I don't see why people are even arguing over this stupid tax on cigarettes as it has nothing to do with Obama's original income tax plan. Tax on consumables is going to affect EVERYONE, whether you clean toilets for $6.25 an hour or you're sitting on the 85th floor with your legs up on the desk making $50mill a year.
Just take a look at your cell phone bill. I'd bet 10% of the bill comes in the form of "taxes". Internet, telephone, utilities, heck even LCDs - same shit, just spun differently - ultimately it's a TAX no matter what its called on the line item. The low income earners will be burdened more than high income earners everytime there's an absolute tax increase, which is kind of an irony to Obama's tax plan if you ask me.
Just take a look at your cell phone bill. I'd bet 10% of the bill comes in the form of "taxes". Internet, telephone, utilities, heck even LCDs - same shit, just spun differently - ultimately it's a TAX no matter what its called on the line item. The low income earners will be burdened more than high income earners everytime there's an absolute tax increase, which is kind of an irony to Obama's tax plan if you ask me.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
You must live in a cave if you can't look at the implications of these types of taxes. Our government has no RIGHT to impose controls on us citizens via focused taxes. If it is legal, treat it the same as any other product. This one is simple, a lot of people dislike smoking as do I, but it sets a precedent for government to follow. When more money is needed, just pick something popular and tax the snot out of it. Only an idiot would argue in support for a democratic government to usurp the rights of its citizens and force and ideological view on an entire nation by force, and taxation is force!
By the way, I have been to a lot of oppressed countries and these policies that Obama is pushing leads to governments like China so take your $13.00 and get ready to turn your friends and family over for re-education. I would take McCain and no tax cut over Obama and his "Idiot-in-Charge" at the treasury who is trying to kill our economy forever any day.
I just listened to an Obama speach on the radio while driving to work and he definitely said he would not raise "any form of tax" for families making < $250K or individuals making < $200K, not just income tax. However, if this is what is making you realize he is a liar, reality has already passed you by. It's getting easier to list the what he didn't lie about than listing what he did lie about.
We can also opt out of home ownership, quit working, cancel vacations, refrain from buying any toys (boats, RV, motorcycles), and all sorts of stuff. So, by your logic, all taxes are voluntary.
SP33Demon
Lifer
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,929
- 142
- 106
Omg, Obama lied from Sept 12th! Allow me to hand out tissues. Obama lied about a complete pullout of troops from Iraq from last April, are you going to cry about that too? Plans change, this guy isn't a green rookie anymore and has been hit by the reality stick. The real question is, what kind of reality are many of you living in to think that NONE of your taxes will go up during any 4 year period? Pure naivete.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,819
- 1,126
- 126
Only a complete dumbshit would make that comment without reading the linked article. Obama clearly stated more than once that "no form of tax" would be increased not just federal income tax.
Well normally I am never as rude as to call someone a complete dumbshit, but if you insist the title is yours.
just for your benefit links to his speeches saying any tax are already in the thread.
regardless of that point, result is the same anyway. whats the difference if I slide around one tax increase and increase 30 others? net result is less money in the wallet. energy taxes coming where I get taxed for turning on my light switch. Im waiting for them to start taxing the air I breath next.
You're confused and it's quite obvious. The president's position throughout the campaign was that he would not raise income or payroll taxes on families making less than $250,000. Income or payroll. This is a total stretch and you know it.
Obama said: "I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Whatever. You guys know damn well what he was talking about. Feel free to play dumb semantics games though. FFS, cigarette taxes are not even a mandatory tax. No one NEEDS to smoke. It's completely optional. Don't want to pay? Don't smoke. Duh.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
He didn't raise taxes on "families making $250,000 a year", he raised taxes on SMOKERS. Yes, he said "any form of tax increase." He meant "any form of tax increase [on your income.] This is implied since the beginning of the sentence says "families making under 250k", thus he can only be referring to taxes that are targeted to affect that group, not any tax in the universe which people can opt in to. Keep reading to see why any other reading is illogical, and frankly, disingenuous.
Let's say Obama increased the luxury tax on automobiles costing over $100,000. Then, let's say a family making under $250,000 took out a third mortgage on their house and cobbled together all their savings and begged and borrowed money from friends. Using all that capital, they then went and bought a $150,000 car. Technically they are now paying a higher tax than they would have had they bought that car last year, since Obama raised the luxury tax. Has he broken his pledge not to raise that family's taxes? According to your logic, this constitutes a tax increase on families making 250k/yr.
So, would a general luxury tax increase on private jets or yachts that does not take into consideration anyone's income and which people making under $250,000 can theoretically purchase, constitute an increase in taxes on familes making $250,000 a year"? (this is rhetorical, but let's see you answer it anyway)
To be clear, I'm not arguing that a cigarette tax increase will not disproportionally affect the less affluent. We know that this is true. I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of claiming that this tax is an income tax or that Obama broke his pledge or was referring to anything other than taxes on income.
Daniel is correct that the addicted smoker won't care if it's a mandatory tax or not, but the smoker's regret is not the president's broken promise.
SP33Demon
Lifer
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,929
- 142
- 106
Well, like I said, create a thread for him "lying" about completely pulling out of Iraq. Create a thread and complain about the rise in cellphone taxes he created. Just because a politician says something during a campaign doesn't ever mean you should believe it, especially regarding taxes. All in all the tax he was really talking about (income) isn't going up so I don't give a rat's ass about him "lying" or making a verbal "gaffe" about little taxes like this. If he raised income tax I'm sure you would see a lot of people up in arms.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter