Subject to Change

I thought I might play nice for a while, until I got back on my blogging feet. Then, I went to Irishfest.

We look for street parking whenever we go to the festival grounds. Yesterday was no different, except that we noticed some new signs: Temporary – No parking 9pm-12am, Fri-Sat. My wife asked what’s with the signs and I sarcastically responded, “revenue generators,” speculating that the parking checkers would be out at precisely 9pm.

Even though I was joking a little I couldn’t have been more right. When we walked past the line of cars at 10pm there was a parking ticket on every one. I saw a woman entering her car and finding the ticket neatly placed under her wiper blade.

Me: Are you surprised by that?

Her: Yes.

Me: They put up temporary signs back there. We almost fell for it, too.

She walked back to the sign post, gave a look of disgust, and returned to her car. No doubt, this process repeated itself hundreds of times throughout the night.

But, this sort of thing happens all the time, you say. What’s the big deal? Well, it occurred to me that this was an attempt by the city government to generate revenue: Tom Barrett’s city government. The man who would be governor finds this an acceptable tactic to make up a few dollars in the city budget. What do you suppose he would invent or allow as governor? And, the hypocrisy given that he’s been operating his campaign headquarters without a permit.

Tom Barrett, I challange you to forgive the parking tickets issued in the Third Ward this weekend. Admit that this was a shameless money grab and apologize for your city government.

REP. ED MARKEY (D), ENERGY SUBCOMMITTEE CHMN.: This bill has the ambition of the moon landing. The moral imperative of the Civil Rights Act and the scope of the Clean Air Act all wrapped up in one.

You forgot to mention that it also includes the insanity of Prohibition.

I’ve changed my mind. I now wholeheartedly believe that Wisconsin needs commuter rail, and lots of it.

When the state starts to feel the impact of all the taxes, fees, and regulation the democrats are putting into the budget there’s going to be a revolt.

We’re going to need a rail to ride our politicians out of town on. It would be so delicious if that same rail was the one they demanded we build.

So, there’s this industry that’s constantly jacking up prices while providing essentially the same level of service. In fact, there are many times when the quality of the product decreases dramatically and they do absolutely nothing to compensate for it. When I discovered that the last two “Matrix” movies earned over a billion dollars the answer immediately became clear.

We need to impose a windfall profit tax on Hollywood. What right do they have to earn excessive amounts of money while the rest of us are suffering? All of that cash goes straight to some corporate fat cat’s pocket book. That money could be feeding the poor or housing stray cats and instead it goes to buy some actor or director another boat. A billion dollars would go a long way toward plugging our state’s budget hole!

Why can two movies of exactly the same duration can earn vastly different profits, too? That’s the same amount of entertainment. They ought to be paid by the hour to make it fair.

——

P.S. The other plus side is that if liberals like the ones in Hollywood had to face a windfall profit tax head on they might suddenly sing a different tune.

Cross posted at the BBA.

I’m planning to take the family with me on my next business trip. In order to avoid an annoying episode with some bureaucrat at the airport, we decided to get my son his very first government ID. After going through this process with a ten month-old child I know without a doubt that all arguments against voter ID are totally bogus. They’ll give a state ID to anyone, provided they’re a citizen and have some proof. The hardest parts of the whole process are being prepared and standing in line.

All that we needed to apply for a state ID was his birth certificate and Social Security number. So, we started our day at the Waukesha County court house, where we got our copies of my son’s birth certificate. Three copies cost twenty-six dollars. And, it wasn’t even a problem that his mother and I aren’t married, she signed for them, and I paid. We did have to go through a security checkpoint, though. That part was a little rough. We then went to the DMV, where we filled out a very simple form, in ink.

Provided that you are a well-behaved citizen, a Social Security number and birth certificate are all that’s required to verify your identity. If you’ve had some brushes with the law, drunk driving, or revocations you may have some more explaining to do at this point. If you’re not a citizen there may be some extra paperwork, as well. But, you shouldn’t be voting if you’re not a citizen, so this discussion doesn’t really apply to you anyway.

After you wait the government allotted time in line, you get to pay for the new ID. An ID now costs twenty-eight dollars, ten of which allegedly goes to pay for some federal security screening or something. Presumably, this is the markup applied for the Real ID Act. Once you pay your fee, they take a really bad picture and hand you Baby’s First ID Card.

The whole experience cost us fifty-four dollars, the better part of a morning, and a trip to Starbucks, and that’s it. If you have your birth certificate or order it through the mail it’s even easier. So why do people bother complaining about Voter ID?

Some of them say that there are people who can’t get to the DMV to get an ID.

Horse feathers! If you can get to a polling place, the bank, the grocery store, the doctor, the pharmacy, or the social security office you most likely have the means to get to the DMV. For those handful of people who truly cannot make this trip through any other means, I’m sure that Voter ID would inspire volunteers to rise to the occasion. There’s already no shortage of volunteers willing to drive people to polling places. This is just one more stop along the way.

Some people say that it’s too much bother to get an ID and people who want to vote might not do it.

I stood at the DMV with a ten month old. Suck it up, chump. Besides, if you can’t be bothered to do this once every eight years for the sake of doing your civic duty, something tells me that locating your polling place and actually going is too much bother for you as well.

Some people say that the fees are too high.

I totally agree. Thirty dollars isn’t play money, even in a responsible middle class family. Without an ID, there isn’t much you can do in this state besides vote. Something so necessary for daily life should be more accessible. It’s too darn bad that our governor has decided to hide our taxes in fees. He really ought to deal with the budget by cutting out the fat.

The moral of this story:

If our governor was honest, Voter ID would be a fair and accessible way to police the voting process.

This is a question aimed at my liberal readers, but anyone is free to comment.

If the federal government stopped funding social programs and reduced its spending, would that really be so bad?

Imagine if the federal government managed things that were in the national interest: defense, printing currency, and maybe disaster aid. Without earmarks, congressional sessions would become extremely boring. They would actually have to focus on legislation that makes the union of states function as a single entity. Under this model, federal income tax would be lowered. State taxes would most likely be elevated to make up the difference.

Here’s why that would be beneficial to the American public: states would compete for tax dollars. A free market for social programs would be created. Citizens could decide which programs mattered most to them and which states managed them best. We’d find out really quickly which policies attract business and grow economies, and which suck the life out of the economy.

We already expect states to manage their own social programs. I’m just saying that we shouldn’t let the federal government paint the country with a broad brush. And, we certainly shouldn’t let Washington earmark money for projects that only affect a small district or group of people. I, for one, would like to live in a state that doesn’t take six percent of my income and invest it for me in a worthless account. It’s a shame that I don’t have that option.

Caltechgirl brings us a little analogy that we should remind ourselves of every tax season.

Are you sick of high gas prices, or concerned about the environment? Are you brewing your own biodiesel yet?

Do you think you’re a pioneer? A hero? A thrifty individual?

You might be a criminal. If you haven’t paid taxes on your home brew, the state wants to talk to you.

Apparently, biodiesel makers have to pay an inspection fee of two cents a gallon. Plus, if it’s blended with diesel that is used on the roads, the makers also have to pay another 31 cents a gallon.

Forgive me, but doesn’t an “inspection fee” imply that there was some sort of inspection actually performed? Who’s in charge of inspecting hobbyist’s biodiesel operations? I’ve got some questions for them, like: what do you do all day long?

Christian Schneider writes a cautionary piece on Jim Doyle’s proposed cigarette tax. Christian cites a few good reasons to oppose the tax hike.

First off, in the interest of full disclosure, I was a smoker. It was only for a few years, but my habit could get me up to a pack a day at times. Sometimes I needed a smoke, and sometimes I could forget to smoke. I tried quitting once, but for no real reason. Later, I caught a nasty cough, probably from the combined effects of flu season, cigarettes, and working on my house. I know I had something because everyone around me caught it, too.

Anyway, I woke up one day and my first cigarette tasted like varnish. I tossed it out and tried another one, which also tasted like varnish. I figured that the pack was spoiled, until I drank a cup of coffee that tasted like varnish. Usually it tastes like burnt hair and battery acid. Then, my lunch (instant mac & cheese) tasted like varnish and I saw a pattern developing.

The flu kicked my ass over the next few days. I could barely eat and I had no interest in smoking. By the time it was over, I figured I’d been cold turkey so long I may as well keep going. Plus, I was scheduled to be on the radio in a few weeks (remember that?). I wanted my voice back. Kelly decided to quit along with me, which made it easier, too.

I tried the gum once, about two weeks in. It burned like hell. I’ve been smoke free for a year and nine months (give or take). I vary rarely get an urge, even when I’m around smokers. I’m also extremely lucky that the smell still doesn’t bother me, although I do get a dry mouth from time to time in smoky bars.

There are a few good reasons why smokers should oppose coughing up the extra cash.

We’re taxed enough, period. Tax the cigarettes more, and sooner or later I will personally lead the revolt that dumps them into Milwaukee harbor (aka. The Port of Milwaukee).

Cigarette taxes are the most disingenuous of taxes. A truly targetted cigarette tax would do two things: decrease people’s desire to smoke (by increasing awareness, as well as the price of a pack) and take care of those who are or were smokers. Most often, the money collected does nothing of the sort.

As Christian said, this is coercion by tax. It’s easy to excuse it because we’re talking about a habit that 99% of people agree is bad for them. But, as the dominoes fall, you open the door to junk food taxes, talking on the cell phone in your car taxes, fat person in public taxes, and who knows what else.

If successful, a cigarette tax should actually decrease revenue. You don’t suppose the state is going to go without it, do you? The burden will be shifted to non-smokers. I say, let the “poor” pull their own weight if they think they can afford it.

On the other hand, smokers seem to be content to let people walk all over them. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to roll over and play dead?

The Doyle proposal is coupled with a proposed cigarette ban. This gives it the appearance of an honest effort to curb smoking, so long as we don’t start hearing that taverns will be allowed to purchase smoking permits. It is cruel, though, to force the smoking public to go cold turkey.

I’m having a hard time sympathizing with the smokers on this because they’re such a bunch of pansies. Talk about your unprotected classes, they won’t stand up to anybody until it’s already too late. When smoking can be banned outdoors, where it doesn’t hurt anyone or in your own home where it’s none of anyone’s business, it proves that no one is going to stand up for smoker’s rights. Why shouldn’t we just put them all out of their misery? I’m sick of feeling like I’m the only ex-smoker who’s willing to go to bat for the ol’ cancer stick.

I’d like to see someone do something with cigarette money that makes sense. Put the ALL of the taxes into smoker health care accounts, at least you’re forcing them to save for their medical costs then. Maybe it would help reduce insurance costs for the rest of us, too. Just keep the cigarette money focused on fighting damage from cigarettes. Why in heck should we raise the tax if all the money is going to get dumped into other budgets, without addressing the issue the increase is supposed to solve?

By now you must have heard that there will be a proposal before the next session of the state legislature to tax gift cards. Of course, it isn’t being called a tax. The heroes in the state legislature are going after “unearned income,” “unfairly earned income,” or some other such buzz word to make you feel that this is a noble effort on the tax payer’s behalf. The proposal is to “reclaim” (steal) 80% of the stored value of expired gift cards, leaving the business with 20%. You can hear the proposal and the lame excuses for it on the Early Spin blog.

I didn’t buy any gift cards this year. If you did, please tell me: is the gift card sale taxed, or is the sales tax only applied when you use the card to purchase an item? If memory serves, the sale of the gift card is tax free (it had better be, or you pay sales tax twice!). That’s probably why some people in government have got their panties in a wad. They can’t fathom giving “all this money” away to corporations (Most of them are evil, like Walmart. But, not Starbucks. Starbucks is cool. I gotta have my double-mocha-spresso-latte-chino-grande before work.) “for free.” Never mind that the company selling the gift card has to pay corporate income taxes on any profit earned.

Do not fall for the spin on this. The proposal is not going to benefit the taxpayers. Our government thinks that they see free money laying about. They’re hacked off that you have money to burn. How dare you just hand your hard-earned cash to anyone but them! If the intent is to protect the consumer there are much better ways to do it.

Some ideas have been proposed and lobbied against by the retail industry. I suggest that the true heroes in Madison quit pandering to the special interests; put up or shut up. Any of these would make sense.

1. Require businesses to honor gift cards permanently, with no expiration dates. Retailers claim that this creates a difficulty in balancing their books. I suppose they fear that some huge mob of gift cards will come and wipe out their inventory when the next generation of Playstation consoles comes along.
2. Require that expiration dates be printed on the card. Simple, easy. If you forget it’s your fault. Too bad, so sad. Quit crying, you baby. Seriously, it’s embarrassing!
3. Require that gift cards be valid for a minimum period (1 year or more). This would prevent a sneaky retailer from issuing cards that expire too quickly to be practical. It would actually protect the consumer, rather than punish the retailer for offering a service that’s never used.

Why not charge retailers for unused coupons, too? If I forget to use my $1.00 off coupon, what right does the retailer have to that money? It’s not fair. They should have to pay the government $0.80, so that it can be given back to me as tax relief. (Note: you can’t tell, but my colon tried to throttle my brain for writing that last sentence)