouse…!

    See…what it iz ya’ll. Tha Lukey needs ta get mo’ money so it can fund his vagtastic voyages to tha strip clubs and pay fo’ dem hoes.

    Remeber ya’ll. “Pimpin’ ain’t easy…but it’s necessary. Luke Doggy Dogg is chasin’ money from ya’ll bitchez like Tom chasin’ Jerry.”



  12. Awesome
    March 18, 2010 12:32 am

    Don’t bitch Pittsburgh! You elected him, now deal with it! It never ends with this clown…

    2005 arrest
    Lemieux Golf Tournament incident
    Toby Keith SUV garbage
    2008 Stanley Cup banner crap
    G20 “FU… Vic Walczak”
    Tuition tax
    Ravenstahl Trash Cans
    Feb 2010 Mardi Gras BS
    …and NOW the sugar water tax. LMFAO!! I love it!

    Pittsburgh, please keep electing him!



  13. northside15212
    March 18, 2010 2:08 am

    I don’t even know where to begin. The fact is, municipal governments could care less about the health of their residents; they only want money, and they’ll say and do anything to get it, particularly in today’s flagging economy. A “sugary drink” tax is only the latest idea, or what passes as an “idea,” in the never-ending quest to subsidize the overly generous and unrealistic promises that elected officials have made to their respective bureaucratic work forces.

    Whoever it was that blamed the non-profits and the suburbs for the shortfall in government revenue sidesteps the real issue here: government’s insatiable appetite for cash. I would submit that commuting suburbanites are a net gain on city revenues –their houses don’t catch fire in the city, they apply no pressure on city police services relative to the crime profile of the city, and their impact on infrastructure within city limits is negligible relative to the taxes they pay on parking, “privilege tax,” drink taxes, and the money they spend on lunch, dry cleaning, dinner, and other goods while they’re here. Realistically, if we banned the entry of suburbanites into the city for a month, the city would collapse into itself like a dying star.

    As to the rate of the proposed tax –it is merely a trial balloon and, as always, an over-inflated balloon at that. Two cents on the ounce is excessive and the Mayor knows that, but should he really be serious about trying to pass such a tax, two cents on an entire bottle is something he can accept and will be far more palatable to the electorate when it is proffered as a “compromise” to the two cents on the ounce. The dumb ass citizens will think they actually won when they pay the two cents per bottle. It’s just legislative strategy.



  14. Just A Simple Man
    March 18, 2010 5:13 am

    Can you impeach a mayor?



  15. Greg
    March 18, 2010 6:19 am

    I think all the fervor against this tax is hypocritical.

    As a smoker and drinker, I pay MORE than my share if taxes. Where was this hue and cry the last time they raised the cigarette tax? I guess it’s fine as long as it’s someone else’s money. I welcome a tax on things I don’t use. Time for the rest of you to step up.

    Along those lines of thinking, the city should consider a jogging and biking permit tax. These people use city services to maintain the sidewalks, bike paths and parks. Also, they need EMS if they twist an ankle or take a fall.



  16. Bojack
    March 18, 2010 6:53 am

    @Dan (not the Ho)-
    They (Lukey’s staff) claim “the check’s in the mail,” for like maybe some time after Aug, Nov, next Feb.
    Translation- “until sometime after you all hopefully forget about it”

    You didn’t see the Fed govt in any delay paying AIG did you?

    Of course it’s horse shit.

    @PittinDC-

    Wow! That’s some power logic there! Do you work for the federal govt in DC? College? Where?? Sneaker Tech??

    ***How about a fat and stupid tax??***

    Just work out a tax schedule based on % of weight over your
    body mass index??

    $10 per lb. over your BMI

    How about a non-voter tax? You pay $500/year, but, $250 is
    refunded if you vote in May, the other $250 if you vote in Nov!

    @



  17. Jen
    March 18, 2010 7:54 am

    This city will NEVER dig itself out of its financial mess by creating new taxes.

    The problem with this proposal and just about every other proposal by this administration, is that they don’t address the underlying problem. The city needs revenue because its pension is underfunded. Why is the pension underfunded? Bad fiscal management (under-funding and borrowing against it to pay for other services) and bad pension policy (promising benefits that are unsustainable). Another underlying cause is extended population and job losses in the city. Fewer residents and fewer companies means less tax revenue.

    The city has to fix this problem, and it is obligated to fulfill the promises it has already made, so it must come up with new revenue. The city should focus on policies that attract new businesses and residents. Adding new taxes of any kind will only accelerate population and business losses.



  18. Yinz Meets Y'all
    March 18, 2010 8:29 am

    Thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy here. To be fair, there’s lots of hypocrisy, but I’m specifically referring to loophole for diet drinks. Diet pop is a joke; it’s no better for you than the regular stuff. It’s a stupid tax anyway, but if they want to do this, it should be all or nothing.

    Also, great point above by Greg that the 99 cent 2-liters will be doubled in cost because of the overburdening tax. Fail fail fail.



  19. Kathy
    March 18, 2010 8:37 am

    #45: That is untrue; they do get ss benefits — they pay ss taxes out of their paychecks just like everyone else. Their pensions are so high because they are part of a union which lobbies the government for such a high pension payment per the state legislature, which then the local governments have to find a way to pay for.



  20. gunnlino
    March 18, 2010 9:02 am

    Yeah, and yadda, yadda, yadda. Keep pulling that “D” lever in the voting booth.



  21. mizzpenz
    March 18, 2010 9:43 am

    I was born in your fine city and live in the Harrisburg area now. I travel to Pittsburgh more than twice a month on a regular basis. I frequent your bars, restaurants, sports arenas and stadiums. I drink your taxed beer (more of it than I should!) I keep up with Pittsburgh current events every day. It pains me to see the BS that goes on with your Mayor and his administration. There are others like me that pour money into your economy on a regular basis that are NOT going to be pleased with this continued taxation on every day life. Lukey walks around with blinders on and does not see the bigger picture here at all. You don’t raise taxes in a recession, you cut spending. For the life of me, I just can’t understand why it is so hard for people to understand this.



  22. Pingback: Sugar Tax is a Bacon Tax | Mr. Baconpants

  23. Bojack
    March 18, 2010 10:01 am

    Here’s a real shocker!!

    Gee, you’d think the Allegheny County DA might have better things (let alone more ethical) things to do than investigate their political rivals!

    Like prosecuting drug and gang crimes, local political corruption, ooops……

    Court won’t stop Zappala’s investigation of Orie
    Thursday, March 18, 2010
    The Associated Press

    Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10077/1043854-100.stm?cmpid=latest.xml#ixzz0iXZIRsqj



  24. CarolineFB
    March 18, 2010 10:52 am

    Glad to live in Westmoreland County. Today, anyway.



  25. Angry Mongo
    March 18, 2010 11:20 am

    I’m wondering if I’m going to make Lukey’s “List” with my post today about this whole mess.

    Here’s a simple solution.

    If we can’t be left to make decisions about our health as consenting adults then get rid of all the things we are told are bad for us.

    OR

    Balance your budget better.

    But don’t lie to us and say it’s in our best interest to try and curb bad behavior by taxing it. It’s just oportunistic to pick on that folks.



  26. chris
    March 24, 2010 3:40 am

    i am pretty sure that the government taxes stuff that we buy a lot of. people are addicted to alcohol and cigarettes, so they tax it. we’re addicted to gasoline, so they tax it. we drink a crap-ton of sodapop, so why not tax it?





Switch to our mobile site