Sin Taxes

[TooLowBrow]

Can someone help me figure this out?

The gov't needs to increase it's income.

They decide to tax... cigarettes, booze, fatty foods, whatever.

They reason that these things are bad for people and higher taxes will encourage them to quit.

They are helping the people.

--Now lets say--

People quit their vices.

"Thank you gov't! We are not sinners anymore!"

The gov't now has lost the increased income from the tax raise.

It has also lost the income from any previous taxes.

And as the sin companies go out of business, people lose jobs.

--So here's my question--

Does the gov't really want people to be 'good' even if this will hurt the gov't?

and

If it really is just all about money. Will the gov't realize that there is a limit to how much you can tax an item before the tax becomes too high, leading to disuse of the item and, therefore, zero income from the tax on said item?

[epo]

Actually those who "indulge" in the "sinning" items generally cost government more than the revenue from the sin...hence the government's desire to raise the tax to do one of two things:

1. Encourage them to quit, reducing the expense.
2. Raise the funds to pay for the programs those sins create.

[pennington]

It's just about the money regardless of what they say. Cigarette consumption is down so they just keep raising the tax. Eventually they will tax something else. They're already talking about a large electricity tax (called something else, I'm sure) using the Global Warming excuse.

They will tax until they can't tax anymore and they will borrow until they can't borrow any more. Only then will they make a fraction of the "painful decisions" they have to make and do the "painful cuts" that they should have been doing all along.

[beachbum]

I believe the hope is that the number who quit will eventually save the gov't more money in the end,even if it means losing the sin tax revenue.But basically you have it nailed.

[TooLowBrow]

Actually those who "indulge" in the "sinning" items generally cost government more than the revenue from the sin...hence the government's desire to raise the tax to do one of two things:

1. Encourage them to quit, reducing the expense.
2. Raise the funds to pay for the programs those sins create.

gay people used to have the highest aids rates. didnt that cost the govt more to make programs for them?
why didnt the govt just say that gay programs cost money and the solution is to tax gay people?

[TooLowBrow]

and octo-mom is gonna cost the tax payers money, but she wont be taxed more.
in fact she'll be taxed less because she has so many kids and expenses

[Zorro]

Actually those who "indulge" in the "sinning" items generally cost government more than the revenue from the sin...hence the government's desire to raise the tax to do one of two things:

1. Encourage them to quit, reducing the expense.
2. Raise the funds to pay for the programs those sins create.

I guess they must really want to save me from my phone addiction. Four lines $162. Taxes on that $162.00 ... $69.66... Hopefully my ears and the rest of America's ears will be saved.

[Zorro]

and octo-mom is gonna cost the tax payers money, but she wont be taxed more.
in fact she'll be taxed less because she has so many kids and expenses

What is Sean Hannity off today? Just trying to figure out why we've been graced with this insight.

[epo]

and octo-mom is gonna cost the tax payers money, but she wont be taxed more.
in fact she'll be taxed less because she has so many kids and expenses

The sick thing is that with demographics in this nation, we could use a few more octo-moms to pay for the baby boomer generation and their expectations of government programs.

[TooLowBrow]

What is Sean Hannity off today? Just trying to figure out why we've been graced with this insight.

im just in a mood today

taxes are crazy and in port washington, where i work, they're building a $200,000 statue to john philip sousa

i dont think id mind the taxes if i saw more of the money going towards more intelligent things

spend the money on port's crappy roads, not some overpriced statue

[IMSlacker]

gay people used to have the highest aids rates. didnt that cost the govt more to make programs for them?
why didnt the govt just say that gay programs cost money and the solution is to tax gay people?

Taxing the gays, while a fine idea, would be hard to do. Taxing booze and cigarettes is easy.

[Zorro]

The sick thing is that with demographics in this nation, we could use a few more octo-moms to pay for the baby boomer generation and their expectations of government programs.

It ain't the volume its the volume contributing. When you got 40 something percent of the country not paying any Federal taxes you got a tax structure that's out of whack.

The problem for boomer's is that they were told contribute and we'll get you back. Too late before they realized that today's contribution was being spent on today's retirees.

[SatCam]

im just in a mood today

taxes are crazy and in port washington, where i work, they're building a $200,000 statue to john philip sousa

i dont think id mind the taxes if i saw more of the money going towards more intelligent things

spend the money on port's crappy roads, not some overpriced statue

That blows

http://prosites-allmanmusic.homestead.com/files/ash_260g.jpg

[epo]

It ain't the volume its the volume contributing. When you got 40 something percent of the country not paying any Federal taxes you got a tax structure that's out of whack.

The problem for boomer's is that they were told contribute and we'll get you back. Too late before they realized that today's contribution was being spent on today's retirees.

The problem isn't "for the boomers" in my opinion, it is the boomers. They have been in charge of this nation and have managed to create a "me first" culture....and in a few years they are going to want theirs again.

With the demographic information that they have known...this nation should be heavily into the black right now if they had any sense of responsibility. Any baby boomer who is whining about "needing a tax cut"...is generally a self-serving asshole who doesn't understand how government works.

[scottinnj]

My preacher told me once:

Love the sin, hate the tax.

It's in the Bible someplace.

[Kublakhan61]

I'm Going To The General Store, FOR A PHOSPHATE!!

[The Jays]

It ain't the volume its the volume contributing. When you got 40 something percent of the country not paying any Federal taxes you got a tax structure that's out of whack.

The problem for boomer's is that they were told contribute and we'll get you back. Too late before they realized that today's contribution was being spent on today's retirees.

The tax structure is out of whack because the income ratio is out of whack. The poor people can't make enough, and the rich people keep getting more than enough.

[Zorro]

The tax structure is out of whack because the income ratio is out of whack. The poor people can't make enough, and the rich people keep getting more than enough.

Simple answers to complex questions. Gotta love the American Way...

[epo]

The tax structure is out of whack because the income ratio is out of whack. The poor people can't make enough, and the rich people keep getting more than enough.

Simple answers to complex questions. Gotta love the American Way...

One of the more complex issues is that worker production rose dramatically in the past 10 years and worker income has declined. This speaks to The Jays point that income is simply not keeping up with the times.

[jafter]

I wish they would put a tax on Diapers, juice boxes, and formula. Why should people without kids have to pay for the stupid rugrats to go to school. I wish we could pass laws against children like they have for cigarettes. Why should people who have kids get a tax breaks for the booger eaters. When people who don't have kids pay more. We are not burdening society.

I would love to go to a store, restaurant, beach, hell almost anywhere without hearing a fucking kid screaming and running around while their parents ignore them.

[IMSlacker]

I wish they would put a tax on Diapers, juice boxes, and formula. Why should people without kids have to pay for the stupid rugrats to go to school. I wish we could pass laws against children like they have for cigarettes. Why should people who have kids get a tax breaks for the booger eaters. When people who don't have kids pay more. We are not burdening society.

I would love to go to a store, restaurant, beach, hell almost anywhere without hearing a fucking kid screaming and running around while their parents ignore them.

I think the great Whitney Houston explained it best.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dc3xY4UTeDU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dc3xY4UTeDU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[FUNKMAN]

good questions... i would just say that eventually there will be a savings in health costs... medicaid, medicare, insurance premiums... people eating better and smoking less should improve health conditions and less time at the doctor, hospitals, tests, etc...

but the reality is, organizations, corporations, eventually lose money. not good for shareholders or wall street. that's what it all eventually comes down to, isn't it?

how about the billions in tax payer money they've given to the banks who are supposedly paying it back. the reality is the bank gives you 1 to 3% interest on savings, checking, cd's etc... and people are paying anywhere from 4 1/2% to 30% in interest on loans, credit cards, etc...

so the taxpayer money was given to the banks and it's taxpayer money that are really paying the loans back

i shouldn't have coffee this late

[A.J.]

The gov't needs to increase it's income.

They decide to tax... cigarettes, booze, fatty foods, whatever.

If only. I'm sick of smokers being made to feel like pariahs while fatasses who shovel crappy food into their pieholes get a pass.

[disneyspy]

if they ever start taxin a real sin like spillin the seed,i'm in trouble

[CountryBob]

Maybe it's time for a REVOLUTION!?

[TjM]

They do it because they know people will still buy all those things. Booze especially

[TjM]

If only. I'm sick of smokers being made to feel like pariahs while fatasses who shovel crappy food into their pieholes get a pass.

:clap:

I'd like to sign up for your newsletter.


I'm also pissed that when I go into a FUCKING BAR! I can't smoke a cigarette. Even though the towns and cities made all these bars remodel years ago to seperate the bar from the restaurant so they could have smoking.

[badmonkey]

I wish they would put a tax on Diapers, juice boxes, and formula. Why should people without kids have to pay for the stupid rugrats to go to school. I wish we could pass laws against children like they have for cigarettes. Why should people who have kids get a tax breaks for the booger eaters. When people who don't have kids pay more. We are not burdening society.

I would love to go to a store, restaurant, beach, hell almost anywhere without hearing a fucking kid screaming and running around while their parents ignore them.

The better those kids are educated, the more money they will make and the more they can pay into Social Security when you do start burdening society (retire). If you didn't have kids to join the workforce and pay into SS, then you could be seen as part of the problem. Also, children without education are more likely to break into houses so it's more beneficial to society as a whole to ensure that they are educated.

I quit smoking almost 2 yrs ago and I agree that everybody that smokes should quit as soon as they can manage to do it... but....... until somebody's willing to pass prohibition laws against tobacco, it's legal to smoke in this country so they should mind their own fucking business.

Badmonkey

[Aggie]

If only. I'm sick of smokers being made to feel like pariahs while fatasses who shovel crappy food into their pieholes get a pass.

http://image.hotrod.com/f/editorials/you-know-what-grinds-my-gears/1034951+w500+cr1+re0+ar1/what-grinds-my-gears.jpg

You know what really grinds my gears? ...

[cougarjake13]

Can someone help me figure this out?

The gov't needs to increase it's income.

They decide to tax... cigarettes, booze, fatty foods, whatever.

They reason that these things are bad for people and higher taxes will encourage them to quit.

They are helping the people.

--Now lets say--

People quit their vices.

"Thank you gov't! We are not sinners anymore!"

The gov't now has lost the increased income from the tax raise.

It has also lost the income from any previous taxes.

And as the sin companies go out of business, people lose jobs.

--So here's my question--

Does the gov't really want people to be 'good' even if this will hurt the gov't?

and

If it really is just all about money. Will the gov't realize that there is a limit to how much you can tax an item before the tax becomes too high, leading to disuse of the item and, therefore, zero income from the tax on said item?



they want enough people to be good and enough to be bad to even things out


i dont believe they want total goodness cause as you stated they'll lose that income
but they want enough people to stay bad so they keep getting the money but enough who quit so as to appear like they care and they did something




realistically if they wanted people to quit things that were bad they wouldnt allow those things to be made anymore, but as has been said, there's too much money involved in the staus quo



thats why diseases dont get cured anymore, only managed so you have to spend money on drug pills for the rest of your life