Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 35 of 35
  1. #26
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,522
    you can tax cigarettes specifically because they are known disease producers, except that, eg, the tobacco industry spent $50M SUCCESSFULLY blocking the $1 tax per packet propostion in CA. The vote isn't final yet, but the $50M blitz dropped the supporters from about 70% to less than 50%.

    you can't tax "fattening" foods directly because there's nothing specifically disease producing about them, quan y is too vague, and they are too diverse.

  2. #27
    Scrumtrulescent
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Post Count
    9,724
    you can tax cigarettes specifically because they are known disease producers, except that, eg, the tobacco industry spent $50M SUCCESSFULLY blocking the $1 tax per packet propostion in CA. The vote isn't final yet, but the $50M blitz dropped the supporters from about 70% to less than 50%.

    you can't tax "fattening" foods directly because there's nothing specifically disease producing about them, quan y is too vague, and they are too diverse.
    You can tax anything. Whether there's anything specifically disease producing about them is irrelevant.

  3. #28
    Damns (Given): 0 Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    76,370
    That's a great point. If you took a group of people from mcdonalds and the local all you can eat buffet and a group from the meat counter and produce section of the grocery store, it would be virtually impossible to tell the two groups apart.
    Right because people that eat at mcdonalds never go grocery shopping.

    I haven't been to Souper Salad in a while so I forget...are their patrons all fat?

  4. #29
    Damns (Given): 0 Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    76,370
    You can tax anything. Whether there's anything specifically disease producing about them is irrelevant.
    Sure you can tax anything as long as you can justify it.

    I have yet to see proper justification for a ”fast food” tax without further taxing most items found in the grocery store.......including the produce section.

  5. #30
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    take away church tax-free status for all money not spent on charity. If you only spend 30% feeding the poor, then you pay taxes on the other 70%. Just like a person.

  6. #31
    Just Right of Atilla the Hun Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    25,372
    Right because people that eat at mcdonalds never go grocery shopping.

    I haven't been to Souper Salad in a while so I forget...are their patrons all fat?
    no! Eating at that place is like taking a ing colonic. It'll clean you out.

  7. #32
    Veteran EVAY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    7,563
    Tax policy has been used since time immemorial to advance certain behaviors and restrict others. Hence, tax deductions for home buying, charity giving, etc.

    If you think that religious organizations are mad at governments now, just imagine what would happen if the tax deduction for 'charitable donations' to religious ins utions were to disappear.

    No politician has the stomach for that.

  8. #33
    Veteran EVAY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    7,563
    no! Eating at that place is like taking a ing colonic. It'll clean you out.

  9. #34
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    I have no problem with removing the tax free status of charitable contributions, or placing a smaller limit of how much is tax exempt. But then, I am one who wants to see a radical change in our tax system, and make it as simple as possible.

  10. #35
    Esse quam videri ploto's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Post Count
    10,994
    The idea of it being a tax credit instead of a deduction off income is an interesting notion. That way anyone who makes the same donation would get the same benefit instead of it benefiting those in a higher tax bracket more. The credit could be a set percentage of the donation.

    Then again I do not understand why people get to pay less taxes because they choose to have more kids.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •