Georgia Senate blocks mega tax cuts for Delta in response to Delta punishing law abiding NRA

[jc456]

so why aren't you questioning Delta's rationale then? they only took one group's discount not all groups. so they are taking away a perk to punish the members of the NRA only charging their members a higher air fare. And you're cool with that correct?

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

their citizens who are members of the NRA are directly affected by Delta.

 

[jc456]

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

This is the problem.

For some it seems they see no difference between the role of the government and the role of private organizations


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

yep in this case you are correct. Come see, come saw.

 

[Pogo]

so why aren't you questioning Delta's rationale then? they only took one group's discount not all groups. so they are taking away a perk to punish the members of the NRA only charging their members a higher air fare. And you're cool with that correct?

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

 

[jc456]

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

 

[Cecilie1200]

so why aren't you questioning Delta's rationale then? they only took one group's discount not all groups. so they are taking away a perk to punish the members of the NRA only charging their members a higher air fare. And you're cool with that correct?

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

 

[Cellblock2429]

again - because since they did it the outset of the mob screaming CUT TIES!!! it will forever be seen as doing it to appease, not be neutral.

why is that concept lost on you?

it comes across as you choosing to believe Delta cause you can take the "left" stance in here.

Can one not appease by being neutral? Does it have to be one or the other?

I choose to believe Delta because they have a track record of withdrawing anything that could be seen as an endorsement from just about anything that is causing controversy at the time.

My stance is the “right” stance, the people supporting the actions of the Ga Senate are taking the “left” stance.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so the question is why did they feel the need? were they being hassled? because if they felt hassled, like fedex is being hassled, then they did it for that reason and not neutrality.

Why Delta did what they did is unimportant.

What it comes down to is how each individual views the role of the government.

For most of you the role of the government is to try and force one private entity to give financials discounts to another private entity.

I happen to disagree that is the role of the government


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

/-----/ How about when States boycotted other states because didn't glob onto gaye marriage or MLK Day? Where was your fake outrage over that?

 

[Pogo]

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

Hard to believe I have to actually explain this but considering the poster I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

--- If a government penalizes a private business based on that business' own perfectly legal choice of its own promotions --- then that government is steering that private business. And that is way out of line. At the very least this jackoff legislator who spelled out his rationale here should be immediately impeached.

 

[Montrovant]

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

doesn't the US Postal Service go up against Fed Ex and UPS and other carriers? Isn't the US Postal Service a government agency? The state is in itself a company run by the government. all Services are for customers. It is no different.

The idea that a state is a company run by government is horrible. The purpose of a company is to make money. Is that what you consider the purpose of the states? Do you think that government and private companies should have the same rules and standards?

 

[jc456]

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

Hard to believe I have to actually explain this but considering the poster I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

--- If a government penalizes a private business based on that business' own perfectly legal choice of its own promotions --- then that government is steering that private business. And that is way out of line. At the very least this jackoff legislator who spelled out his rationale here should be immediately impeached.

what is the penalty exactly?

 

[Pogo]

I'm "cool with that" in the sense that Delta should be free to make such a decision, whereas I do not think the government should be free to use tax legislation as a way to pressure a single person or company to give discounts to any other single person or organization. The government does (or should) operate under different standards and restrictions than private citizens, companies, or organizations.

I honestly don't know why Delta gave a discount to the NRA in the first place, nor what other discounts Delta gives. Whether the move to get rid of the NRA discount was a good or bad business decision, time will tell.

You seem to think the government should be able to operate the same way a private company does. I disagree.

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

I don't give a shit if 122% of the state are "gun enthusiasts". It's not the government's domain to run a private corporation.

 

[Pogo]

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

Hard to believe I have to actually explain this but considering the poster I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

--- If a government penalizes a private business based on that business' own perfectly legal choice of its own promotions --- then that government is steering that private business. And that is way out of line. At the very least this jackoff legislator who spelled out his rationale here should be immediately impeached.

what is the penalty exactly?

OK, you're going to sit here and play stupid? Back to Ignore you go. Don't waste my time.

 

[jc456]

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

I don't give a shit if 99.99999999999999% of the state are "gun enthusiasts". It's not the government's domain.

 

[jc456]

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

Hard to believe I have to actually explain this but considering the poster I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

--- If a government penalizes a private business based on that business' own perfectly legal choice of its own promotions --- then that government is steering that private business. And that is way out of line. At the very least this jackoff legislator who spelled out his rationale here should be immediately impeached.

what is the penalty exactly?

OK, you're going to sit here and play stupid? Back to Ignore you go. Don't waste my time.

you said they penalized them, why can't you state the penalty? you treat me like shit cause you can't answer? ignore me then.

 

[SavannahMann]

Georgians can take the El Camino instead. After getting down off the cement blocks of course.

Um. You know El Camino’s are collectocars right? A good one can easily fetch $20k.

https://www.autolist.com/chevrolet-...labell,+GA&latitude=32.181&longitude=-81.5146

Oh, and more are in California. In Georgia they prefer pick up trucks. Ford sells a lot of F-150 while Chevy and Dodge are seen quite often as well.

Now to travel from Savannah to Atlanta you can take four hours flying including security and airport walking times, or drive in the same four hours and have a car when you get there.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Can one not appease by being neutral? Does it have to be one or the other?

I choose to believe Delta because they have a track record of withdrawing anything that could be seen as an endorsement from just about anything that is causing controversy at the time.

My stance is the “right” stance, the people supporting the actions of the Ga Senate are taking the “left” stance.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so the question is why did they feel the need? were they being hassled? because if they felt hassled, like fedex is being hassled, then they did it for that reason and not neutrality.

Why Delta did what they did is unimportant.

What it comes down to is how each individual views the role of the government.

For most of you the role of the government is to try and force one private entity to give financials discounts to another private entity.

I happen to disagree that is the role of the government


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

/-----/ How about when States boycotted other states because didn't glob onto gaye marriage or MLK Day? Where was your fake outrage over that?

Can you bring up a thread where that was talked about since I have been on the board? Now, personally I think it is stupid, but it is not the same thing. That is one government vs another government. Not the government vs a private entity.

 

[Cecilie1200]

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

I don't give a shit if 122% of the state are "gun enthusiasts". It's not the government's domain to run a private corporation.

And they aren't, so stop exaggerating.

They have every right to say, "This is what we expect from companies who wish to negotiate tax breaks with us." And Delta has every right to say, "We don't want to do that." So everyone's perfectly in control of their own sphere of influence.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

dude it happens in every state for specific customers. Look at the deal Amazon is going to get. don't be so naive that you don't open your own eyes. the state can give tax breaks to any company, just like any company can give discounts. it is no different. and yet you want it to be. wow. blind monkeys.

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

The functions of and rules of operation of government and the functions of and rules of operation of a private business certainly should be different. The difference is that Delta is a private company, while the Georgia government is not. If another company wanted to take a perk away from Delta, I would have no problem with that. For example, if XYZ Glass supplies Delta, and gives them a discount, XYZ Glass could stop giving Delta a discount in response to this and that would be entirely up to them.

And as I've said, if the Georgia government simply said, "We don't feel this tax break is something we can get behind," that would also have been fine. I don't like the government throwing its weight around, so to speak, in a matter between 2 private organizations that involves no illegal actions, and doing it so blatantly. To go back to a quote from Cagle, he said that he would kill tax break legislation unless Delta reinstated its discount for NRA members, and described it as conservatives fighting back. When he is using the power of government, he isn't representing conservatives, he is representing the people of the state of Georgia.

Partisan politics already bothers me, and this seems like taking it just a little step further, or more openly.

Seems to me government trying to run the affairs of private corporations is called fascism.

what is it they're trying to run exactly?

So congress is running my business because they changed the tax code? interesting.

If congress changed the tax code for your business only and told you that it would stay changed unless you paid a tribute to another private entity, then yes it would be.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Georgians can take the El Camino instead. After getting down off the cement blocks of course.

Um. You know El Camino’s are collectocars right? A good one can easily fetch $20k.

https://www.autolist.com/chevrolet-el+camino#make=Chevrolet&model=El+Camino&buyer_intelligence=true&sort_new_cars_last=true&page=1&radius=any&location=Ellabell,+GA&latitude=32.181&longitude=-81.5146

Oh, and more are in California. In Georgia they prefer pick up trucks. Ford sells a lot of F-150 while Chevy and Dodge are seen quite often as well.

Now to travel from Savannah to Atlanta you can take four hours flying including security and airport walking times, or drive in the same four hours and have a car when you get there.

Not surprising about the trucks. Ever seen the kind of mud Georgia gets when it rains? Holy cats. Anything that sits too close to the ground ends up drowned.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

I don't give a shit if 122% of the state are "gun enthusiasts". It's not the government's domain to run a private corporation.

And they aren't, so stop exaggerating.

They have every right to say, "This is what we expect from companies who wish to negotiate tax breaks with us." And Delta has every right to say, "We don't want to do that." So everyone's perfectly in control of their own sphere of influence.

But that is not what they said, they said "Give this private entity a tribute in the form of a discount or you will not get a tax break".

Can you truly not see the difference?

 

[jc456]

I'm well aware that companies get tax breaks for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure I disagree with some of those, as well. The state is under no obligation to provide tax breaks for airlines, and I have not once in this thread argued that they are. My argument is, and has been, that the way the Georgia government has gone about this, the explicit way the tax break was made contingent upon Delta giving special treatment to NRA members, is wrong. If Georgia were to make a tax break for Amazon require Amazon give discounts to UNICEF, I would oppose that.

well, again, it's the states call? no different than Delta's to pull the perk from the NRA members. it is no different.

What the hell does the Georgia State Leg have to do with the NRA? Are they owned by them?

In the sense that Georgia's a state with a lot of gun enthusiasts.

I don't give a shit if 122% of the state are "gun enthusiasts". It's not the government's domain to run a private corporation.

And they aren't, so stop exaggerating.

They have every right to say, "This is what we expect from companies who wish to negotiate tax breaks with us." And Delta has every right to say, "We don't want to do that." So everyone's perfectly in control of their own sphere of influence.

The state is responsible to its constituents. They are watching out for them.