Ok, in the name of not yet having at least some of the facts straight, I’ll hold off on the contaminated water bit, and delve straight into the drink tax. Well, first some background.
I signed up for a Google News Alert. (You can specify any search you want.) So, every day, Google scans something like a million online news sources, and spits out an email to my inbox. The email has links to every story that mentioned “Philippines.” Yup, the internet can do that. I can hear my 92-year old grandmother’s confusion: "But if you don’t check your email every day…???"
Well, just last week, this gem, courtesy of the just-drinks.com editorial team popped up:
PHILIPPINES: Government ponders drinks tax
22 Jun 2004
The Philippine government is considering introducing taxes on soft drinks and other artificially-flavoured juice beverages. New tax measures are required in the country as the government is due to assume between PHP500 bn (US$8.9 bn) and PHP600 bn of debt from the National Power Corp.
A tax on the drinks was first proposed in 1999, and had expected to yield PHP3.5 bn.
A source at the country’s Development Budget Coordination Committee told the Manila Standard: “The new taxes are necessary because there are no more spending cuts possible. We have cut on the expenses of the administrative and the only thing left now is the pork barrel of the legislators. Even then, we cannot just eliminate it because some of them use it for education and health projects.”
The Philippines has among the highest per capita consumption of soft drinks in Asia, accounting for 60% of total volume sales in 2003, according to industry studies.
*******************
My first reaction was: oh gosh, wouldn’t they be better off taxing cigarettes? (As it is, a pack of smokes goes for about 30 cents.) But I’m sure they’re exploring all options. After all, the government has a ridiculous debt. Yes! Let them tax Coca-Cola up the wazoozillyzoo. Can you imagine living in a place where 60% of all the soda in Asia is consumed?
Most Filipinos believe Coca-Cola has a magical power to aid in digestion after eating meat or a heavy meal. For a while I just kinda nodded my head and, when offered a glass, said “Thanks, but I only ate vegetables.” But then I asked a doctor, who told me it was just a myth, and I imagine Coke probably instigated it.
So now, I ask people why they drink so much Coke, and they say we need it to digest and I say “WHAT????” Just yesterday a lady explained to me that if I need proof, just drop a piece of meat in a glass of Coke and it will be gone in the morning. So I ask “That is proof of WHAT???? Proof that it’s gonna devour the meat? What do you think it does to your stomach? (I remember a kid in elementary school called Dan Wintermantel. Actually, I barely remember him, but I remember his science fair project like it was yesterday. His dad was a dentist, so he had all these teeth lying around. He dropped them all in various beverages. Sure enough, the tooth submerged in Coke disappeared the fastest, in less than 24 hours.) Don’t you think the meat will digest itself eventually anyway?”
For a country that never seems to be in a rush about anything, why not just lay around and take a nap until the digestion sets in. Or like the lady said herself, maybe Filipinos should not eat so much meat.
For a country where almost everyone I come across knows someone with diabetes, why are they letting themselves be fooled? Why are they spending 30 cents for a liter of Coke, on a regular basis, when the average salary barely affords basic nourishment?
I guess I’m just seeing red.
I thank justdrinks.com in conjunction with Google for bringing this tax to my attention. I hope this tax becomes a reality and people say to themselves “you know what, I really don’t need this. I’ll buy a couple of mangos instead, or maybe just put the money back in my pocket and save it for a rainy day.”
Posted by dbs at July 1, 2004 05:53 PM