The only things certain in life are death and...
Would love to hear your thoughts on this. We discussed this briefly in class last week.
posted by Mr. Carlisle at 10:42 PM
Saturday, February 28, 2009
About Me
- Name: Mr. Carlisle
- Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
I'm a native South Carolinian and I attained my undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of South Carolina. I taught fourth grade for two years in the Mississippi Delta and two years at an alternative high school in Western North Carolina. I have been at Tigard High School since the fall of 2003, where I teach U.S. History and Psychology.
Previous Posts
- Conservative Rapper
- Immigration websites
- Feb. 27
- Adv. US History
- Would you buy this future car?
- Stand or sit?
- Feb. 25
- Cabrini Green Housing Projects
- Ghetto Life 101
- Tenement Museum
10 Comments:
The taxes seem strange, but it's either tax the currently untaxed (which would be those "strange" items) or increase taxes on the currently taxed. Spending cuts should of course come with the taxes, but spending cuts are more of a mid to long term solution while taxes are more short term, which is really what the states need now.
Personally, I'd rather the taxes be spread out over as many things as possible rather than concentrated on a few things.
The taxes on pornography, while perhaps unorthodox, are a good way to generate revenue. Whether the country wants to admit it or not, the pornography industry is extremely large. It also has mostly low taxes on it, a general increase on the industry (though perhaps not to 18.5%) would aid any state in its cash woes.
California's attempt to legalize and tax marijuana, while interesting (and personally, I'm for legalization, never been a fan of the War on Drugs in general for fairly generic Libertarian reasons, one of the few issues where I align with them), will probably find issues in federal courts. Marijuana being a Schedule I drug, it is outlawed by the (federal) Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Until the federal government amends that law, California (and all states) will find it very difficult to legalize any drug.
11:15 PM
hmm, while it is pretty strange that a tax on extremely widespread pornography industry is a bit strange it's no stranger than them asking for a 5 billion dollar government bailout
http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2009/01/08/flynt_porn_bailout.html
As for the legalization of marijuana, Casey is right that nothing would really go through without amendments on a federal level. State legal despenceries in california are already being randomly raided and shutdown by federal agents.
One thing I didn't get "John Lovell, [...] said the plan would create a large, illicit — and thus untaxed — black market." The illicit untaxed market already excists nationally. If it was federally legalized that would save $17 billion on funds from the "war" on drugs and generate an additional 7 billion in tax revenue annually.
Our country has gotten pretty desprate and it'll only get worse in the next few years so I wouldn't be surprised if that accellerates change in spreading out taxes into new things.
12:31 AM
Got the url wrong for that story
http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2009/01/08/flynt_porn_bailout.html
12:32 AM
While it is a good idea, I can't get over how weird it is. A "Porn Tax" would be a great money-maker, but it just feels a little desperate to me. However, as others have said, it is a pretty consistent and successful industry. The couple that claimed their marriage "would fall apart" if there was a Porn Tax, I suppose, may eventually have to deal with it.
And as for marijuana, I really don't see it becoming legal at the nation-wide level during my lifetime. Like somebody else said, the federal government still isn't to keen on legalizing it, and without their approval--state laws legalizing it would be removed by the federal government.
10:33 AM
Alex,
No matter how many things are "legalized", there will always be a black market as a way to get around paying taxes.
How do you guys feel about a tax on fast food as way to subsidize the cost of healthy food? Discuss.
10:52 AM
Personally I wouldn't mind, though it would depend on the actual tax. Something like 5% would seem reasonable to me.
But I don't really think it would do much to solve America's eating problems. Yes, McDonald's is cheaper than Safeway, but in many places (especially in low-income inner city areas like LA), the nearest tomato may be 5 miles away, while the nearest burger is 3 blocks.
A tax would help make healthy food (and that's another thing, you'd have to define "healthy") cheaper, but it would also put more of squeeze on people that just have no easy way of getting to healthy food.
We need to build-up our "health infrastructure" (healthy food stores) in inner city areas before we tax their (as of right now) only easily accessed source of food.
1:15 PM
hey this doesn't have to do with this but my mom just turned on the Rush Limbaugh speech on Fox (she is a fan) but I was just wondering your thoughts on it Carlisle?
6:21 PM
Erika,
He's a great radio personality. My commitment to neutrality will not allow me to say anymore.
6:48 PM
well i know your not going to tell me your complete view but I was just hoping you'd tell me if he even made any good points?
7:03 PM
I think the taxing on porn and marijuana is extreme, but extreme times like these calls for extreme measures. I'm not completely for legalizing marijuana, but it would provide much needed revenue for the state if they put a tax on it, so its not a horrible idea. Ideas like these two are going to have to be put into action otherwise our deficit will keep increasing.
7:36 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home