SCHIP Tax House Bill

Bill has been introduced. The new tax rate will be 52.4% with a maximum tax cap on any one cigar at 40 cents per cigar.
Clicky
«134

Comments

  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    though this is an improvement, it is still a poor way to rase funds for anything. the fact that it is a socialized system is a totally different issue that i am also against.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,152
    kuzi16:
    though this is an improvement, it is still a poor way to rase funds for anything. the fact that it is a socialized system is a totally different issue that i am also against.
    Agreed.
  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭
    kuzi16:
    though this is an improvement, it is still a poor way to rase funds for anything. the fact that it is a socialized system is a totally different issue that i am also against.
    agree 100%
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    Krieg:
    kuzi16:
    though this is an improvement, it is still a poor way to rase funds for anything. the fact that it is a socialized system is a totally different issue that i am also against.
    agree 100%


    I am not too familiar with this bill, other than it will add to the price of cigars. But I thought this was something you guys were saying you were afraid of Obamma bringing in. This is still George Bush's Administration ???
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    Krieg:
    kuzi16:
    though this is an improvement, it is still a poor way to rase funds for anything. the fact that it is a socialized system is a totally different issue that i am also against.
    agree 100%


    I am not too familiar with this bill, other than it will add to the price of cigars. But I thought this was something you guys were saying you were afraid of Obamma bringing in. This is still George Bush's Administration ???
    bush vetoed it twice before. with a democrat house senate and president the passage is almost assured.

    the bill will use tobacco taxes to raise funds for the SCHIP program. this is a social health care program for children under 30 living in or out of the home with parents that make under $75k a year.
    so, although my parents retired early, are living off of the wealth they saved over years of hard work, and my wife and I make more than $75k a year I will qualify for "free" health care.

    and so will many people who dont need it or want it. Basicly the program will be paid for by a small group of people and used by a large group of people.

    ...and since its free, the demand will be infinitely high and unable to be funded by the shrinking population of tobacco users. this means that taxes will have to be raised in other areas after a while. Its the beginning of a failing program.

    will it work?
    a similar program in Hawaii that was funded by a larger percentage of people and used by a smaller percentage of people failed earlier this year. I dont see why this wont be a giant waste of tax dollars as well.
  • TumblerTumbler Posts: 338
    I am sorry, but this is ridiculous...
  • j0z3rj0z3r Posts: 9,403
    kuzi16:
    will it work?
    a similar program in Hawaii that was funded by a larger percentage of people and used by a smaller percentage of people failed earlier this year. I dont see why this wont be a giant waste of tax dollars as well.
    Interesting comparison...I don't see how the converse of that program, which seemed designed to succeed, can do anything but fail. Then again, it is not as though I expected this program to do anything other than fail from the first mention I heard of it.

    If they are going to try and push for socialized health care, which I'm against anyway on principle alone, the very least they could do is design a system that makes any damn sense.

    Something like this that affects so many should be put to a majority vote of the people funding said program, the citizens, see what your Average Joe has to say about it.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    Actually SCHIP has been very successful, and provided health care coverage for 6 million kids. The bill would expand it to 10 million kids. I'm against socialism too and I'm not a fan of taxes. But I think all kids deserve equal access to the best possible medical care. (disclaimer, I work at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh)
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    Yeah but not at the expense of raising already heavy taxes on cigars. I say go after cutting welfare, or tapping/raising cigarette taxes either for them or the companies themselves. using "kids' to raise taxes or put fees on things is just F'd up. It's such a cliche'.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    Or hey, why not tax the funds of all these celebrities? I'm sorry but 30+ million for a freaking film is just ludicrious! Athletes I can see getting paid a few to several million as they only last for a few years and their bodies get pretty mangled, but celebs in film and tv don't need that much. Hell I'd rather see sitcom actors get paid more than most movie stars, crap, a whole season on tight schedules vs 3 months of work... hmmm, let me see....
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    phobicsquirrel:
    Yeah but not at the expense of raising already heavy taxes on cigars. I say go after cutting welfare, or tapping/raising cigarette taxes either for them or the companies themselves. using "kids' to raise taxes or put fees on things is just F'd up. It's such a cliche'.
    Um, they are raising cigarette taxes...the proposal I saw was $1 a pack. It's not as if "kids" are some made up entity and this money is actually going to lambourginis hospital CEOs. Our health care system is serious effed up and I agree, lets talk about different ways of fixing it and paying for it. In the meantime, the system is what it is and kids need coverage.

    Also, celebrities and athletes already do pay taxes. At least the law requires they do. And more than likely, they pay a heck of a lot more than anybody visiting this forum. Overpaid...absolutely. But they are taxed.
  • lvlawlvlaw Posts: 18 ✭✭

    Kids need medical coverage ... period.  I have no problem with that.  The 40 cents cap per cigar could have been much worse had the former versions been signed into law.  ($3.00 per cigar)!

     

    The problem is still in policing the program.  The fight now seems to be whether to allow immigrant children to receive coverage under this program, and the concern that illegal immigrants' children will be covered throught the legal immigrants. 

     

    Also, how can the government make sure that people who sign up for this do not have private insurance available first through their employers, which the law will apparently require?  Tell me a single parent earning a modest income who does not want to have to pay for their childrens' medical insurance not covered by their employer will not try to take advantage of this.  It is undeniably going to happen in large doses. 

     

    It is a clear step toward socialized coverage cloaked under the guise of helping kids.

  • StoogeeStoogee Posts: 157
    I dont think anyone has aa problem with kids getting health care. The problem I have is this is another tax. The real problem is that the government continues to want more and more of my money and pretty much everything they touch they screw up and then the answer is they need more of my money to fix it when the truth is they are just inefficient and wasteful and constanltly want to create more and more programs that will fail.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    well this .40 will only get bigger. I agree it's better than before but what we see here is something that one we can't vote for and another that taxing is way out of hand. I've said it before, nothing is worth taking money from people who already are being taken from. If the govt wants to spend more money on projects or anything else it needs to bring back real paying jobs and go back to being the #1 exporter of goods, PERIOD. Again using "Kids" as a reason to TAX things is just wrong. Not saying that children, well matter of fact ANYONE deserves good healthcare. It's just that simple. I'm a little confused though, so some people are against a national health care system but okay with taxing citizens more and more for childrens healthcare? It seems Ironic to me that one of the main principles for US leaving the grips of England was due to taxes and now we seem to be being taxed much more and it's getting worse. Taxes aren't the answer and I for one am not down for anything that will continue to tax me. Just my opinion but there are other means to receive funding.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    Luko:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Yeah but not at the expense of raising already heavy taxes on cigars. I say go after cutting welfare, or tapping/raising cigarette taxes either for them or the companies themselves. using "kids' to raise taxes or put fees on things is just F'd up. It's such a cliche'.
    Um, they are raising cigarette taxes...the proposal I saw was $1 a pack. It's not as if "kids" are some made up entity and this money is actually going to lambourginis hospital CEOs. Our health care system is serious effed up and I agree, lets talk about different ways of fixing it and paying for it. In the meantime, the system is what it is and kids need coverage.

    Also, celebrities and athletes already do pay taxes. At least the law requires they do. And more than likely, they pay a heck of a lot more than anybody visiting this forum. Overpaid...absolutely. But they are taxed.
    Well I don't see why kids get it and others need to pay? I also know that at least for Oregon that if people who are un-insured go to the hospital without coverage the taxpayers pick up the bill, though I know when I wanted to have an appointment set up I was denied (not sure what the stipulations were...) but I know I was making minimum wage and had no coverage. Luckily I had the VA.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    Look, I can't imagine any one is a big fan of taxes. I'm certainly not and I'm definitely not a fan of how the state or federal governments use the tax money they're already taking from me. But you don't want "socialized" medicine and you're not in favor of new taxes to pay for it. But under our current system, you've got to find some way to make it happen. I agree, fix the system and tax us less and make it better. But we're talking about a dream world. Until that becomes reality, they do what they're doing here. So instead of tobacco, they could tax alcohol, gasoline, property, income, and so on and so forth. Pick your poison.

    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us. There is a need. They're doing the tax to meet that need. Now, is there a better way to make that happen. Sure, but you think this government is going to reform health care?
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    Luko:
    Look, I can't imagine any one is a big fan of taxes. I'm certainly not and I'm definitely not a fan of how the state or federal governments use the tax money they're already taking from me. But you don't want "socialized" medicine and you're not in favor of new taxes to pay for it. But under our current system, you've got to find some way to make it happen. I agree, fix the system and tax us less and make it better. But we're talking about a dream world. Until that becomes reality, they do what they're doing here. So instead of tobacco, they could tax alcohol, gasoline, property, income, and so on and so forth. Pick your poison.

    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us. There is a need. They're doing the tax to meet that need. Now, is there a better way to make that happen. Sure, but you think this government is going to reform health care?
    Yea, it really is a marketing snow job. Thats what that money is SUPPOSED to go towards, but we all know how much the government likes to dip into things for their own personal projects! Look at the TX state Lotto that was supposed to entirely go towards "Kids Education"... once again the Snow Job begins! Not very much of the Lotto money has actually gone to Education and they are just about to bankrupt the entire Lotto system here. I agree children deserve health care, but this is the WRONG way to go about it.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    Ok, well I'm not going to say it IS a marketing snow job, but it could very easily be. I guess saying it "IS" a snow job is going a bit far, but it just sounds like a doomed system to me.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,152
    Luko:
    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us.
    Sure they are. Its what they do every time.
    They introduce a new tax that wil be used to pay for education or helathcare for kids. Then very little if any of of the income generated is used for the poorly designed program it was supposed to fund. Instead it is used to bail out welfare and social security or pay for the bridge to nowhere or the complete upgrade to fiber optics in the state of West Virginia.
    The program that was designed poorly to begin with is now underfunded as well. So they raise the tax again because the program is failing "due to underfunding". The tax is raised x amount with again less than half of the new amount going to the orginal program because it is paying for all the riders that came along with this raise in tax.
    Eventually they realize the program is doomed and they come up with a new solution to the problem. They're now going to ditch SCHIP for a new program, Program X, but only if Program X passes will SCHIP be dissolved. Now they're going to ask for a new type of tax to pay for Program X, they're not going to use the taxes that are paying for SCHIP, they need a new tax. So where is this original tax that was paying for SCHIP going now?

    I would say that I'd be for a small tax for program that helped kids have access to health care(the best health care, I doubt that. The best of anything is always reserved for those that can pay the most for it, health care is no different.). The problem is that even if the government promised to use this tax for nothing but this program we all no that its BS. They've done this over and over. It is technically unlawful for congress to borrow against Social Security but they do it daily.
    I have no doubt the people who originally proposed this bill had good intentions, but these reasons right here are why our fore father designed the USA so that the States were supposed to be making these decisions not the federal government. TOo much bueacracy, nothing ever gets accomplished and every program is destined to fail.


    Sorry for my rant.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,152
    PuroFreak:
    Luko:
    Look, I can't imagine any one is a big fan of taxes. I'm certainly not and I'm definitely not a fan of how the state or federal governments use the tax money they're already taking from me. But you don't want "socialized" medicine and you're not in favor of new taxes to pay for it. But under our current system, you've got to find some way to make it happen. I agree, fix the system and tax us less and make it better. But we're talking about a dream world. Until that becomes reality, they do what they're doing here. So instead of tobacco, they could tax alcohol, gasoline, property, income, and so on and so forth. Pick your poison.

    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us. There is a need. They're doing the tax to meet that need. Now, is there a better way to make that happen. Sure, but you think this government is going to reform health care?
    Yea, it really is a marketing snow job. Thats what that money is SUPPOSED to go towards, but we all know how much the government likes to dip into things for their own personal projects! Look at the TX state Lotto that was supposed to entirely go towards "Kids Education"... once again the Snow Job begins! Not very much of the Lotto money has actually gone to Education and they are just about to bankrupt the entire Lotto system here. I agree children deserve health care, but this is the WRONG way to go about it.
    Damn Puro, jinx! LOL. Great minds ... eh?
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    madurofan:
    PuroFreak:
    Luko:
    Look, I can't imagine any one is a big fan of taxes. I'm certainly not and I'm definitely not a fan of how the state or federal governments use the tax money they're already taking from me. But you don't want "socialized" medicine and you're not in favor of new taxes to pay for it. But under our current system, you've got to find some way to make it happen. I agree, fix the system and tax us less and make it better. But we're talking about a dream world. Until that becomes reality, they do what they're doing here. So instead of tobacco, they could tax alcohol, gasoline, property, income, and so on and so forth. Pick your poison.

    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us. There is a need. They're doing the tax to meet that need. Now, is there a better way to make that happen. Sure, but you think this government is going to reform health care?
    Yea, it really is a marketing snow job. Thats what that money is SUPPOSED to go towards, but we all know how much the government likes to dip into things for their own personal projects! Look at the TX state Lotto that was supposed to entirely go towards "Kids Education"... once again the Snow Job begins! Not very much of the Lotto money has actually gone to Education and they are just about to bankrupt the entire Lotto system here. I agree children deserve health care, but this is the WRONG way to go about it.
    Damn Puro, jinx! LOL. Great minds ... eh?
    I don't know if I would say "great minds" Maybe WARPED minds though! haha
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,152
    PuroFreak:
    madurofan:
    PuroFreak:
    Luko:
    Look, I can't imagine any one is a big fan of taxes. I'm certainly not and I'm definitely not a fan of how the state or federal governments use the tax money they're already taking from me. But you don't want "socialized" medicine and you're not in favor of new taxes to pay for it. But under our current system, you've got to find some way to make it happen. I agree, fix the system and tax us less and make it better. But we're talking about a dream world. Until that becomes reality, they do what they're doing here. So instead of tobacco, they could tax alcohol, gasoline, property, income, and so on and so forth. Pick your poison.

    And they're not using "kids" as a reason to tax us more. It's not like it's a marketing snow job and they're playing the "kids" card to bleed more money out of us. There is a need. They're doing the tax to meet that need. Now, is there a better way to make that happen. Sure, but you think this government is going to reform health care?
    Yea, it really is a marketing snow job. Thats what that money is SUPPOSED to go towards, but we all know how much the government likes to dip into things for their own personal projects! Look at the TX state Lotto that was supposed to entirely go towards "Kids Education"... once again the Snow Job begins! Not very much of the Lotto money has actually gone to Education and they are just about to bankrupt the entire Lotto system here. I agree children deserve health care, but this is the WRONG way to go about it.
    Damn Puro, jinx! LOL. Great minds ... eh?
    I don't know if I would say "great minds" Maybe WARPED minds though! haha
    Indeed. LOL
  • rwheelwrightrwheelwright Posts: 3,296
    Number one, my opinion on athletes is this. If they "LOVE" the game as much as they say they do, then would play for smaller amounts of money. When they start with the "I'm not playing until I get X million is bullshit. I'm not disagreeing that they bang their bodies up but it is by choice. Celebs are notorious for being on commercials for fundraisers, this and that. No, I have no facts here but I highly doubt they would do it for free and if they really cared so much, they should donate some of their fortunes and not just miniscule amounts.

    My next comment is on tobacco tax. What gives the government the right to say "Hey, we are going to tax this because we want more money and want to regulate it". I don't understand how we let this happen. Same thing with Alcohol. I can understand an age limit but deciding to tax it more than any other product is outragous. Same thing goes for gas. Everybody wants to tax it because everyone wants their share.

    My next problem is income tax. Not every state has it but a lot do like NJ. So, you bust your ass each year making what you make and I'll tell you that I don't even make $70k. Then they tax you for busting your ass. The harder you work, the more they tax you. Bonuses are worse. They tax almost 50% of the bonus. Then property tax. When you buy a car or a bike you pay tax once and you own it. Why do you need to keep paying tax on something you own? That brings me to cars. I bought myself and 2001 Audi S4 in 2000. If I got myself an all decked out A4 I would not have to pay luxury tax but because I got an S4 I did. What is this luxury tax all about? That's a bunch of bullshit too. So I can have something nice but you are not just going to charge me more for it you are gonna tax it higher too. Ugh..................................................................................................

    Now I am not against paying taxes but I think a lot of what is taxed is wrong. One more example is renting a car in NJ. They tag on a $3 a day homeland security tax. What does renting a car have anything to do with homeland security? Paying taxes to towns and they state are ok with me. Police assistance, plowing, supporting schools, etc... are taxes that are needed but when they decide to tax tobacco and air and water and ever **** thing else is when I start to get mad and wonder what gives them the right to do this. I almost feel like stocking up on cigars (more than I already have) and not buying for like 10 years just so they loose this new tax. In reality, I could cut my cigar smoking back and not give as many away and I can smoke for the next 5 years without having to buy anything except maybe some distilled water.

    Sorry for the rant but this *** gets to me. How much more can they tax us before it is more beneficial NOT to work than to go to work.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    rwheelwright:
    Number one, my opinion on athletes is this. If they "LOVE" the game as much as they say they do, then would play for smaller amounts of money. When they start with the "I'm not playing until I get X million is bullshit. I'm not disagreeing that they bang their bodies up but it is by choice. Celebs are notorious for being on commercials for fundraisers, this and that. No, I have no facts here but I highly doubt they would do it for free and if they really cared so much, they should donate some of their fortunes and not just miniscule amounts.

    My next comment is on tobacco tax. What gives the government the right to say "Hey, we are going to tax this because we want more money and want to regulate it". I don't understand how we let this happen. Same thing with Alcohol. I can understand an age limit but deciding to tax it more than any other product is outragous. Same thing goes for gas. Everybody wants to tax it because everyone wants their share.

    My next problem is income tax. Not every state has it but a lot do like NJ. So, you bust your ass each year making what you make and I'll tell you that I don't even make $70k. Then they tax you for busting your ass. The harder you work, the more they tax you. Bonuses are worse. They tax almost 50% of the bonus. Then property tax. When you buy a car or a bike you pay tax once and you own it. Why do you need to keep paying tax on something you own? That brings me to cars. I bought myself and 2001 Audi S4 in 2000. If I got myself an all decked out A4 I would not have to pay luxury tax but because I got an S4 I did. What is this luxury tax all about? That's a bunch of bullshit too. So I can have something nice but you are not just going to charge me more for it you are gonna tax it higher too. Ugh..................................................................................................

    Now I am not against paying taxes but I think a lot of what is taxed is wrong. One more example is renting a car in NJ. They tag on a $3 a day homeland security tax. What does renting a car have anything to do with homeland security? Paying taxes to towns and they state are ok with me. Police assistance, plowing, supporting schools, etc... are taxes that are needed but when they decide to tax tobacco and air and water and ever **** thing else is when I start to get mad and wonder what gives them the right to do this. I almost feel like stocking up on cigars (more than I already have) and not buying for like 10 years just so they loose this new tax. In reality, I could cut my cigar smoking back and not give as many away and I can smoke for the next 5 years without having to buy anything except maybe some distilled water.

    Sorry for the rant but this *** gets to me. How much more can they tax us before it is more beneficial NOT to work than to go to work.
    The sad thing is, it's us voting for these idiots that "give them the right"... It's WRONG, but if we keep electing these idiots it will just get worse.
  • zoom6zoomzoom6zoom Posts: 1,214
    children under 30? Who came up with that definition? "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". - Margaret Thatcher, I believe.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    PuroFreak:
    rwheelwright:
    Number one, my opinion on athletes is this. If they "LOVE" the game as much as they say they do, then would play for smaller amounts of money. When they start with the "I'm not playing until I get X million is bullshit. I'm not disagreeing that they bang their bodies up but it is by choice. Celebs are notorious for being on commercials for fundraisers, this and that. No, I have no facts here but I highly doubt they would do it for free and if they really cared so much, they should donate some of their fortunes and not just miniscule amounts.

    My next comment is on tobacco tax. What gives the government the right to say "Hey, we are going to tax this because we want more money and want to regulate it". I don't understand how we let this happen. Same thing with Alcohol. I can understand an age limit but deciding to tax it more than any other product is outragous. Same thing goes for gas. Everybody wants to tax it because everyone wants their share.

    My next problem is income tax. Not every state has it but a lot do like NJ. So, you bust your ass each year making what you make and I'll tell you that I don't even make $70k. Then they tax you for busting your ass. The harder you work, the more they tax you. Bonuses are worse. They tax almost 50% of the bonus. Then property tax. When you buy a car or a bike you pay tax once and you own it. Why do you need to keep paying tax on something you own? That brings me to cars. I bought myself and 2001 Audi S4 in 2000. If I got myself an all decked out A4 I would not have to pay luxury tax but because I got an S4 I did. What is this luxury tax all about? That's a bunch of bullshit too. So I can have something nice but you are not just going to charge me more for it you are gonna tax it higher too. Ugh..................................................................................................

    Now I am not against paying taxes but I think a lot of what is taxed is wrong. One more example is renting a car in NJ. They tag on a $3 a day homeland security tax. What does renting a car have anything to do with homeland security? Paying taxes to towns and they state are ok with me. Police assistance, plowing, supporting schools, etc... are taxes that are needed but when they decide to tax tobacco and air and water and ever **** thing else is when I start to get mad and wonder what gives them the right to do this. I almost feel like stocking up on cigars (more than I already have) and not buying for like 10 years just so they loose this new tax. In reality, I could cut my cigar smoking back and not give as many away and I can smoke for the next 5 years without having to buy anything except maybe some distilled water.

    Sorry for the rant but this *** gets to me. How much more can they tax us before it is more beneficial NOT to work than to go to work.
    The sad thing is, it's us voting for these idiots that "give them the right"... It's WRONG, but if we keep electing these idiots it will just get worse.
    Wheelie, you are so right! I agree with everything you said, and I had no idea about the Homeland Security tax on car rentals, what gives? Anyway I know exactly how you feel. If anything there should be a senate tax and election tax! HA.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    After reading these post' I understand better what this program is all about. Thanks guys

    I can't help notice that many of you mention that you are not opposed to kids getting health care etc. but that they should not raise taxes to do it. There was more then one comment about there being other ways to do it (raise funds for kids healthcare).

    Now I DO NOT like taxes but we all know that they are inevitable. My point here is that while we all don't like to pay taxes...what are these other methods which have been mentioned.

    It is not like people in the US (or anywhere else) send money to the government without being asked to in order for the Govt. to run / establish these types of programs. I am NOT talking about donations to this or that organization. That is diferent in that, this is money you send for a program that you as an individual support.

    Surely you can understand a need for the government to use tax money to run / establish certain large scale programs which they have deemed needed. I mean c'mon they do have the facts and figures (that's what we pay them for... to manage) needed to know that this or that program is needed on a national level.

    Now my question is, where does the money for new programs come from ? If taxes weren't raised at certain times for these types of huge programs, does anybody really believe that the people who promote/back/desire this type of program will just start sending money to the government earmarked for whatever particular program they are in support of? Taxes are the way a government finances itself in order to run the country. Do they take too much? Always. Do they spend it wisely and get the most bang for the buck? Rarely. Is there a better system to get people to pay for something (voluntarily) they support while allowing them to opt out if they do not support any particular program? Nope.

    I mean realistically nobody is going to just start firing off money to the government without taxation because they support a new program. Taxes are for the government to run the country. Voting is for the people to let the government know how good of a job we think they are doing. Just my .02

    In this case it sounds like thru some lobbying or whatnot, the government has been forced to lower the tax from what some have said would be $3 a stick to some .40 a stick. This to me would say the program will get some funding to get it kickstarted and maybe even offer some people in need to get the help they need. On the other hand you could argue that the program will now be underfunded, and that in itself will go some way to deciding how successful this program can be. Maybe it is a win /win situation , or maybe because they did not take enough in the end, this program will fail and that will only add to the arguements that programs like these can't work, untimately.
    I would like to see a ballot that gave the voter the option to mark "none of the above" off as their selection at the polls. If enough of these were in the ballot boxes at the end of the election then we would get a new slate of candidates to choose from. I mean think about it, if you have the right person in the right job, things should be done, well, right. If you have only two people to choose from, and both of these people are selected in a very NON democratic way by the parties, then how can you possibly get proper representation after the election results are known? Our systems (in both the US and Canada) allow the people to practice Democracy only once every 4 years or so...on election day. The rest of the time we live in Top Down society. Taxes are less important then the people to whom we give the power to spend those taxes.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    It's not "children under 30." In PA, and I believe in most, if not every other state in the nation, it's kids under age 19.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    rwheelwright:
    Number one, my opinion on athletes is this. If they "LOVE" the game as much as they say they do, then would play for smaller amounts of money. When they start with the "I'm not playing until I get X million is bullshit. I'm not disagreeing that they bang their bodies up but it is by choice. Celebs are notorious for being on commercials for fundraisers, this and that. No, I have no facts here but I highly doubt they would do it for free and if they really cared so much, they should donate some of their fortunes and not just miniscule amounts.

    My next comment is on tobacco tax. What gives the government the right to say "Hey, we are going to tax this because we want more money and want to regulate it". I don't understand how we let this happen. Same thing with Alcohol. I can understand an age limit but deciding to tax it more than any other product is outragous. Same thing goes for gas. Everybody wants to tax it because everyone wants their share.

    My next problem is income tax. Not every state has it but a lot do like NJ. So, you bust your ass each year making what you make and I'll tell you that I don't even make $70k. Then they tax you for busting your ass. The harder you work, the more they tax you. Bonuses are worse. They tax almost 50% of the bonus. Then property tax. When you buy a car or a bike you pay tax once and you own it. Why do you need to keep paying tax on something you own? That brings me to cars. I bought myself and 2001 Audi S4 in 2000. If I got myself an all decked out A4 I would not have to pay luxury tax but because I got an S4 I did. What is this luxury tax all about? That's a bunch of bullshit too. So I can have something nice but you are not just going to charge me more for it you are gonna tax it higher too. Ugh..................................................................................................

    Now I am not against paying taxes but I think a lot of what is taxed is wrong. One more example is renting a car in NJ. They tag on a $3 a day homeland security tax. What does renting a car have anything to do with homeland security? Paying taxes to towns and they state are ok with me. Police assistance, plowing, supporting schools, etc... are taxes that are needed but when they decide to tax tobacco and air and water and ever **** thing else is when I start to get mad and wonder what gives them the right to do this. I almost feel like stocking up on cigars (more than I already have) and not buying for like 10 years just so they loose this new tax. In reality, I could cut my cigar smoking back and not give as many away and I can smoke for the next 5 years without having to buy anything except maybe some distilled water.

    Sorry for the rant but this *** gets to me. How much more can they tax us before it is more beneficial NOT to work than to go to work.
    As far as athletes go, in my opinion, you're solely to blame for this. Ok, not actually you, but "you" the fan. Who the hell wouldn't take that money? And if you knew you could hold out and get another $5 million and even further set you and your family up for life, you wouldn't? Yeah right.

    The owners pay them that much, and I'd say they're to blame, but we let them. Quit going to games. Don't buy another jersey. You'll see salaries come down drastically.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    Laker: If the government wants money they can open a F'N chain of 7-11's!!! haha No seriously though. If they would cut so much of the crap spending that goes on there would be WAY more than enough money to provide for this program. These idiots are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on studying how it hurts the environment when a cow farts... That is just one of HUNDREDS of examples of things that need to be cut to save money. Also, they could revamp the welfare system in our country and that would save millions of dollars. There are soooo many ways to cut spending so that this country would have a huge surplus of money. Raising taxes on ANYTHING is the wrong thing to do. They can't budget the money they have now so they expect us to want to give them even more to piss away???
Sign In or Register to comment.