Each new day seems to reveal yet another way in which my dear home state is screwing me. A tax enacted on booze to offer relief to the victims of the 1936 Johnstown flood is still on the books and feeding the state coffers. The original 10% tax, now up to 18% is the subject of a possible 3% reduction. Wow. How fucking generous of them. :dubious:
How dare you. Who are you to say that those victims of the flood aren’t still suffering? That they don’t need our support?
As an example, I give you Luther P. McFakename. Sometimes, when he’s alone at night, he swears that his house is a little damp.
I’m sorry. I’m just too choked up to discuss this anymore.
Very funny, Har.
It raised $200 million last year. Do you have that amount in specific spending cuts that you can propose to make up for the revenue loss?
We had a good one in New South Wales, Australia. In 1989 the State government introduced the 3X3 Levy a 3c per litre levy on fuel for the next 3 years. They even put up signs around the highways telling us how mush good it would achieve in the next three years. In 2000 when the 3 year levy ceased the signs seemed pretty silly.
If you read the whole story, you’d see that the cough great thing about the tax is that it goes into the general fund, neatly obviating the need to actually budget for its use. If specific (and current) uses aren’t a prerequisite for taking the money in the first place, why should specific cuts be a prerequisite for those proposing abolishment? You’d think the onus would be on those doing the taxing to justify what it’s for.
<insert crap “dry state” joke here>
I say pick a card, any card.
It is proverbial in Eastern Europe: There is nothing so permanent as a temporary measure.
It rolls of the tongue rather better in Russian, but don’t tell me I’m the only one who’s heard the saying?
I’ve heard it.
This is exactly why people should be more in touch with their state and local governments…to provide accountability. Sunset provisions are all well and good but the weasels will go around them if people don’t pay attention.
Well, considering that the 2005-06 Pennsylvania State budget is 24.3 billion, I’m guessing that Pennsylvania could survive an across-the-board cut of 0.823%, if you didn’t want to get specific in your cuts.
I love it, I haven’t heard it in years. I used to work with a programmer from Russia who quoted it during enough lunchtimes that I used it for a few years and was pleasantly surprised to come across it in a Tom Clancy novel.
Most tolls in NJ & NY were temporary to pay for the “Bridge”, “Tunnel” or “Road”.
Right, the Port Authority was formed in the Twenties for the purpose of building a rail tunnel between Staten Island and Brooklyn. Eight decades later, they haven’t even started.
There are many roads in the US that were built with toll booths to pay for the construction bonds. Many of those roads were paid off long ago, but are the tollbooths gone? (John Belushi voice) But no-o-o-o! I-95 in Connecticut is the only one I know of.
You can add the Boulder Turnpike between Boulder and Denver, but the booths on that were pulled over 30 years ago. I doubt they’d do it again today.
[anecdote, can’t be arsed to check my facts]Income tax was instituted over here to fund the Napoleonic War effort. It’s still here two centuries later [/acbatcmf]
Same same with our income tax. It was for funding the War to End All Wars.
Governments always think they need more money. And, given a chance, they’ll take 120% of everything.
Well, duh! There’s been wars after that one. So we gotta keep feeding the military-industrial complex until, by gum, we actually have a War to End All Wars that sticks!!
You know, I’m not sure what’s scarier. The implication that income tax is forever, or that maybe we actually could have a War that Ends All Wars. :: shudder ::
Almost all of Kentucky’s parkways have had their tolls removed. The Natcher Parkway and the Audubon Parkway are the only two toll roads remaining in Kentucky.
Not really, since the modern income tax was instituted in 1913. Also the year the 1040 form was introduced. The revenue acts of 1916, 1917, and 1918 just increased the rates. Although, these were drastically reduced back down once the war was over.
IIRC, income tax withholding of wages started during WW II, and would not have likely been accepted by the population otherwise.