Chicagoist: Bottled Water Tax Not as Lucrative As City Hoped

joseph_dunphy_in_chicago

Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:24:00 -0600

"Wait till July..." especially after a lot of hikers have had their memories refreshed with one of the more appetizing sights of summer - the yuppies walking their dogs up to the water fountains to take a nice, long drink. "Ho ho ho, we can afford designer clothes, so you should feel honored to have our dogs drool in your drinking water, while we enjoy our Evian, you lowly plebian." Until more people do what I do, I guess, and buy bottles of Evian, for later refilling with tap water. Those bottle make for suprisingly durable containers, and, as one walks up dressed from head to toe in thrift store or K mart purchases, one can get an absolutely priceless look of abject horror from the fine folk as one seems to raise the same thing they're drinking, in a mock toast to their shared good taste in beverages. "We're sympatico, me amigo. Would you like to go bowling some time?"

Scooter Libbby

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:34:12 -0600

Aquafina & Dasani are both Chicago tap water, at least those bottled in Chicago [Pepsi] or Niles [Coke].

annieF

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:20:33 -0600

great. you know they're feverishly searching for something else to tax to make up the difference. what's your guess on the inevitable item they will tax next? umbrellas? tampons? trail mix?

Chris F

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:14:44 -0600

What cracks me up is this, which I've actually seen... 20-oz bottle of Coke: $1.25 20-oz bottle of Aquafina water: $1.30 20-oz bottle of Aquafina water w/ fruit flavor: $1.25

Slaphappy

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:42:55 -0600

You think that gallon jug of water shouldn't count as bottled? The city doesn't care what you use it for. My point was that it sucks to be subjected to a luxury tax for something I need during an emergency. Jackass.

SAMiller

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:41:46 -0600

I thought the purpose of the tax was to discourage the use of bottled water. Ideally shouldn't the tax generate $0? Or was this just a politically correct way to redistribute wealth?

magnus

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:20:44 -0600

Wow. To have a mindset that $550,000 isn't enough money...

ThisGuy

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:01:08 -0600

You think that gallon jug of water shouldn't count as bottled? The city doesn't care what you use it for. I don't think it's the tax that decreased bottled water consumption. I think it's the possibility that there may be drugs (viagra!) in our water supply that has actually increased tap water consumption.

Slaphappy

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:33:54 -0600

What pisses me off about this bottled water tax is that it even applies to the gallon jug of water I bought when my pipes froze a couple of months ago. Thanks for taking advantage of my mini-emergency, assholes.

Tower18

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:20:35 -0600

"The city could, and should, have a graduated city sticker program that charges more for vehicles of higher tonnage." Pretty sure they do have that.

Jeremy

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:14:11 -0600

Yok- If you live in the city, you have to pay the city tax on car purchases from the suburbs.

jimbo

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:03:34 -0600

it only took 2 posts to get a mention of an SUV. nice work.

mepps

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:58:45 -0600

TourismBoard- When you buy a vehicle, you are taxed at the rate of where you LIVE, not by where you are purchasing the vehicle. - I guess too many people did that too many times in the past.

groggy

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:56:43 -0600

buy a sigg. save a whale.

YoknapatawphaTourismBoard

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:07:52 -0600

Also, SUV owners are going to go out to the 'burbs to buy their vehicles if you tax them at the time of purchase. The city could, and should, have a graduated city sticker program that charges more for vehicles of higher tonnage. It would be hard to police, though. Also, with gas prices as they are, I'm not so sure SUVs are all that affordable. They must carry a prestige for some that offsets the $100+ fill ups.

cookie66

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:00:01 -0600

sure, summer may up the purchases of bottled water. but perhaps people are buying less bottled water because (one can hope) they are starting to realize how wasteful the stuff is....and that a lot of it is just, um, tap water.

matilda

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:44:58 -0600

Because, Pherdnut, the auto lobby apparently is more powerful than the beverage lobby.

Pherdnut

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:39:54 -0600

If we're going to start taxing and legislating to keep people from wasting their money on stupid environmentally damaging things, why are SUVs still so affordable and why are they allowed to park on street corners where they make it impossible to see oncoming traffic.

plumbum82

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:33:15 -0600

Wait till July...