PEOPLE

The Southeast Missourian asked people what they thought about a new California tax on snacks and if it would be a desirable method for Missouri to use to raise extra revenue.

Bob Harper: "I think it would be a nuisance tax and would be hard to enforce. Who is going to set whether an item is a snack or food? I would hate to see it come about. I don't think it would help that much."

Ken Peyton: "I think such a tax would cut down on snack sales and hurt industry. Similar taxes are in England, and people there are just not buying. M&Ms would go out of business in Missouri."

Michael Sterling: "It's a good idea. Snackers are going to buy them anyway, so that makes more revenue for the state. Nutritionists can tell people not to eat so many snacks, especially if it costs more."

Helen Ueleke: "I think it's silly because it's hard for people to distinguish between foods and snacks. A muffin is food, but a cupcake is a snack. Peanuts are food, but most people eat them as a snack."

Shirley Kossman: "I would not mind paying a tax like that, if the revenue was used for a specific purpose. Snacks are not something that people need to have, even though most of us think that we need them."

Mike Flynn: "I buy candy bars and chips all the time, and I don't see that it would hurt to have a tax on them. It would be good if they did something worthwhile with the tax, but it would not bother me."