There has been a tax on pop and some juices in Ohio since, I believe, the mid-90s. It certainly hasn't stopped obesity in Ohio (not even a little). I don't think our state is in any better condition financially than most other states at this point in time. It's a nonsensical argument for people to propose that taxing pop would make a substantial difference.

That said, I really don't care either way. If the government needs money and they want to tax something that I can CHOOSE TO OPT OUT OF (as opposed to mandatory income taxes), it really doesn't seem to matter to me. They're just going to find something else to tax, so everyone can just deal like we Ohioans have done. The only people who don't understand the tax are children (obvious hyperbole--don't beat me up).

Would you rather have an increase in the sales tax or have these product specific taxes, or an increase in the income tax or some other general tax?

With regards to fairness I have to go with the general tax but as you noted then there is no way to opt out to avoid the tax.

"pop "

Sort of off the subject, but why is it called 'pop'? I mean, I sort of get 'soda,' but 'pop'?

It's a regional thing. In California and the northeast, it's "soda." In most of the West and Midwest, it's "pop." And in the deep south, it's "coke." My girl's relatives (in a small west texas town) call it "soda-water."

see: <link>