Oakland, Berkeley, And East Bay News, Events, Restaurants, Music, & Arts
Will NEVER BE BACK IN la!!! 😂😂😂😂😂 you all still dreaming?!! GTFO!!
OK , we taxed cigarettes to death (and to some being smuggle in).
I agree excessive sugar might be harmful to some people. But there must be a point where we let people decide their behavior. I know the people reading this who approve would get pissed, if "they" took your dangerous pot away.
Why is it on the restaurants to ask themselves why they're doing what they're doing? As long as they aren't explicitly selling themselves as something they are not, I don't see the problem.
I would love to see restaurants come together and discuss with each other and the community these types of issues, rather than grapple with them on an intimate level.
If the consumers are supporting restaurants that sell a veneer of authenticity, culture, and diversity, that's our collective responsibility to be more mindful and investigative in our consumption.
At Charlie Pine:
While, I share your hesitation to trust that the City Council will spend all of the funds as intended, if not the current electeds but any future elected officials, there are some accountability measures written into the ballot measure.
1. There will be a Committee who will make recommendations on how the money is to be spent. Members of the community who are public health professionals as well as members of the communities most effected by the tax.
2. The committee will write a report that is open to the public which will show how the money is spent (presumably in comparison to their recommendations) and the success of programs/education funded. So the public will be able to see if the the city spends the money responsibly and can respond.
You may say that these same measures were put into place for Measure Y (I don't know actually)..
But how effective these accountability protocols are depends on how strongly the community enforces it. As with anything, the city council responds and are "checked" by community pressure. There will be watch dogs (myself and can I assume, you too, if this passes) who will keep an eye on the money. 🙂
Thanks, Luke. No easy answers here but humanity.
No! No! No!
Oakland treats Home Loaners (notice I didn't say home owner..the bank owns my home) like endless cash cows. We already pay a ton of taxes, and get little in return. Where does all my money go anyway? How come Oakland doesn't have money for road repair during a record influx of money? Audit the city's expenses first, and tell us where all the tax money goes before asking for more money. If you want affordable housing money, ask all those out of state developers that are building profitable giant apartment buildings.
Bill drawdy ....first sellout in how many years ?..Raiders will double in value once they're back in LA!!!
Mr. Commentator under the moniker of reporter: Thanks for acknowledging your error on the basic mechanics of the proposed tax. You're halfway to accuracy. Distributors of beverages can recover the cost of the grocery tax by up-pricing any of the beverages they sell. You might like an increase in the price of beer, but that has nothing to do with sugar. Furthermore, the retailer, hit by increased cost, can up-price anything he sells from milk to diapers. However, congratulations on your search for a professor who mouths the opinion you want to publish. Prof. Auerbach might know law, but he clearly does not understand the first thing about comparative price elasticities, taught to students in micro-economics class.
If Ms. Love thinks the City of Oakland will spend most of the tax revenue on education, she should look at where Oakland spent its Measure Y "police staffing" revenue (hint: not on police staff), to mention only the most egregious example of broken commitments by City Hall.
The grocery tax is a regressive tax with a bit of lipstick on it to make trendy "progressive" politicians feel good while they enjoy the added revenue.
Lmao at vegas is a better fit than oakland and more revenue hahahaaa. Yea ok way more money in oakland than vegas. Stadium damn near already sold out on season tickets. Vegas will never sell out season tickets before the season starts smfh. We the OAKLAND RAIDERS and it will remain that way. The A's are looking at howard terminal as i type. So the raiders will have coliseum site to them selfs
I see a pattern working here.
I saw an article on Facebook yesterday that said the Raiders would stay in Oakland for the next three years.
The new stadium in LA will be totally built in three years.
I am a supplier of medical/recreational marijuana ,cannabis oil ,medical prescription/cards and other related products. We do it 100% discreet and vacuum sealed. We ship all over the US,Australia, Canada , Uk and Europe. Patients
suffering from Cancer, depression, pains, Nausea, epilepsy and many more.
We also have strains on combating period pain, which ranges from slight discomfort in some women to total agony in others.Health is wealth. Are you depressed, suffering from cancer, diabetes, glaucoma, headache, insomnia, joint pains, multiply sclerosis, muscle spasms, nausea, etc and need the best strains of medical marijuana to help ease your pain?? why not try out our wide range of products today? we are a team of dedicated farmers specialized at growing the best strains of medical marijuana containing the THC,CBN and CBD active ingredients.
Contact us at http://www.herbalgreenstore.com / 850-583-4236 for more details.
Mark Will take a cheaper stadium over moving away from Oakland bc he DOES want to stay in Oakland and he knows that in order to Make Oakland the city get in toit, u gotta scare them into thinking ur gonna leave and making something happen. Also he's putting money in, his own money, so if he can save a few bux and keep the team in Oakland he will definitely do it.
no new renderings,..its the whole 120 acre lot or nothing at all!...Mark wants the whole property! plus they have to match the price of the new stadium at 1.4 billion,..why would Mark want a cheaper stadium built for his team?..Las Vegas is a better fit for the future of the Raiders and will produce more revenue!
Thanks for analyzing the facts behind the proposed Oakland ordinance and research on how it is playing out in Berkeley.
This is particularly important because of the blatant lies by Joe Arellano, the American Beverage Association, and the No campaign on the Oakland Soda Tax. It is a tax on sodas and on distributors, period. The only way they can hope to defeat the soda tax is through misinformation. Such an approach is disingenuous and shameful.
What a perfectly complex subject for the Oakland community to debate! As a white male who loves all food from all cultures, I am already a customer of both the hole in the wall ethnic spots & places like Penrose. I love them all & I hope our community can strike the right balance to ensure all can make a decent living & keep all those good eats coming!
To echo Cho, my biggest beef is when a restaurant uses ethnic ingredients and then declares whatever final dish they made with it as belonging to that ethnic group. Anything made with gochujang, or marinated in a mix of soy sauce/sugar, is not suddenly Korean.
This is definitely a class/education issue that goes hand in hand with eating local and "clean" ingredients. I can't hate on it though. These upscale establishments lend a level of transparency to where their ingredients come from that makes diners feel safe and seemingly justifies the higher prices. Atmosphere while dining also makes a difference. Sometimes it's just nicer kitchenware and furniture. Other times its the diner feeling like an odd duck because they're not the ethnicity of the cuisine or cannot speak the language of their server/fellow diners. There's a level of comfort in atmosphere and dining with the familiar, whether that is ingredients, language, etc.
I'm glad it wasn't any longer than it was.
This is an excellent article--thank you for presenting both sides of a contentious debate in a balanced manner. There is a ton of misinformation regarding this issue and you have done a fantastic job cutting out the chaff. Please keep up the good work.
Tonya Love: Thanks for the information. I corrected and clarified the online version of the story. I guess I was confused by the press conference that the American Beverage Association-backed "grocery tax" campaign held last week. They had two speakers, both store owners, who said at the press conference that they would be paying the tax. And the public relations people running the anti-beverage tax campaign have repeatedly implied that grocers themselves will pay the tax. Clearly the text of the ordinance reads that the tax is on distributors who sell beverages to retailers, and the ordinance exempts retail sales.
Charlie Pine: How many distributors of sugar-sweetened beverages also distribute vegetables, milk, eggs, and so on? I was always under the impression that most beverage distributors just distribute beverages. How much of an opportunity do beverage distributors really have to pass this tax onto other goods? And as to this theoretical ability of a grocer to raise prices on milk and diapers to absorb price increases they have to pay for soda from their distributor, professor Auerbach addresses this claim in the article. He doesn't think it's sound.
As to the regressive impact a soda tax would have, yes, you are correct. The poor would pay more. That's true with most taxes on consumer goods.
But your claim regarding tobacco taxes isn't backed up by research. Most studies have found that increasing tobacco taxes leads to reductions in smoking rates (for example, http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2…)
o for cryin out loud: this has to do with sanctions that will reduce sugar consumption. This. is. a. good. thing. The less sugar you consume--esp HFC--the better you will feel; you will also mysteriously not miss it.
Meanwhile, how bout targeting the real problems behind the 'need' to self-medicate with soda: poverty, homelessness, (mis)education, capitalism...
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation