You're still paying for spanish-american war if you have telephone

[Chairboy]

Interesting tidbit from party headquarters:

http://www.lp.org/article_154.shtml

Text as follows:

Your contribution to the Spanish-American War

A hundred and seven years ago, in 1898, the federal government began levying a temporary 3 percent excise tax on telephones, ostensibly to fund the Spanish-American War.

Flash forward to 2005 -- and every American with a telephone is still paying this "temporary" tax. The war was over after just a few months, but the tax has been in effect for over a century. On top of that, the tax does not go for any specific purpose. Rather, the funds are simply added to the general fund.

Congress attempted to repeal the tax in 2000. Both the House and the Senate passed legislation to eliminate the tax -- it was a 420-2 vote in the House -- but then-President Bill Clinton vetoed the bill when it reached his desk.

Once again, the House has been presented with a bill -- H.R. 1898 -- that would repeal the tax on telephone and other communications services. The bill was introduced in late April by Rep. Gary G. Miller of California, and has been cosponsored by 39 other congressmen. It currently sits in the House Committee on Ways and Means.

This tax should have been repealed more than a century ago, but some members of Congress still support the tax -- and some even want to expand it. Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation issued an opinion in January, saying that the tax could be expanded to apply to wireless Internet and data connections.

Note: I'm a member of the Libertarian party, and the article ends with a pitch to join up.  I'm not trying to prosel-^H^H^Hprosylet-^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hproslyt-^H^H^H^H convert you guys, but I think it's an interesting bit of information.

[Hangtime]

Support the NSA!

Pay yer damn phone bill!

[Sandman]

Hmmm... Interesting point, I'll have to bring it up in class. This week, we're studying the Spanish-American War.

The prof is one of the most leftist people I've ever met. Part of our class credit is participation. I'll score points.

Woot!

[JB73]

i'd like to hear his explnation of why clinton vetoed the bill then ; )

[Toad]

Government, from either side of the aisle, has never really seen a tax it wanted to get rid of if there was the least chance of keeping it.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by JB73
i'd like to hear his explnation of why clinton vetoed the bill then ; )

That's an easy one... Democrats like taxes.

[rpm]

Or there could have been something else attached to the bill that Clinton didn't like. Congress likes to slip you the big 'ol pork weenie that way.

[Toad]

Nah, just cut to the chase.

Pretty much every entity of the Federal Government views every single revenue stream from any source whatsoever as theirs to keep in perpetuity.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Further proof to never accept a tax or a tax hike that you don't want to live with for generations to come.

They tried a neat one here in Tennessee a few years back. They said "we'll reduce the state sales tax, cap the local option, and take the sales tax off of necessities, if you'll support an income tax". In small print, they said "we'll of course have to keep all the taxes going for a while, until the income tax generates enough revenue to allow us to repeal or lower the other taxes".

They tried this for 3 years, shutting down the state twice, my wife went home for a week twice, before the backlash finally cost dozens of the tax and spend dirtbags their jobs.

We eventually ended up with a lottery, to fund education, after all, the taxes were for the CHILDREN, think of the CHILDREN. The lottery proceeds are only available for college, not a dime is spent on K-12.

[eagl]

You mean me too Toad?  After all I've done in the last 3 months trying to cut about 3 mil out of our flying budget, somehow I think I deserve all your money?

There's gratitude for ya.



j/k

[JB73]

see that's what i don't get.

sorry not to get all political here, but yes sandman you are correct. in a general sence democrats like more taxes, to pay for all sorts of causes. more money out of my pocket for the "homosexual minority mimes with disabilities society" or whatever.

yet they claim they are for "the little man" or whatever.

why promote all sorts of extraneous taxes to take more money out of my pocket (the under $25,000 / year income group) to pay for these groups and programs i never get a use from? how many white christian male programs are there, and show me a government tax break for someone like myself.


for someone to say to me i have to give my money for whatever this or that a democrat politician sets up, i get very angry.


oh well thats just my opinion.

[Chairboy]

I'm not sure your generalization is entirely correct.  The Republicans have actually spent more federal money in the last 5 years then the Democrats in the same time period, even adjusted for inflation and subtracting war expenses.  The 'Tax and spend!  Tax and spend!' stereotype for Democrats was killed in the early 1980s with the Reagan administration.  Likewise, the Republican stereotype of 'Up with business, down with minorities' is equally inaccurate these last few decades.

Both parties are increasingly mirrors of each other, and have straddled the middleground.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Toad
Nah, just cut to the chase.

Pretty much every entity of the Federal Government views every single revenue stream from any source whatsoever as theirs to keep in perpetuity.

Amen.

But not just the Federal Government.

Here, in 1970, they took out bonds to pay for two high schools. A local wheel tax was enacted to pay off the bonds, it was one of the highest in the state. It was to be retired in ten years, when the bonds were paid off. Twelve years later, they had not only increased the wheel tax, but were also charging students to park in the school parking lots. None of the principle had ever been paid on the bonds, they paid the interest only. After complaints, they removed the message on the bottom of the wheel tax sticker:

"To retire the ten year construction bonds for the 1970 high school construction"



We still pay that wheel tax, 35 years later, and the bonds have never been retired. But at least the interest is paid up.

We were recently told we needed to pay $25M for more new schools. The reason is we're one of the fastest growing counties in the country, but revenue from taxes paid by those moving in will not cover their needs for schools, or utilities and such.

[StarOfAfrica2]

That may or may not be true 73, but take a look at our deficit under Clinton, then look at it before Clinton, and look at it after Clinton.  



You do the math, yer a smart boy.

I dont like taxes anymore than anyone else, and I hate stupid programs that waste our money.  But I dont mind so much paying the taxes if we get something to show for it.

[Toad]

Originally posted by eagl
You mean me too Toad?  After all I've done in the last 3 months trying to cut about 3 mil out of our flying budget,  

Lemme guess.. yer boss said "Eagl, we gotta cut $3 mil out of the flying budget. I think this is a great idea! We need to fly less! Get on it!"

And you said...

"Yes sir! I was thinking just the other day there's WAY too much flying going on around here and people just don't enjoy it. I was hoping there'd be a way to cut funding."

Is that how it went?



I feel for ya buddy.... went through that when I was in. Fortunately, my little unit had a pretty protected budget. The other guys in the Wing got their wings clipped pretty short though.

Good luck with it... I hate when that happens.


Now, when we're talking about $150 mil for the new extension of the Robert Byrd "Klansmen Memorial Highway" in West Va... that's different.