I went out and bought some soda and some water.
The purchase price was $8.48.
The sales tax was $0.42.
The "California Redemption Value" was $1.80.
So, I paid 25% over the price of what I bought in taxes. This is the problem with "use-based taxes". They look good on the surface, but they just turn into another source of revenue for the state, and even make the tax look righteous.
Even when it's all...hokum.
What's worse is that--according to what I've heard--the blue bins that the state collects the recycling in were basically formulated to stop the homeless from collecting and doing the recycling themselves. In other words, we took something that gave the least fortunate members of society a way to make money through honest labor and cost the taxpayers nothing--and turned it into something that the government does (and loses money at, at the city level).
All I'm really wondering, though, is what happens to that 0.42? Why isn't that enough to do what needs to be done, rather than tripling it?
Why is it these clowns always have money for mansions, and never for roads?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That is the problem when these pin heads talk about a value added tax. That is the tax that is most abused and under reported of all taxes. Withholding on wage earners is the one sure way to get collection.
ReplyDeleteYou should read Walter Neff's comments on taxationa and the tax code at Althouse. He sounds like a really smart guy.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea there is to reduce the number of people they have to enforce/audit.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure in this Ebay-based world that's necessarily true.
I'm tellin' ya: Per capita. Everyone pays the same price. Once a year.
I haven't seen neff around lately.
ReplyDeleteThere's a Buford somebody or other....
I love "Bullshit". I mean the show.
ReplyDeleteThe one on Wal-Mart is especially good. (Sorry, Trooper, I know you hate the Big Boxes.)
Yeah, they're not exactly fair, but they're upfront about their biases.
ReplyDeleteAnd sometimes they're dead on.