The author stated in the article that he came across a workaround on Crackberry such that he could get Bridge to work. He also reviewed the data synchronization between the Playbook and a Blackberry.
I think it has more to do with each US State separately and legally defining what "beer" is based on alcohol percentage of volume for regulatory and taxation purposes.
As a result, a mass producer can only really produce the LCD beer that they can sell nationwide profitably, as making a version for each state would be, most likely, logistically impossible or extremely costly and unprofitable.
Article and summary are misleading at best.
on
The Fresca Rebellion
·
· Score: 1
The study cited states clearly that the tax is for sugar-sweetened (including HFCS) beverages only. The full quote related to "diet" beverages actually is:
"A controversial issue is whether to tax beverages that are sweetened with noncaloric sweeteners. No adverse health effects of noncaloric
sweeteners have been consistently demonstrated, but there are concerns that diet beverages may increase calorie consumption by justifying
consumption of other caloric foods or by promoting a preference for sweet tastes.34 At present, we do not propose taxing beverages with
noncaloric sweeteners, but we recommend close tracking of studies to determine whether taxing might be justified in the future."
This would also preclude 100% fruit juice drinks - although "juice" - the mostly sugar and water kind - has been touted as a victim on commercials against the sugar-sweetened beverages tax, which is
disingenuous, at best.
Last time I drank a Fresca, it didn't have sugar in it - nothing to worry about for the article writer. Granted, there's no ends to what governments will put a tax on, but to derive an article
that may have no purpose other than to upset and anger persons from a one paragraph that doesn't exactly say what you say it does is somewhat
irresponsible.
Slashdot Mirror
The author stated in the article that he came across a workaround on Crackberry such that he could get Bridge to work. He also reviewed the data synchronization between the Playbook and a Blackberry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXfV2hw_2Xo
I think it has more to do with each US State separately and legally defining what "beer" is based on alcohol percentage of volume for regulatory and taxation purposes. As a result, a mass producer can only really produce the LCD beer that they can sell nationwide profitably, as making a version for each state would be, most likely, logistically impossible or extremely costly and unprofitable.
The study cited states clearly that the tax is for sugar-sweetened (including HFCS) beverages only. The full quote related to "diet" beverages actually is:
"A controversial issue is whether to tax beverages that are sweetened with noncaloric sweeteners. No adverse health effects of noncaloric sweeteners have been consistently demonstrated, but there are concerns that diet beverages may increase calorie consumption by justifying consumption of other caloric foods or by promoting a preference for sweet tastes.34 At present, we do not propose taxing beverages with noncaloric sweeteners, but we recommend close tracking of studies to determine whether taxing might be justified in the future."
This would also preclude 100% fruit juice drinks - although "juice" - the mostly sugar and water kind - has been touted as a victim on commercials against the sugar-sweetened beverages tax, which is disingenuous, at best.
Last time I drank a Fresca, it didn't have sugar in it - nothing to worry about for the article writer. Granted, there's no ends to what governments will put a tax on, but to derive an article that may have no purpose other than to upset and anger persons from a one paragraph that doesn't exactly say what you say it does is somewhat irresponsible.