Taxing bad behavior

[JakeStarkey]

Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.

The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.

Note how SP twists the meaning to fit his silly parameter of definition.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Darn mandatory armed forces integration (1948) or the Civil Rights Bill (1964) and so forth.

You folks who consist of less than 3% have every right to protest and the majority has every right to tell you that you are crazy.

Excise tax on Tobacco (1862), Prohibition of Alcohol (1920), War on Drugs (1974). All examples of the majority telling the minority just how crazy they are.

Fugitive Slave Law (1850) as well. The silliness is to suggest that 'social engineering' as suggested by SP and others is somehow impartial and equal application. Jeez, some weak minds on the Board and the far right.

Where did i say social engineering was equal and impartial?

You better brush up on your reading skills.

I said

Establishing equal protection under the law for all regardless of race was not social engineering you fucking idiot. It was the equal impartial application of the law.

If you're going to paraphrase me at least get it right you mental oyster.

 

[ConzHateUSA]

Is some idiot con, who can barely afford to buy mac and cheese, defending the indefensible practices of oligarchs again?

idiot conz

 

[JakeStarkey]

SP continues to twist his definition, which is completely out of line with the Constitution, American law, and our national narrative.

Here, SP, contact SCOTUS and tell them to get it right. Contact Us - Supreme Court of the United States

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.

The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.

Note how SP twists the meaning to fit his silly parameter of definition.

Hey asswipe, I linked to a definition you just made one up as usual

 

[oldernwiser]

Darn mandatory armed forces integration (1948) or the Civil Rights Bill (1964) and so forth.

You folks who consist of less than 3% have every right to protest and the majority has every right to tell you that you are crazy.

Excise tax on Tobacco (1862), Prohibition of Alcohol (1920), War on Drugs (1974). All examples of the majority telling the minority just how crazy they are.

Fugitive Slave Law (1850) as well. The silliness is to suggest that 'social engineering' as suggested by SP and others is somehow impartial and equal application. Jeez, some weak minds on the Board and the far right.

I guess it isn't.
The "social engineering" that's applied is designed to enforce in a dissenting minority the will of the majority. Is "democracy" just another term for "conformity"?

 

[Too Tall]

The tax on medical equipment is even worse. It is not a tax on income but on revenue. Start up companies spend a couple of years just trying to break even while they get their product into the market. This will kill more than a few of them.
Obamacare takes the best medical system in the world, in terms of how it responds when people actually get sick, and turns it into a 3rd world hell hole.
Now we need some change.

The irony of this tax is hearing one of Obama's favorites running for the Senate, Elizabeth Warren, whining about the tax on medical equipment. There are quite a few companies in Ma that will get hurt by this ridiculous tax.

Warren was a huge backer of the ACA.

 

[Too Tall]

of course unions are exempt from all this.

some myths never die.

unions are major recipients of obama health care waivers | national legal and policy center

busted!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Excise tax on Tobacco (1862), Prohibition of Alcohol (1920), War on Drugs (1974). All examples of the majority telling the minority just how crazy they are.

Fugitive Slave Law (1850) as well. The silliness is to suggest that 'social engineering' as suggested by SP and others is somehow impartial and equal application. Jeez, some weak minds on the Board and the far right.

I guess it isn't.
The "social engineering" that's applied is designed to enforce in a dissenting minority the will of the majority. Is "democracy" just another term for "conformity"?

You think Americans were in the majority for the Fugitive Slave Law or for integration of the Armed Forces? Wow!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Taxing bad behavior​

It is common knowledge that the government can reduce “bad” behavior by taxing or penalizing it.
Tobacco and alcohol use are the perfect examples. Every time the tax rates increase on tobacco products, some people quit using tobacco. It happens with alcohol also. Some people quit or reduce consumption because they can’t afford it anymore. Some because they just don’t want to pay the increased taxes.

A few years, the city of Chicago instituted a 5 cent tax on bottled water. They said they needed the tax money because all those empty bottles were getting into landfills. I guess they sort of forgot about their recycling programs. The sales of bottled water dropped, and Chicago didn’t get the revenue stream they anticipated and wrote into their budget.

By the way, the reason I know this about Chicago’s bottled water tax is because I am the IT person for a fortune 100 retailer that had to develop the reporting so that our company could collect and pay the tax to the city. Our sales of water have dropped dramatically since the tax was introduced.

Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called “Cadillac” health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government won’t get it’s anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.

Another part of the health care bill calls for taxing manufacturers of medical equipment. I am willing to bet, those costs will be passed on and some doctor or hospital will just buy less medical equipment. The anticipated taxes won’t be realized, and the medical services that could have been provided with that equipment won’t be available.

Anybody with a lick of common sense knows that unfairly taxing something reduces a person’s propensity to engage in that behavior. Putting special taxes on medical related goods and services isn’t going to improve medical care any more that putting special taxes on tobacco increases the sale of tobacco products.
I'm not sure why the government thinks medical care is bad behavior.

Here you GO!!

Show everyone WHERE.....

.....in Health Care Reform.....

....these "taxes" reside.


<tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick>.....​

 

[oldernwiser]

Fugitive Slave Law (1850) as well. The silliness is to suggest that 'social engineering' as suggested by SP and others is somehow impartial and equal application. Jeez, some weak minds on the Board and the far right.

I guess it isn't.
The "social engineering" that's applied is designed to enforce in a dissenting minority the will of the majority. Is "democracy" just another term for "conformity"?

You think Americans were in the majority for the Fugitive Slave Law or for integration of the Armed Forces? Wow!

Didn't say they weren't. And I think I already conceded that sometimes social engineering is put to good use. I think, the question was "is it correct and proper for the government to do so". There have been quite a few times that the government has over-reached, IMO.

 

[ConzHateUSA]

Shaman, you know what is astounding, look at that list of accomplishments under Obama, while facing the greatest obstruction in the history of human politics, it really is amazing.

I am sometimes one of those progressives who complains about him when it comes to his trying too hard to work with the terrorists, uh i mean republiklans, but when I look at that list and the hate and intolerance he has faced, I am really impressed.

Imagine the recovery this nation could have had were the baggers to have just stuck their collective heads in a toilet somewhere, and let us adults handle things.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The tax on medical equipment is even worse. It is not a tax on income but on revenue. Start up companies spend a couple of years just trying to break even while they get their product into the market. This will kill more than a few of them.

*​

Obamacare takes the best medical system in the world, in terms of how it responds when people actually get sick, and turns it into a 3rd world hell hole.

C'mon.....c'mon.....they're doing just fine......


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ1lPPTPSR4]SiCKO - Canadian Waiting Room Scene - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called “Cadillac” health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government won’t get it’s anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.

The "anticipated revenue stream" here is folks with employer-sponsored coverage substituting taxable wages for (arguably) overinsurance. Eliminate the tax benefits of piling up ever more expensive high actuarial value plans, and a great many folks with those plans will just prefer cash and more reasonably priced plans.

A higher tax revenue, slower health expenditure growth double whammy.

Of course unions are exempt from all this.

That's what Porky Limbaugh says, huh?​

 

[Too Tall]

"Putting special taxes on medical related goods and services isn’t going to improve medical care any more that putting special taxes on tobacco increases the sale of tobacco products."

False analogy. The idea is to reduce the costs in the long run, not increase the revenue stream.

Here are two opinions from people who disagree with you:

Senator Scott Brown (R) Ma

The medical device tax threatens our economy and our economic recovery in Massachusetts. And with more than 400 medical device firms and employing nearly 25,000 workers and contributing more than $4 billion to our economy, the Commonwealth can simply not afford to have this industry targeted with the tax.
If enacted, this harmful tax will put American workers at a competitive disadvantage and chase jobs overseas.

The medical device tax would likely cost 43,000 jobs across the country at the loss of $3.5 billion in wages. Massachusetts alone is estimated to lose more than 2,600 jobs as a direct result of this tax, so about 10% of our entire medical device manufacturing workforce.

Candidate Elizabeth Warren’s position ‘evolves.’ (D) Ma

On April 17, 2012, Democratic Senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren announced a reversal of her own position on this issue, saying that “innovation is a vital part of who we are” and that the medical device industry in Massachusetts accounts for “13% of all state exports.” Warren said that the Excise Tax would slow the pace of innovation and harm Massachusetts employers.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Shaman, you know what is astounding, look at that list of accomplishments under Obama, while facing the greatest obstruction in the history of human politics, it really is amazing.

Ah, yes......

....Obamaccomplishments (2009-2012)

*

Hell......"conservatives" are STILL bent-outta-shape, over his FIRST-TWO-YEARS!!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnoPpWdlG3A]Rachel Maddow (1) 111th Congress put policy before politics - YouTube[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBHK7zsz7xU]Rachel Maddow (2) 111th Congress put policy before politics - YouTube[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfWpBWP8krs]Obama Takes a Victory Lap After Big Wins - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Taxing bad behavior​

It is common knowledge that the government can reduce “bad” behavior by taxing or penalizing it.
Tobacco and alcohol use are the perfect examples. Every time the tax rates increase on tobacco products, some people quit using tobacco. It happens with alcohol also. Some people quit or reduce consumption because they can’t afford it anymore. Some because they just don’t want to pay the increased taxes.

A few years, the city of Chicago instituted a 5 cent tax on bottled water. They said they needed the tax money because all those empty bottles were getting into landfills. I guess they sort of forgot about their recycling programs. The sales of bottled water dropped, and Chicago didn’t get the revenue stream they anticipated and wrote into their budget.

By the way, the reason I know this about Chicago’s bottled water tax is because I am the IT person for a fortune 100 retailer that had to develop the reporting so that our company could collect and pay the tax to the city. Our sales of water have dropped dramatically since the tax was introduced.

Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called “Cadillac” health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government won’t get it’s anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.

Another part of the health care bill calls for taxing manufacturers of medical equipment. I am willing to bet, those costs will be passed on and some doctor or hospital will just buy less medical equipment. The anticipated taxes won’t be realized, and the medical services that could have been provided with that equipment won’t be available.

Anybody with a lick of common sense knows that unfairly taxing something reduces a person’s propensity to engage in that behavior. Putting special taxes on medical related goods and services isn’t going to improve medical care any more that putting special taxes on tobacco increases the sale of tobacco products.
I'm not sure why the government thinks medical care is bad behavior.

Here you GO!!

Show everyone WHERE.....

.....in Health Care Reform.....

....these "taxes" reside.


<tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick>.....​

<tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick>.....

Yeah......that's what I thought.......​

 

[dblack]

If you want more of something, subsidize it.
If you want less, tax it.

That's really the crux of that mindset.

I was discussing this issue with my s.o. a few days ago and she kept responding with "but how will we encourage more of 'x', or discourage more of 'y', etc...?"

I had to answer "We won't. Not with government anyway. It's not the purpose of government to tell us how to live."

As you and others here have suggested, if something is bad enough we need the government involved, make the bad thing a crime and be done with it. If it doesn't warrant locking someone up - keep government out of it.

 

[dblack]

Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.

The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.

<tedious Starkey ad hominem redacted />

The question of this thread is whether the taxation power should be used for such purposes.

 

[ConzHateUSA]

Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.

The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.

<tedious Starkey ad hominem redacted />

The question of this thread is whether the taxation power should be used for such purposes.

who has taxation power in our govt?