I do not disagree with the analysis, but I think the tax would result in
a lower consumption. I think this is good from a general health POV,
despite the fact that the bill is not well-researched nor well-written.
This is probably the only shot SF has to get something like this
through. So, I vote Yes.
I think it would be easier to revise/resolve the implementation issues
after it is passed (IF it is passed). But even if it is a total waste,
I think it would still result in an overall health benefit.
Joe
On 4/26/17 10:00 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
Could we get back to Tom's OP? I for one am a "no" vote for exactly
Tom's reasons.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
--
Joe
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
