Letters: Kenney's plan takes on Big Soda for the kids

ISSUE | MAYOR KENNEY'S PLAN

Take stock of needs

Mayor Kenney plans to issue at least $300 million in bonds to improve the condition of public parks, recreation centers, and libraries. But before we move forward on this initiative, it would be helpful to consider:

City facilities are in appalling condition because the city can't afford to maintain them. Issuing $300 million in bonds is just going to dig the hole deeper.

How many recreation and library facilities do we have, and how many did we have in 1970, when the city's population was

22 percent larger?

How many sites does the Department of Parks and Recreation own that have nothing to do with recreation?

How many sites is Parks and Recreation required to maintain that the city doesn't own?

Since library visits decreased 7 percent in fiscal year 2015 in spite of a 10 percent increase in service hours, according to the Pew Charitable Trusts, should we be rehabbing or closing libraries?

A city can live beyond its means for only so long before the apparatus comes crashing down.

|Mike Egan, Philadelphia, mchlegan@gmail.com

Health is the priority

Opponents of a tax on sugary drinks sold in Philadelphia made the expected opening salvo with the specious argument that such a tax is regressive, meaning it excessively burdens low-income people, who consume more sugary drinks than high-income people do. Maybe so, but a founding principle of public-health measures is that such policies aim to benefit everyone, and lowering sugar intake fits this principle on many levels. This public-health principle trumps the social-economy argument against burdening the poor.

|Stephen F. Gambescia, professor, Drexel University, Philadelphia, sfg23@drexel.edu

Don't blame 'Big Soda'

It seems as though attaching the adjective big to any business, industry, or endeavor is sufficient to demonize it. There are Big Banks, Big Oil, Big Pharma. Now, Mayor Kenney demonizes the soft-drink industry by calling it "Big Soda" ("Kenney rallies for backing on tax on sugary drinks," Thursday).

When he refers to Big Soda, is he including the nefarious bodegas, corner groceries, food trucks, and convenience stores that are in the sugary-drink distribution chain and that would suffer significantly with a 3-cents-an- ounce sugary-beverage tax?

The mayor is girding for a "war" waged by Big Soda to frustrate the will of the people. Too bad he did not mention this tax during his campaign. He rails against Big Soda making big profits from the poor, but it's OK for him to impose a huge and regressive tax on them? George Harrison's lyrics in "Taxman" ring true.

|Randy Sommovilla, Philadelphia

Soda tax is for the children

I am tired of hearing that Mayor Kenney's soda tax would disproportionately affect poor people. The mayor is not proposing a tax on vegetables or diapers or housing or anything that is a necessity to live. Soda is a luxury item. It does not contribute to a person's health or well-being; in fact, it does the opposite.

Pre-K does contribute to health and well-being. It might even be said to disproportionately benefit poor people. Pre-K programs allow parents to return to work, and they reduce the need for paid child care, which is a significant burden on people with lower-paying jobs.

It is offensive to hear the beverage industry and the Teamsters lobby against something that would benefit children, working families, and the city. And to those who are upset that a bottle of soda might cost a dollar more - drink water; it's better for you.

|Meg Pidgeon, Philadelphia