Unintended consequence or deliberate attack on the poor and elderly? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 11:39:40 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Unintended consequence or deliberate attack on the poor and elderly? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: IS the Michigan cigarette tax a deliberate attack on the poor and elderly?
#1
Deliberate attack
 
#2
No the Michigan government just screwed up.
 
#3
other -explain
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 17

Author Topic: Unintended consequence or deliberate attack on the poor and elderly?  (Read 3372 times)
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


« on: June 06, 2006, 11:02:08 PM »

Option 2. The government screws up a lot. They generally don't intend a lot of the bad stuff that happens.

Lets take an example; Rich man earns $100,000 per year. Poor man earns $10,000. Both men smoke a pack a day. At $2.00 per pack the annual tax for both men is $730. The effective tax rate as a percentage of income is as follows:
Rich man  0.73%
Poor man  7.3%

Its odd to see so many Democrats supporting such a regressive tax.

it's a voluntary tax.  no one is forced to pay it.  

it is odd to see libertarians oppose voluntary taxation.

It's odd that libertarians oppose the government using it's taxation power in an attempt at social engineering?

And it's only a truly voluntary tax if you don't have to pay it when you buy the product - I mean, if the tax was applied to clothing or food would you be calling it a voluntary tax? Or heck, property taxes are voluntary, right? Just don't buy a house! So no, it's not a voluntary tax. A truly voluntary tax would be completely voluntary, not a matter of not buying a certain product.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2006, 10:36:03 AM »

I would be open to the idea of an unhealthy food tax to help pay for the cost of health care.

Please tell me you're joking.

that is actually a good idea!

why not a fast food tax.  1. it would raise reveues.  2. it would help to discourage teens (many of whom are obese) from eating there.

Then why not just outright ban fast foods if you're so concerned?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 11 queries.