That $.15 tax per Christmas tree is only for those people making over $250,000.00..... right?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 10:57 PM
This may not be instigated by Obama but by the folks that want to bolster Christmas tree marketing with something similar to the soybean check off program.
But what do I know? I haven't any clue, just thinking.
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 11:06 PM
Christmas trees need more marketing? What for? Christmas in July? The good lots go empty every year! They are a perishable product after all, you can't keep them around for more than about 2 months....
-- Posted by John in Jackson on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 11:30 PM
If I were going to buy a Christmas Tree, which I'm not... I would insist on a $.15 discount. Obama promised there would be no new taxes on people making less than $250,000, and last time I checked, it is a pretty safe bet that unless there is a really big increase in social security, I won't go over the $250,000 promised minimum for any new taxes.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 11:42 PM
John in Jackson: Never heard of this one but consider the source where you obtained it from. This is what I mean people pay to much attention to these far right groups that over half what they put out there is not true, the republican party is going to have to get away from this bunch if they expect to win any elections.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 7:15 AM
Hmmm.
I thought sure that I saw a Hillary Clinton 2012 sign on the Thread Poster's avatar.
Has Hillary gone over to the far right? As I live and breathe, I never thought I would see the day.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 8:20 AM
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 8:58 AM
We used to put real trees in our house. However, the idea of having a highly flammable pine-oil reservoir stored in the home has lost its appeal to me.
The last time I had one, I tried all the tricks to keep it green and fresh for the duration of the holidays. Even so, when I took it out to burn it on Boxing Day, it took one match and less than a minute to turn it into a roaring inferno.
Methinks the marketing wizards will have a chore overcoming that limitation...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:02 AM
Some of the posters are right.
It's a tax organized and pushed through by the Christmas tree producers. They will use it to promote live trees for Christmas vs. fake ones probably made in China.
This is a similar program institued by a number of ag related business.
But instead of people actually debating this, some blog makes areference to Obama as if this is the first and only time its happened. They never mentioned that the politicians they support also support this and other programs.
Then the ignorant read it and are no longer actually able to debate this program, but instead alaign themselves with the ignorant and just go on an Obama bashing rhetoric, which is really kind of immaterial.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:09 AM
Joe,
I hear what you are saying, but butting the government into the situation is not part of the free market system.
Markets come and markets go, depending on the whims of the consumer. Gone are the days when we put our 4 buckles on and trudged out into the forest to bring just the right tree home. A market developed and now it is dying down. The fickle public would rather get a tree made in China.
Will the Hula Hoop people be the next in line to revive their market.
I believe if the Christmas Tree industry is to survive it should be because of the dedication of the industry itself. And I wish them the best of luck at that. I was a member of a Board of Directors years ago who tried promoting their industry by placing a fee on all of their products coming into the State of Missouri. It worked pretty well but obviously was voluntary, and you always had the slock who was going to skate by free and let his competitors in the market carry him. You cannot change some people, but I fear more and more government, no matter how well intentioned it starts out.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:10 AM
I have looked on the US Dept of Agriculture site and I cannot find where this occurred unless I missed it somewhere. With all of these far right internet blogs and web sites going out these days you can never find out the full truth on any single issue.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:19 AM
I believe if the Christmas Tree industry is to survive it should be because of the dedication of the industry itself. And I wish them the best of luck at that. I was a member of a Board of Directors years ago who tried promoting their industry by placing a fee on all of their products coming into the State of Missouri. It worked pretty well but obviously was voluntary, and you always had the slock who was going to skate by free and let his competitors in the market carry him. You cannot change some people, but I fear more and more government, no matter how well intentioned it starts out.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:10 AM
And that is a good point. The problem is, its a fault of all politicians. But people can't see throuth it an and want to blaim a particular politician or party, while doing the same and promoting it as their cause. To bad people are too blinded to know the difference. And I am not singling out either party becasue both are 100% guilty.
Like you said, well intention programs just add to bigger government. Its death by 1,000 pecks.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:23 AM
Lumber,
What I posted last night was tongue in cheek.
But if a department falls under your jurisdiction, then whatever comes out of there is ultimately your responsibility. Obama does not seem to see it that way and his AK's do not seem to either.
One of the best quotes I think for any chief executive, private or government, "The Buck Stops Here".
Anyone know who coined that?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:31 AM
Swamp,
Link at top of Joe's first post.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:33 AM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel wrote:
"One of the best quotes I think for any chief executive, private or government, "The Buck Stops Here"."
I thought that was an ad for hunting ammo...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:49 AM
"Then the ignorant read it and are no longer actually able to debate this program, but instead alaign themselves with the ignorant and just go on an Obama bashing rhetoric, which is really kind of immaterial."
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:09 AM
So who are the ignorant this time out of the eight people posting when you decided to share your superior truth from fact detecting talents? :)
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:51 AM
Rick,
A Gold Star for you today.
SH
Probably a good advertising gimmick for one of them, especially with the upcoming weekend.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:53 AM
Wheels, I had question concerning that gimmick if Cain used it but then had second thought about posting it. :)
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:00 AM
Regards,
Where the buck stops.... I will assure anybody, when I was in business and a customer had a complaint, legitimate or otherwise, they never asked to speak to the guy running the forklift in the warehouse or the receptionist. They wanted a piece of the guy who was the fault of everything bad that went on in the company... the OWNER.
And I think that is fair, if the receptionist is being rude to customers, it is the duty of the HNIC to see to it that it stops, if a serviceman is doing shoddy work, same deal.
The customer of a business is deserving of respect and at least a dollar's worth of value for a dollar spent. Same way with taxpayers in my opinion... and folks to put it simply, we as taxpayers are not getting it.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:06 AM
Old John,
I think I am going to give you a wide berth today... you obviously provoked Theorist yesterday and she took it out on me. ;-)
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:09 AM
Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:19 AM
Swamp,
The links I posted are not from a evil right wing blog. They are from a official US government website where you can look up any item logged in the Federal register.
Wheels,
I hope you didnt honestly think I believe this is a needed program. I guess I should have added some of the smiley things after my comment:)
Lumbr,
At what point can a President, no matter his party, be at fault for things implemented by people he helped place in a position of power.
I understand the fact that Obama surely did not wake up last week and decide Christmas tree growers needed govt assistance. I don't care if stupidity in government is taking place under George Washington himself. The President is the "figure head" of our government and will take most of the blame or the credit, depending on if things are going bad or good.
"If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!"
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:20 AM
Doesn't this run afoul of the Separation of Church and State? Has the ACLU weighed in on this yet?
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:25 AM
I was suprised while reading the Federal regs that they used the word "Christmas tree" instead of holiday tree or some other code name.
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:27 AM
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:09 AM
Wheels,
Maybe we should shake things up around here a little bit.
I would like to know what Lumbr and Dug's opions are on who St. Louis is named after.
Also I am curious on Theorist and Shapley's ideas on cutting the amounts of potatoes served in school:)
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:29 AM
Joe Dirt wrote:
"Also I am curious on Theorist and Shapley's ideas on cutting the amounts of potatoes served in school:)"
Potatoes? When did they stop serving Gruel? Small wonder are kids are getting soft these days... ;)
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:40 AM
"Doesn't this run afoul of the Separation of Church and State? Has the ACLU weighed in on this yet?"
I think that would be PITA that would be upset if there were afoul nesting in the tree. :)
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:45 AM
St. Louis is named after the great pharoah "Louis" who ruled Egypt from 250BC-100BC. St. was an Egyptian abbreviation for the type of underwear he used. Therefore "St. Louis".
-- Posted by not_sorry on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:53 AM
Dug wrote:
"St. was an Egyptian abbreviation for the type of underwear he used."
St. was a common abbreviation for 'silk thong', a type of undergarment common among Eqyptian women in ancient times. Pharoah Louis was an early cross-dresser.
Just a bit of little-known and completely fabricated History.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:58 AM
Lumber,
What I posted last night was tongue in cheek.
But if a department falls under your jurisdiction, then whatever comes out of there is ultimately your responsibility. Obama does not seem to see it that way and his AK's do not seem to either.
One of the best quotes I think for any chief executive, private or government, "The Buck Stops Here".
Anyone know who coined that?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:31 AM
That is a good point and one I agree with that. The problem is, many don't.
There should be discussion and a call to repeal this tax. and Obama should be held accountable.
But lets call it what it is. Another needless tax with government overstepping its bounds like so many other ag taxes and not a "christian tax" as the ignorant prefer to beleive. Why muddy the water of a legit issue with ignorance?
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:59 AM
Wheels,
Maybe we should shake things up around here a little bit.
I would like to know what Lumbr and Dug's opions are on who St. Louis is named after.
Also I am curious on Theorist and Shapley's ideas on cutting the amounts of potatoes served in school:)
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:29 AM
Peeked in before going out the door.
Joe thought that didn't sound like you. Yes, feel free to stir something up, I am tired of being blamed for it all of the time... but remember, if you stir Theorist up, she is your responsibility for a while cause I have something needing done. ;-)
Anyway I think right now, I am more interested in how Climax Springs was named. ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:01 AM
Anyway, back on topic, I'm shocked that our usual guardians of Church-State separation didn't jump on this right from the outset.
A "Christmas Tree Promotion Board" established by U.S. Law to promote the symbolism of a Christian holiday, and none of our resident guardians of the Constitution jumped up to oppose it! Shocking!
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:01 AM
So who are the ignorant this time out of the eight people posting when you decided to share your superior truth from fact detecting talents? :)
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:51 AM
No problem. Its the ones call it a "Christian Tax" and the people who beleive it.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:02 AM
And here we go with the "ignorant" again .
Are people "ignorant" who have different opinions then you ? Do you use this philosopy everywhere , in public , at the store , with your family , or do you just call posters "ignorant" in Speak Out .
As before , I ask you , who do you think you are to determine who is "ignorant" and who is not ? What gives you the right to be-little fellow posters calling them small names due to their opinion alone ?
-- Posted by Rick * * on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:16 AM
Because often thime small mindedness gets in the way of logic. They jump to conclusions without thought or reserach and form and opinion based on it. That makes one ignorant.
You seem to think that I call people ignroant because they disagree with me. That is obviously not the case.
People who have different opinions that me, and can rationalize it, simply have different opinon. Those who can't and form factless or just plain wrong claims are ignorant.
For instance, I disagree with this tax. I don't think this should be the role of the government. If you disagree with me because you think should be the role of government to help local farmers vs. Chinese fake Christmas Tree makers, then we simply disagree. Its not a question of ignorance.
However, If you think Ag taxes are anti-christiang becasue Obama passed them, or not realize that every party support these kind of taxes, well then that makes one ignornat.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:08 AM
lumbrgfktr wrote:
"No problem. Its the ones call it a "Christian Tax" and the people who beleive it."
I didn't call it that, however, I have a hard time imagining the promotion board being successful at marketing Christmas Trees to non-Christians. Nor are non-Christians likely to be buying or using Christmas trees for things other than a recognition of the Christian holiday.
Athiests and non-Christians may set up Christmas displays in their stores to lure Christian customers inside, but they are still targeted at Christians.
I don't see the use of the term 'Christian Tax' any more inappropriate than the term 'Death Tax' applied to inheritance taxes (they are applied after death, even though it is not death, itself, that is being taxed), nor the term "Drury Tax" applied to the Hotel and Restaurant Tax in Cape Girardeau, the Drury's being the owners of most of the hotels and restaurants, with some dining establishments (Convenience Stores that have dining areas, which were not typically recognized as a Drury venture) being initially exempted from the tax. You may also remember the "Al Gore Tax", which was the nickname given to the 'Universal Connectivity Charge' added to phone bills to expand internet coverage.
Such nicknames are commonplace, and usually have some foundation in truth.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:13 AM
Lumbr,
At what point can a President, no matter his party, be at fault for things implemented by people he helped place in a position of power.
I understand the fact that Obama surely did not wake up last week and decide Christmas tree growers needed govt assistance. I don't care if stupidity in government is taking place under George Washington himself. The President is the "figure head" of our government and will take most of the blame or the credit, depending on if things are going bad or good.
"If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!"
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:20 AM
And that is the point. Its an institutional problem, not just an "Obama" problem. By laying the blame solely on obama, it makes it look like an isolated incident, which unfortunatly its not.
And don't get me wrong, I have no problem with Obama taking heat on this, as long as he is criticized for the right reason (allowing a needless tax - not taxing religion). I think he should be criticized for not removing other taxes.
How about this as a compromize...Remove 2 other taxes before implimenting this one.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:14 AM
lumbrgfktr wrote:
"...well then that makes one ignornat."
One of the reasons I refrain from name-calling is because of my penchant for making typos of this nature. They can really weaken your case...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:15 AM
I didn't call it that, however, I have a hard time imagining the promotion board being successful at marketing Christmas Trees to non-Christians. Nor are non-Christians likely to be buying or using Christmas trees for things other than a recognition of the Christian holiday.
Athiests and non-Christians may set up Christmas displays in their stores to lure Christian customers inside, but they are still targeted at Christians.
I don't see the use of the term 'Christian Tax' any more inappropriate than the term 'Death Tax' applied to inheritance taxes (they are applied after death, even though it is not death, itself, that is being taxed), nor the term "Drury Tax" applied to the Hotel and Restaurant Tax in Cape Girardeau, the Drury's being the owners of most of the hotels and restaurants, with some dining establishments (Convenience Stores that have dining areas, which were not typically recognized as a Drury venture) being initially exempted from the tax. You may also remember the "Al Gore Tax", which was the nickname given to the 'Universal Connectivity Charge' added to phone bills to expand internet coverage.
Such nicknames are commonplace, and usually have some foundation in truth.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:13 AM
Then you are not one of the people I am referring too.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:18 AM
Lumbr,
As far as I have read the original poster nor anybody else accused anyone of creating this tax out of religious prejudice. The OP used the title "Christian Tax." Maybe he did it for comedic effect, maybe he is a radical christian terrorist hell-bent on exposing Obama as being the anti-Christ, I do not know. Point is people were discussing the issue based on the fact they felt it was a dumb and unnecessary tax until you harped on the religious aspect and the "Obama bashing"
So with all due respect to the original poster, I would like to make a motion to change the title of the thread to "Another needless tax with government overstepping its bounds tax"
Also I officialy recant any statement I may have made putting blame on Obama and shift blame to the "Deputy undersecretary of the promotions division of the Department of Agriculture", or whomever actually put pen to paper and wrote this regulation. I would suggest that others assign their blame here as well.
Thank you
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:46 AM
One exempt, seven to go.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:53 AM
-- Posted by Theorist on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:00 PM
Yeah, I knew that.
Like I said, that's why I don't call people 'ignorant' or harp on their typos, having such a penchant for making my own.
BTW, there should be a space between "Our" and "Kids", and a comma after "That"... but you already knew that, right?
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM
:)
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM
Having learned to spell phonetically, my mind is hardwired to check the spelling of the word, sometimes without regard to the context. In that regard it works not unlike a computer spell-checker. Nor does it always keep up with my fingers, I having been cursed with having to take typing in school and, thus, knowing how to type faster than my composition skills permit me to compose my thoughts.
Thus, I sometimes find a sentence typed before I've decided how to word it and, thus, I have to go back and rewrite portions of it, sometimes missing part of the context.
However, in the case of using 'are' instead of 'our', it was simply a case of overlooking the phonetic similarity and permitting the wrong word to be used by myself. Inexcusable.
I try to watch those homophones, because they often trip people up, myself included. I have a great fear of using 'their' instead of 'they're' and 'your' instead of 'you're'.
Does that make me a homophonaphobic?
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:30 PM
And, of course, I also realize that 'our' and 'are' are not exactly homophobes. 'Our' is more properly pronouned like 'hour', as a two-syllable (or a syllable-and-a-half) word.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:32 PM
"Markets come and markets go, depending on the whims of the consumer"-Wheels
Unless of course you are a big bank. Mortgage company or the automotive industry. The you just get a bail out loan regardless of the product you are producing.
-- Posted by Airborne 95B on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:42 PM
I learn something every day as I figured a homophone was what gay people used to make calls.
Strange that I can read misspelled posts and never notice the mistakes, but double negatives ain't no problem for me to spot.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:45 PM
Some of the easiest post to read on this forum for me are when Rose Pedal checks in. Her writing about Cletus and the family is good stuff.
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:52 PM
Spaniard wrote:
"I am also uneasy with Congress giving the power to levy taxes to an administrative agency."
Taxation without representation, eh? Yes, a valid complaint. I seem to recall it being used agains the 'Al Gore Tax' back when it was initiated. I do not recall if that ever went to court. The last time I looked at the itemized listing on my phone bill, it was still there.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 1:32 PM
Lumbr,
As far as I have read the original poster nor anybody else accused anyone of creating this tax out of religious prejudice. The OP used the title "Christian Tax." Maybe he did it for comedic effect, maybe he is a radical christian terrorist hell-bent on exposing Obama as being the anti-Christ, I do not know. Point is people were discussing the issue based on the fact they felt it was a dumb and unnecessary tax until you harped on the religious aspect and the "Obama bashing"
So with all due respect to the original poster, I would like to make a motion to change the title of the thread to "Another needless tax with government overstepping its bounds tax"
Also I officialy recant any statement I may have made putting blame on Obama and shift blame to the "Deputy undersecretary of the promotions division of the Department of Agriculture", or whomever actually put pen to paper and wrote this regulation. I would suggest that others assign their blame here as well.
Thank you
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 11:46 AM
Your missing my poitn.
The title of the thread is "Christian Tax". I was the first pointing out the ignorance of this, as well as crediting other posters on their correct assesment. There are also blogs out there calling it a Christian Tax.
I also called into question the validity of the "blog" as I am always trying to teach people on these boards that blogs are not at all factual, nor is it journalism. This one provided little substance and no context. Unfortutnaly, there are those who see this as news and do not research it any futher.
I also mentioned it was a dumb tax. I also criticize obama for implementing it.
So I am:
Critical of the Tax and Obaman Administration
Critical of the title of the thread
Critical of the blog
And I don't think Obama should take some heat as he is the one in power. But I also think that this Blogger should also point out similar AG taxes that need to be repealed, instead of isolating just the one.
What people are missing is that this is not just an Obama issue, but rather a statement about what is happing in Washington.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 2:48 PM
You seem to think that I call people ignorant because they disagree with me. That is obviously this not the case.
Your first statement "They jump to conclusions without thought or reserach and form and opinion based on it. That makes one ignorant.
Does not this second statement contradict your first statement ?
Again , who do you think you are to determine who is ignorant and who is not ? Claiming other posters as ignorant because they do not share your logic or have their own opinion is ignorance in of itself .
-- Posted by Rick * * on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 12:21 PM
No. Ignorance is simply lacking information. Would 'uninformed' work better?
And I have no problems admitting there are many times I am ignorant. Which is why choose to read information that not only supports, but challanges my opinons. Sometimes I change those opinions.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 2:53 PM
Two down, six to go.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:05 PM
"I didn't call it that, however, I have a hard time imagining the promotion board being successful at marketing Christmas Trees to non-Christians. Nor are non-Christians likely to be buying or using Christmas trees for things other than a recognition of the Christian holiday."
With Government help all Muslims and Jewish people will buying Christmas trees for St. Patricks. I have confidence in their abilities.
SH,
You only need two rules when dealing with Theorist.
Rule #1 Theorist is always right.
Rule #2 When Theorist is wrong... refer to Rule #1
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:07 PM
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:19 PM
Lumbrg,
I get your point. I agree that some people overlook the real issues and harp on the drummed up tabloid type stuff. When many were up in arms over Obama being a closet muslim or his place of birth I wondered why they werent up in arms over his ideas and political policies instead.
I always wondered why people were so concerned in labeling Bush II a idiot, cowboy, or nazi when there were real issues they could attack him on.
There have been several times on here that very few get your point. Either you are by far the smartest man in the room, or you are not getting your point across clearly.
If your intent was to point out ignorance in these other blogs that could be correct. Apparently more than one poster on this forum took it as you calling out people in this thread.
Once again, I didnt see any posters in this thread speaking along those lines of the blogs you speak of. I saw people discussing the stupidity of such regulations our government dumps on us. Maybe there is something wrong with my computer and it blocked the post of the "ignorant" people making these claims.
Anyhow, in the end this is just one more stupid regulation in a long line of government stupidity that seems to have no limits.
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:33 PM
Shapley,
Someone may want to a EMT to check on the writer in the link you provided. He seems to have typed the same sentence over and over. I fear he may be suffering a stroke or seizure.
Direct copy and paste from link...
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees--the Christmas Tree Tax--to support a new Federal program to improve the image and
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees -- the Christmas Tree Tax -- to support a new Federal program to improve the image and
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees -- the Christmas Tree Tax -- to support a new Federal program to improve the image and
The morning news on the boob tube reports that the federal government has imposed a new federal tax on Christmas trees. They say the purpose of the tax is so that the federal bureaucracy can use the money to better promote the Christmas tree tradition.
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees -- the Christmas Tree Tax -- to support a new Federal program to improve the image and
-- Posted by Joe Dirte on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:39 PM
Joe,
Sorry. The first link I had led me to Fox News, and I know what happens when you post a Fox News link here, so I found an alternate site. It seemed to work when I first opened it, but I did not check over the text to note that it is repetitive, and does not mention the 'sidelining' of the tax.
Yes, it looks as if he suffered a stroke while typing it...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 3:56 PM
Here's a link from the Washington Post, though methinks it is lacking in facts:
"Despite the provocative headlines and the outrage from some in the conservative blogosphere, it was not the Obama administration that initiated or imposed the newly announced 15-cent tax on fresh-cut Christmas trees; rather it was concocted by the Christmas tree industry itself.
"(Update: 2:57 p.m: White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told Fox News Wednesday afternoon that the implementation of the program was being put on hold in light of the controversy.)
"Rather than this being a case of the government trying to suppress religion, it is actually an unusual example of the government working with private industry to promote what many see as a religious symbol."
I say they are lacking in facts because they say, on the one hand, that it was not the Obama Administration that imposed the tax but that it was the industry itself that 'concocted' the tax.
Now, the industry may have 'concocted it', but they could not impose it if it is a 'tax'. They could, as an organisation, require organisation members to attach a 'fee' to the sales, which is what they did before. The problem, as they note, is that not enough members were imposing the voluntary fee. Thus, they asked the administration to make it mandatory, i.e., a tax.
It doesn't matter who 'concocted' the tax, only the government can implement it, and that is who did so. Since this did not go through the legislative process, the finger of blame is pointed at the administration, and its head, Mr. Obama.
Now, given that Mr. Obama is being credited with 'sidelining' it, methinks it is only fair to also give him credit for implementing it.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 4:07 PM
You guys are griping about this so what about the honky tax?
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 4:08 PM
-- Posted by fxpwt on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 6:42 PM
Well it has taken a while, but Wheels is finally catching on! It doesn't hurt to smile and apologize either, laughing!
-- Posted by Theorist on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 6:44 PM
Theorist,
I hope you are smart enough to have taken that post in the spirit it was intended.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 6:59 PM
It didn't take long to shut Obama down. They decided NOT to do it after all.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:00 PM
Mr Lumbrg,
The reason I posted the blog site was that it came up quickly on my old computer; not a lot of video and pop-up ads like on the Alphabet MSM websites.
A Cigarette doesn't pay a tax a smoker does, a beer doesn't pay an alcohol tax an imbiber of the beer does, a restaurant does not pay a restaurant tax, the diner does, gasoline doesn't pay a tax, the consumer of the gas does. No tax is levied upon an item, the tax is levied upon the person paying for the item.
Since pretty much the ONLY people that really celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ are Christians, I called it a Christian Tax! They didn't call it a tax on Xmas trees or Holiday Trees like the secular world purchases, did they? Sorry if I am so ignernt that my logic travels at the speed of light over your head.
But never mind, since several thousand other people thought a gov't program promoting any religion other than atheism was kind on bizarre-THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION White House has sidelined it.....
Not to mention headlines are for attracting attention!!!!!! It worked, 77 posts in less than 24 hrs! Just as I had hoped. Sorry if this also was above your superior intellect.
But you should know, with your Spock-like intellect, not to rile or argue with the ignernt, we'll drag ya down to our level and beat chya with 'sperience!
-- Posted by John in Jackson on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:57 PM
John,
You should have been around a couple of weeks ago for the Great Potato War. Quite a few posters, including me, can you imagine that,☻ ☻ ☻ ☻ was painted with the ingernt brush.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:09 PM
Ike
Tax on tanning bed use. Obama and the Democrats are racist.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 11:05 AM
Ike
Tax on tanning bed use. Obama and the Democrats are racist.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 11:05 AM
Herman Cain looks to me like he has been using a tanning bed. ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 11:24 AM
I believe Lumbrg use of ignorance leans toward the meaning of stupid .
Theorist , you know I shine a dim bulb , but I do not appreciate someone determining I am ignorant based on their opinion , and therefore trying to cast theirself as a better person than me .
I was born this way , what is Lumbrg reason ?
-- Posted by Rick * * on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 8:33 PM
Not at all.
The fact that people are at least seeking out blogs shows they are not stupid and are capable of reading and comprehending.
And if you notice, when I am using the word its almost always in comments that are part of a linked blog.
Not at all do I try and cast myself better than others. And if that is what you get out of my comments, I appologize because that is not my point.
Many of these blogs take and element of truth and then fire up the fluff that is usually not related to the original point of the blog.
So the USDA limits potatoes. Lets focus on the power of the USDA and limit that power. Don't pass a law about potatoes.
A christmas tree tax is implemented. Criticize Obama AND explain how this is really just a part of government overstepping its athority.
Fact is, in a couple of weeks nobody will care about these issues. But they are still issues.
-- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Fri, Nov 11, 2011, at 3:51 PM
I believe these two issues, potatoes and chrismas trees will go away because government was made aware of their stupid rules by us ignorant citizens and they backed off.
They will just learn by their mistakes and get a little slicker and quieter in the next abusive rule they try to pass.
So you do not need to ask what I mean about abusive... I am referring to the abuse of our freedom to make our own choices on what to support and what to eat. If America wants artificial trees, it is the duty of the Christmas Tree Industry to convince them they want real trees if there is to be a continuance of the Christmas Tree business, not the damned government
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Nov 11, 2011, at 5:25 PM
Lumbr, I've noticed that. A lot of the things we discuss on these threads kind of run the course. Then I see some low key article about just that a few months later. What we opposed and turned out not a threat to our rights and freedoms is still perculating on the back burner.
Roll back through the threads a good ways and recall the topics. I think you will see what I mean.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 12:07 AM
OJ-are you saying that it may be a pattern? Float an idea and get the blogoshere riled up. Then say, oops, maybe we shouldn't while all the time it's just tabled for a while? Then sneak it in as an amendment to another bill? Surely not. I agree and would put money on having (at least) a 15 cent tax on Christmas trees a year from now. Potatoes will probably cost more too at least partly due to some new regulation.
-- Posted by Knoblickian on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 6:54 AM
Knob, Yep. I think we will see that more in the future.
One idea in particular is farmers needing a CDL and DOT number on a truck or tracctor that hauls produce across the road to the farm or down the road to the local grain buyer.
Surely as proposed it won't fly, but watch and see if they don't sneak it in via rules and regulation instead of law.
I bet a little digging could provide examples of that.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 8:46 AM
Reading when I was half asleep last night, I read where Lumber, on some thread, thinks that the younger generation is more social program minded and they just need to channel their energies into the proper places. Looks to me like Washington DC would have been the best place to start.
Most of our problems started with an awareness of social problems as the awarees viewed them. Better worded I think the problems started when the awarees started sticking their noses into pther peoples business. In way too many cases, they made the assumption that people were poor because they could not help themselves and they must step in and manage the poor's lives. In doing so they created s whole new class of poor because it was easier to be poor than to try and improve yourself. Some people want to be poor... let them alone unless they ask for ways that they can improve themselves. Then help them do that, but on their own with no unnecessary handouts.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 10:48 AM
I dislike the idea of the government collecting the dues of organizations for them. That includes labour unions.
It seems to me that, if the problem is that U.S. grown live Christmas Trees are threatened by foreign imports, it would make more sense to impose an import duty of, say, 50 cents per imported fake tree and use that for the purpose, rather than impose a tax on the U.S. product.
It would not be without precedent, and would make more sense given the nature of the perceived problem.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 2:22 PM
I dislike the idea of the government collecting the dues of organizations for them. That includes labor unions.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 2:22 PM
That was the main problem the union had with Wisconsin.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 6:53 PM
HEY!
If you folks want to discuss unions & dues collections, start your own thread! Don't hijack my dead Christmas Tree tax discussion!
-- Posted by John in Jackson on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 10:56 PM
Menu
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees......
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/08/obama-couldnt-wait-his-new-christmas-tree-ta...
Replies (74)