Authoritarians once taxed Light and Air

[The2ndAmendment]

Big Tax Authoritarians don't every teach this 150+ year travesty in public school:

Citizenship

A 'window tax' was first introduced in 1696. It was a tax on light and air; and despite its unpopularity, it was not abolished until 1851. Because houses with more than a certain number of windows were liable to be taxed, house owners often, reluctantly, blocked up windows, and there was a tendency to include fewer windows when new houses were built. Reproduced here is a petition requesting that ministers of the Church of Scotland be exempted from paying the tax, together with the Treasury's reply refusing to grant exemption.

In the United States they started taxing the rain. How long before the "pro-environment" crowd drops this hammer?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

 

[Mr. H.]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

Solar and Wind IS big business.

 

[rightwinger]

Big Tax Authoritarians don't every teach this 150+ year travesty in public school:

Citizenship

A 'window tax' was first introduced in 1696. It was a tax on light and air; and despite its unpopularity, it was not abolished until 1851. Because houses with more than a certain number of windows were liable to be taxed, house owners often, reluctantly, blocked up windows, and there was a tendency to include fewer windows when new houses were built. Reproduced here is a petition requesting that ministers of the Church of Scotland be exempted from paying the tax, together with the Treasury's reply refusing to grant exemption.

In the United States they started taxing the rain. How long before the "pro-environment" crowd drops this hammer?

Nobody taxes rain....but if you block natural seepage you can be taxed

 

[g5000]

The number of windows were a sign of how much wealth you had. It was a form of property tax. Under Charles II, they also used to tax the number of hearths or stoves you had.

 

[rightwinger]

The number of windows were a sign of how much wealth you had. It was a form of property tax. Under Charles II, they also used to tax the number of hearths or stoves you had.

Glass was a precious commodity in 1695

 

[hadit]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They're not. They're against being forced to buy expensive energy when cheaper alternatives are readily available.

 

[Pogo]

The number of windows were a sign of how much wealth you had. It was a form of property tax. Under Charles II, they also used to tax the number of hearths or stoves you had.

Property taxes take many forms. In New Orleans they built "shotgun" houses to minimize the tax on one's front property breadth so that your property ends up a long strip with the front at the narrow end. A "shotgun" house is so named on the basis that you can stand at the front door and fire a shotgun out the back door, though nobody who explains the term ever explains why you'd want to be firing a shotgun in your own house.

The mental yoga necessary to stretch the OP examples into a "tax on light and air" is a stretch worthy of only a select few mental gymnasts though. I'm not sure anyone else would have even attempted it so....

​

If only this kind of creative imagination could be channeled into something actually productive...

 

[g5000]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

 

[Pogo]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

 

[hadit]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

Big business simply doesn't care where the energy comes from, as long as it's reliable and cost effective.

 

[Pogo]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

Big business simply doesn't care where the energy comes from, as long as it's reliable and cost effective.

As long as it's in Control of it.

 

[hadit]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

Big business simply doesn't care where the energy comes from, as long as it's reliable and cost effective.

As long as it's in Control of it.

In what way does Wal-Mart, for example, care about controlling the energy it uses to power its stores?

 

[Pogo]

Mal-Wart is not an energy company.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Notice how liberals loves this idea.

 

[rightwinger]

Notice how liberals loves this idea.

Made sense in 1696

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

Big business simply doesn't care where the energy comes from, as long as it's reliable and cost effective.

Solar and wind being neither.

 

[SwimExpert]

 

[Pogo]

Why do you think big business is against solar and wind energy.

They aren't profitable.

And if developed to be so, they threaten the profitable status quo.

Big business simply doesn't care where the energy comes from, as long as it's reliable and cost effective.

Solar and wind being neither.

As, say, nucyulur wasn't without the massive subsidies propping it up -- which it still gets.
That's exactly why I said "And if developed to be so". That's part of any infrastructural development that government plays a key role in building.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Once more for the slow kid: nuclear power WORKS. Solar and wind is pixie dust and unicorn flatulence.