Tax Pet Food and Pet Supplies
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
reality

Newport, NH

#22 Mar 20, 2013
Disproportionately taxing poor people to supposedly help poor people is idiotic and only serves to drive more people into poverty.

Taxing a can of cat food a few cents means nothing to rich people, to sweet old Mrs. grandma, it means that she might skip a meal herself so that her companion can eat.

The prevalence of smokers is higher among adults living below the poverty level. It is a highly addictive drug.

The prevalence of second home ownership and ski weekend getaways is higher among the rich. Neither of these are highly addictive and are both completely unnecessary.

Very much unlike sweet old grandma's feline companion. To her, her cat is her one true friend and the very reason she bothers to get out of bed each morning to face another day. It is as essential as her medications.

Every new tax that poor people on public assistance pay is essentially just another cut in their public assistance.

If the republicans had their way, they would tax these people until their public assistance only was enough to pay these disproportionate taxes, thereby effectively eliminating public assistance altogether.

We should be taxing the actual luxury items and the people who are rich enough to afford new taxes without going hungry.

Think

Brownsville, VT

#23 Mar 20, 2013
reality wrote:
Disproportionately taxing poor people to supposedly help poor people is idiotic and only serves to drive more people into poverty.
Taxing a can of cat food a few cents means nothing to rich people, to sweet old Mrs. grandma, it means that she might skip a meal herself so that her companion can eat.
The prevalence of smokers is higher among adults living below the poverty level. It is a highly addictive drug.
The prevalence of second home ownership and ski weekend getaways is higher among the rich. Neither of these are highly addictive and are both completely unnecessary.
Very much unlike sweet old grandma's feline companion. To her, her cat is her one true friend and the very reason she bothers to get out of bed each morning to face another day. It is as essential as her medications.
Every new tax that poor people on public assistance pay is essentially just another cut in their public assistance.
If the republicans had their way, they would tax these people until their public assistance only was enough to pay these disproportionate taxes, thereby effectively eliminating public assistance altogether.
We should be taxing the actual luxury items and the people who are rich enough to afford new taxes without going hungry.
Is this a joke?
reality

Newport, NH

#24 Mar 20, 2013
Perhaps if we weren't wasting money on things like a U.S. Army top fuel drag racing team, we wouldn't need to tax cat food:

http://www.goarmy.com/army-racing/nhra-top-fu...

After paying millions for cars, crew, tools, rent, fuel, high class hotel and travel expenses, it costs about $1000.00 a second to run just one of these ridiculous cars.

Our tax dollars at work ...
U R a selfish fool

Newport, NH

#25 Mar 20, 2013
Think wrote:
<quoted text> Is this a joke?
You are a joke and nobody is laughing.
I dont owe you pet toys

South Burlington, VT

#26 Mar 21, 2013
Think wrote:
<quoted text> Is this a joke?
It' no joke, it's socialism and ignorant.
I dont owe you pet toys

South Burlington, VT

#27 Mar 21, 2013
Here is where you should have been clued in: If you don't own a pet, you won't be taxed "disproportionately" . It Is a just plan. While Everyone,(grandma included) depends on the basic necessity taxes that Montpelier is passing. Providing basic necessities for the poor and those down on their luck is why public assistance is financially backed by taxpayers like me - your neighbor. When you use that money to buy pet toys, you are keeping my tax dollars from helping those people who honestly need it! I have no complaint about supporting your grandma, but her cat is taking the food out of another needy person's mouth.

Gas taxes affect the working person "disproportionately" by the way.
I dont owe you pet toys

South Burlington, VT

#28 Mar 21, 2013
The full House will vote on H.510 Thursday. The $658 million bill provides for funding for the Transportation Agency. Most controversially, it effectively raises the state's take home of gas sales by 7.7 cents per gallon.
Anonymous

United States

#29 Mar 21, 2013
Vermont is headed down the wrong path of trying to raise revenue by increasing taxes on basic necessities. Economic growth and consumer spending increases the tax base and generates revenue. When you impose taxes on ski areas and hotels, you are biting off the hand that feeds you. Ski areas and hotels employ workers and brings income to the state be it skiers purchasing gas, food, ski equipment or clothing. When you tax the ski areas, the cost is passed to the consumer who can no longer afford to perhaps ski or make other purchases. The industry fails and you lose.
Anonymous

United States

#30 Mar 21, 2013
Vermont is headed down the wrong path of trying to raise revenue by increasing taxes on basic necessities. Imposing taxes on business is also a bad idea. When you raise taxes on ski areas and hotels, you are biting off the hand that feeds you. Ski areas and hotels employ workers and brings income to the state be it skiers purchasing gas, food, ski equipment or clothing. When you tax the ski areas, the cost is passed to the consumer who can no longer afford to perhaps ski or make other purchases. This decreases profit and tax revenue. Vermont should strive to encourage economic growth which increases the tax base and generates revenue.
reality

Newport, NH

#31 Mar 21, 2013
People who own second homes and book ski weekend getaways are not worried about being able to afford basic necessities. Trying to raise revenue which is lost due to the corporate world not paying their fair share of taxes by taxing the underclass for basic goods is not a sustainable solution.

The problem is that in this country, as people get richer they pay fewer taxes. Taken to the extreme it is commonplace for a multibillion dollar corporation to pay virtually no federal taxes whatsoever by using their wealth to cheat the system.

These are the real moochers. Corporate welfare robs our country of revenue on a scale that is many, many times greater than every individual on public assistance combined.

I agree that taxing the underclass for basic goods is the wrong path, but we must find a way to make the business world pay the taxes they owe.

In the meantime, taxing the benefactors of this tax fraud on their ill-gotten gains by imposing new taxes on the things they buy with that stolen money is a good start.
Lets be honest

South Burlington, VT

#32 Mar 21, 2013
The real problem is that Vermonter's income is largely gotten under the table. If Montpelier cracked down on this practice, they wouldn't have need to keep raising taxes on honest / above the table working people.
Community Disorganizer

Florham Park, NJ

#33 Mar 21, 2013
Lets be honest wrote:
The real problem is that Vermonter's income is largely gotten under the table. If Montpelier cracked down on this practice, they wouldn't have need to keep raising taxes on honest / above the table working people.
Excellent point! And many of those collecting non-tax income are collecting all kinds of welfare at the same time.
The actual problem

Newport, NH

#34 Mar 21, 2013
Too-big-to-fail banks’ profits almost entirely paid for by taxpayers
http://americablog.com/2013/02/too-big-to-fai...
2/21/2013 4:53pm by Chris in Paris

" A new analysis shows that the federal subsidy for too-big-to-fail Big Banks is actually ten times larger than once thought. It’s on the order of $780 billion a year. That’s equal to the size of the entire stimulus bill, but every single year forever. The stimulus bill was a one-time shot for $787 billion, this is that much money every year.

In an alarming new study we learn that America’s largest banks are living on thin financial ice. If it weren’t for government-sponsored corporate welfare, to the tune of $83 billion a year, America’s top five too-big-to-fail banks would only break even financially.

But the system is rigged to actually create and sustain “too big to fail”— to give these banks an incentive to seek bigger and bigger government subsidies, and bailouts.

A really good analysis from Bloomberg:

Banks have a powerful incentive to get big and unwieldy. The larger they are, the more disastrous their failure would be and the more certain they can be of a government bailout in an emergency. The result is an implicit subsidy: The banks that are potentially the most dangerous can borrow at lower rates, because creditors perceive them as too big to fail….

How much are those lower rates worth to the banks? Bloomberg comes to a shocking conclusion:

Multiplied by the total liabilities of the 10 largest U.S. banks by assets, it amounts to a taxpayer subsidy of $83 billion a year. To put the figure in perspective, it’s tantamount to the government giving the banks about 3 cents of every tax dollar collected.

The top five banks — JPMorgan, Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc…. with almost $9 trillion in assets, more than half the size of the U.S. economy — would just about break even in the absence of corporate welfare. In large part, the profits they report are essentially transfers from taxpayers to their shareholders.

That last line is both chilling and infuriating:“the profits they report are essentially transfers from taxpayers to their shareholders.”

Without the subsidy, the banks only break even. We the taxpayer are quite literally keeping them alive through unfair competition. Our taxes are their profits.

The banks regularly bully their way into soft regulation, easy money and a dominating position over the political class — who knew they were just a bunch of paper tigers? Well, actually, all of us knew, from Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz down to the progressive blogs.

So why is this issue important? For starters, there is a lot of taxpayer money involved, and as we’ve already witnessed, these too-big-to-fail banks can bring us all down, quickly. Second, it’s not exactly cheap bailing them out, and the losses to the broader economy go well beyond just the banking industry.

Also, and perhaps more important, is that these banks make up the business class that’s at the forefront of the assault on what’s left of the social safety net. You may recall Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, the guy who Obama has a strange bromance with, adjusted bonus payout dates in both the US and UK to avoid paying taxes. You know, as in the taxes that saved his entire lifestyle." ...
The actual problem

Newport, NH

#35 Mar 21, 2013
continued from:
http://americablog.com/2013/02/too-big-to-fai...

... "Even worse is Blankfein’s insistence on bashing programs that are critical to middle class Americans. It’s the Blankfeins of the world that want to take your Medicare and Social Security away. God forbid we ran out of money and there weren’t any left to bail out the banks next time, right?

Then there’s my other favorite bankster, good old Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan. Dimon is the delightful fellow who ignored the warnings and ended up costing the bank, and our taxpayers, billions.

Since these banks really aren’t turning a profit without government welfare, what would JPMorgan look like without those handouts? For Dimon, banking rules that help protect taxpayers from bailing out the gambling banks are “un-American.”

The major bank chiefs have been quite vocal about trashing the social system, just as they trashed our economy. But when it comes to helping Americans, the banks have little interest beyond their next bailout.

It’s time for the political class to wake up and realize that these people are destructive to society, instead of inviting them to play rounds of golf or join discussions about job creation. Job creation is not their goal. Their goal is to squeeze tax dollars, while bleating on about the free market, while they pick your grandmothers pocket.

Their record confirms this is the hard truth of the day."
Lets be honest

South Burlington, VT

#36 Mar 21, 2013
"The business of America is business" - Coolidge
Too bad Obama didn't have enough common sense to let them fail and recover without his interference.
Robert

South Burlington, VT

#37 Mar 22, 2013
"I will bet this tax raises no more money. People will just purchase less. We started commuting saving the cost of one car going back and forth. I should have done it sooner. The net loss in gas purchases is about 200 a month. What our government doesn't get is that taxes are dynamic and not a fixed linear function. Keep raising them and people will stop spending. Sometimes raising rates results in collecting less. Of course we will never get the whole story from dome town."
- Robert (on VT raising the gas tax)
Joe

Burlington, VT

#38 Mar 23, 2013
they should tax pet supplies starting with horses being kept as pets and stop letting people claim to be farmers and getting massive tax breaks on their hobby farms by increasing the minimum annual gross revenue requirement to qualify as an opperating farm and anything called a horse farm shouldn't qualify because it's nothing more than a stable for rich peoples pet horses so that revenue shouldn't come under farm revenue.
Dairy Queen

South Burlington, VT

#39 Mar 23, 2013
Definition of a farm: it must produce more than it processes.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brattleboro Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Did Anyone Get Kilt In Your Flood (Aug '11) Jul 2 Redneck 7
What Does It Take To Get the Brattleboro Reform... Jun 22 Kay 1
Review: Biologic Integrative Health - Samantha ... (Feb '10) Jun '17 Amy 65
Quick Loan Jun '17 housingfinance 1
News Autopsy results pending: Police ID troopers in ... (Dec '07) May '17 superkim_89 4
News Police roundup (Aug '09) May '17 Ripflatlander 5
Get on the bandwagon while there is still time! (Jan '16) May '17 Morgan 8

Brattleboro Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brattleboro Mortgages