Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: More on the pay raise
Next Post: Let’s turn back to Cook for a bit today…
Posted in:
* I’m not sure this has a chance of actually passing, but I was curious what your thoughts might be…
Chicago should cash in on the bonanza of bottled water sales — and help clean up the environment — by slapping a tax of 10 to 25 cents on the cost of every bottle, a Southwest Side alderman said Monday.
At a time when Chicagoans are bracing for post-election tax increases to close a $217 million budget gap, Ald. George Cardenas (12th) said he can think of no better or more lucrative idea to add to the menu than a bottled water tax. […]
Cardenas noted that there’s a nearly $40 million shortfall in the city’s water and sewer funds, in part because of a decline in water usage.
“How is this possible when we have a water system that’s won honors? It’s because bottled water has become a $15 billion industry that’s growing at a rate of 20 to 30 percent a year,” he said.
* And the other side…
…Joseph Doss, president of the International Bottled Water Association, said he knows of no other city that has tried to tax bottled water.
“Bottled water is a safe, healthy, convenient beverage that consumers find refreshing. Any action that would discourage consumers from drinking this healthy beverage is a bad idea and not in the public interest,” he said.
Doss said the bottled vs. tap argument doesn’t hold water because 75 percent of bottled water consumers drink both. And bottled water companies are attempting to defuse the landfill argument. They’re using much lighter-weight plastics in their containers and have reduced the amount of plastic resin in those bottles by 40 percent over the past five years, he said.
Noting that plastic petroleum containers make up only one-third of 1 percent of the total U.S. waste stream, he said, “Any effort to reduce the environmental impact of packaging must focus on all consumer goods and not just target bottled water or any one industry.”
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 7:52 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: More on the pay raise
Next Post: Let’s turn back to Cook for a bit today…
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The country is in the middle of a heat wave and half the city is up in arms about Indiana’s potentially devestating pollution of the city’s almost exclusive water supply. Do you think this is a bright time to start charging people more for thier water!!
The same platic in water bottles is used in coke bottles, baby bottles, credit cards, swing sets, car parts, etc. etc. etc. Taxing a specific plastic use because in the past month it has become a news story is rediculous.
This is another example of Chicago taking more steps to keep up with city’s like San Francisco and New York and nations like Britain in becoming a completly reactionary government that acts like a teenage girl, constantly finding something new she believes instantly and instensely.
Comment by Diamond Dog Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:02 am
As I have previously posted, I quick smoking in 1986. I always found it interesting that we tax cigarettes and make it a major funding source, while we limit where individuals may use them. It makes more sense to tax something, bottle water, that is used by almost everyone and is healthy for you compared to smoking. That tax would also be a more reliable revenue source.
Comment by South of I-80 Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:07 am
Does anyone else think we are dangerously close to having another Boston Water Party? Geez, give it up. Tax yourself. Enough is enough.
Comment by I know the man Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:29 am
Most of the stuff is glorified tap water but
we could still look at it as a “luxury tax”.
Maybe the city should consider bringing back
pay toilets as a source of revenue.
Comment by Esteban Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:33 am
Just another one of Chicago’s crazy ideas. Stupid, just stupid!
Comment by downhereforyears Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:35 am
Is bottled water really that much more healthy than tap water? I thought I read somewhere recently that
the idea that it’s substantially better for you than tap water is pretty much a hoax. If that’s the case, tax it all you want.
Comment by Cassandra Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:35 am
Despicable
What about the soda bottle, mustard containers, ketchup bottles or anything else that uses the same materials? I thought it was regressive to tax food products.
The Democrats (no Republican criticism since they are apparently unheeded in the state at this time) in this state will tax anything they can to feed the machine that is Illinois politics.
When was the last time you hears someone say that ‘productivity gains in our department operations have saved the taxpayers money'’?
The feathebeding and incompetence I have seen in the State and Municipal offices I have seen would not be tolerated in private industry. The few remaing competent State workers have got to be angry about those around them who shirk their jobs with impunity.
The days of coming up with a tax which can be sold as paying their fair share or a sin tax are nearly over. New taxes are going to be more and more blatant, such as conversion of traffic fines to revenue streams.
Besides, I thought that we were recycling all that nasty plastic so it did not go in the landfills?
If they are truly concerned about landfill waste, place a deposit on the bottle which can be recovered when the bottle returs to the recycling stream.
Comment by plutocrat03 Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:43 am
The City of Chicago does not have residential water meters so they are not charging users for what they actually use. There is no incentive for conservation, plus people are buying what they can get free at home. Sounds like a revenue “stream” to me…
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:48 am
Good, they tax cigarrettes to the max so tax this luxury item too. Besides, the ammonia in Lake MI will kill the E Coli, etc.
Comment by Wumpus Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 9:00 am
It’s a pretty ridiculous tax proposal, but we should make an effort to reduce the use of bottled water. For brands like Aquafina, Dasani, and generic, its just your local tap water.
For brands like Evian and Fiji, there are huge hidden costs to those brands, as they are shipped here from halfway around the world, with no real improvement in water quality.
It is truly a sign of the excesses of our nation that we buy water in a bottle when it’s the exact same thing that comes out of our taps virtually for free.
Personally, IF I buy a bottle of water, I generally refill several times before discarding the bottle, and I never buy bottled water in bulk. At home, I get a glass and fill it up out of the sink.
Of course, with BP dumping all that extra mercury and heavy metal sludge into the lake, maybe I will start buying Fiji water in bulk…
Comment by Jerry Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 9:08 am
On second thought, if you’re dumb enough to pay $5+ for a case of bottled water that is no different from what comes out of your tap, or $1.50 for a bottle of something that comes out of your tap, then I have no sympathy for you. Tax away. I wouldn’t even call it a luxury tax. I’d call it an idiot tax.
Comment by Jerry Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 9:12 am
“Chicago should cash in on the bonanza”
What is the mentality in that statement? The maturity? What is “the bonanza”? How can Chicago “cash in”? The only Joe cashing in on this would be money hungry politicians.
Once again, we have a bunch of Puritans pointing fingers at the pleasure derived by others that mystifies them. They are concerned that people are drinking water - from disposable bottles! They even did this themselves, and they are utter mystified why they enjoyed it and why they bought them. They loved drinking water from bottles, and now they feel really, really guilty. Break out the self-flagellating whips!
The Puritans worry, “can we recycle these bottles?” “They held water in them, that’s clean, isn’t it?” “It isn’t like they held something black and sticky in them like Coke or diet effervescent tar!”
The Puritans are certain that we will die by empty water bottles. The facts don’t lie to them - although they use up only a fraction of a fraction of our landfills, throwing away a plastic bottle that held WATER in it, hurts their Puritanical sensibilities, doesn’t it?
Our politicians want to take more from the Puritans because the Puritans feel guilty over our horrific plastic water bottle planetary destruction. And…they want the money too.
Stupid.
Oh, and I love the Puritans crying over the waste water flowing into Lake Michigan from a BP plant in Indiana. OH THE HUMANITY! They are convinced that all our environmental laws, legal hurdles, state, local and federal standards were somehow circumvented by an evil cabal whose sole intent is to sell us GASOLINE for our EVIL CARS!
I bet there are thousands of Puritans driving NON-HYBRID transportation with WATER BOTTLES in them!
OH - THE HORROR!
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 10:10 am
Aren’t there some california cities that are starting to ban bottled water? Let me see, ban? tax? Sounds good to me either way.
Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 10:10 am
Ooops! Of course not! One needs lots of patronage positions, some given to people who don’t know where it is they “work,” in order to have a well-oiled political machine. And Illinois has a first rate political machine! That machine is at its finest in operation in Chicago. One wonders if there is a limit to taxation, at which the taxpayers will rebell.
Comment by Or They Could Cut Spending? Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 10:33 am
Why tax water bottles but not all other types of plastic bottles? A waste tax probably isn’t such a bad idea since people don’t pay more for garbage pickup if they waste more and managing our society’s waste is not cheap, but it would be silly to encourage people to drink bottled coke instead of bottled water. If the bottled water industry wants to stay one step ahead, they could sell reusable bottles and set up fancy paid water fountains in the same way that soda fountains are now ubiquitous.
I’d rather see a tax on plastic grocery bags, since the alternative reusable cloth bags are such an easy solution that requires very little effort or change in the way we do our shopping.
Comment by Lee Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 10:38 am
Lets’s just tax everything. Water, grass clippings, street usage, parking, movies, emails, dental fillings, pounds gained in one year, everything. That way overall taxes paid may go up 25%, but the pols (especially Rod) can say your income tax did not go up. Or simply raise income tax to 4% and cut out the rest of this nickle/dime stuff. Unfortunately once you start the “what can we tax next” mentality, it never stops.
Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 10:57 am
My first thoughts were those of “I know the man.” Talk about taxation without representation. Tax water, whats next a breathing tax on air?
Comment by Dr. Yan Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:10 am
They can’t help themselves.
They’re Democrats.
Comment by Cal Skinner Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:11 am
hey Loop Lady, guess we need to get a water meter
in your house cause there are meters in lots of
Chicago houses. they should cross reference all
the employees in the Building Dept. to ensure
that they all have a meter in their house cause
I know of some who do not. coincidence?
Comment by amy Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:11 am
I too am waiting for Chicago or Cook County to charge you for the air you breathe. . . get a Britta water pitcher and filter the tap water yourself!
Comment by With Dr. Yan Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:23 am
Let’s ship empty water bottles to Cardenas as a sign of protest and to send him a message of how silly his idea is. Why doesn’t he propose a week forlough for all alderman? That in itself should create a nice dent in the city’s budget shortfall.
Comment by Mr. V Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:26 am
Sounds like the plan of a backbencher.
This guy running for Gov.?
Comment by Skeeter Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 11:45 am
Just Wait…
The State EPA under guiese of Universal Health Care WILL require all citizen’s living in air polluted areas purchase and wear air purifing air masks to be worn out doors. And THEN taxed to the bejeases…
Comment by Siyotanka Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 12:24 pm
aka a TAX on the air we breath…
Comment by Siyotanka Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 12:45 pm
All tap water is not created equal. We had an “incident” in Champaign and there was a chlorine dump into the tap water. The tap water chlorine levels were higher than is considered safe for a back yard pool. We started buying bottled water and now have a filter in our fridge. The water company stated the levels would be “higher than normal” for a month. When you can smell your tap water, it is time to buy bottled! Maybe Chicago can have a “chlorine dump” after they tax the bottled water and increase their revenue stream.
Comment by Kara Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 12:48 pm
a few years ago when I was in school Evian had a problem with benzene in its bottled water.
The bottled water industry is not as regulated as a municipal water supply.
Also why spend $4-5 dollars per gallon with you can get the same water from the tap for less than $5 per 1000 gallons.
Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 1:18 pm
How about instituting a tax on pork projects, ahem, member initiatives. Say 10% of those projects would be returned to the general revenue fund.
That would make more sense.
Comment by Super Mega Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 1:33 pm
Just remember Evian water is “naive” spelled backwards. That sums it up for me.
Comment by A Citizen Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 1:54 pm
What’s the status of a deposit law in Illinois for all beverage cans and bottles? Works in Michigan and is environmentally sound.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 2:20 pm
This idea is certainly feasible in Cook County. The water here is safe out of the taps and anyone who wants to pay more to buy bottled water probably won’t even notice the tax. Even though plastic is recycled, only about 10% of that plastic makes it back into bottles so each bottle is still about 90% virgin materials. Yes, it is true that soda bottles, mustard jars, etc. are also made of plastic, but those products have a value add proposition to them, unlike bottled water. Also, bottled water must be schlepped around to the stores from wherever it is they get their water which again uses resources. That which is easily and efficiently passed around in pipes is much bulkier and less efficient to transport in its bottles.
Comment by cermak_rd Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 2:31 pm
Fascinating article in WIRED magazine this month (also online) about the bottled water business. You all should read it.
Comment by Gregor Tuesday, Aug 14, 07 @ 8:13 pm
TAX ON WATER, WE ALREADY PAY A FORTUNE FOR IT HERE IN FLORIDA AND IT IS UNDRINKABLE OUT OF THE TAP.
If the city your living in has drinkable TAP water then you are very lucky. Having moved from New York (to Southwest Florida I can truly say the TAP water is not drinkable, and in fact makes me nauseous. So I buy 2.5 Gallon jugs and keep refilling my smaller bottles. We already pay a fortune for water here.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 15, 07 @ 11:46 am
Anon, I truly don’t care about a New Yorker who now lives in Florida. Chicago water is excellent.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Aug 15, 07 @ 11:51 am