|
Home > Archive > Architecture > November 2006 > OT - Stretch...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| 3D Peruna 2006-11-05, 9:25 pm |
| In the UK, they have 'greenhouse' taxes. Interesting read here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...31/ngreen31.xml
One of the things that caught my eye "ordinary families have borne the
brunt of environmental taxes and households are paying almost four times
more than businesses for every ounce of pollution they create." And "A
report published by the Government this month, shows that, despite
generating only 22 per cent of UK greenhouse gases, consumers are paying
52 per cent of environmental taxes."
Don't consumers pay all business taxes? Isn't the price of the tax to
the business passed along to the consumer in the price of goods?
Now...the stretch...
Building materials. If this global warming lunacy continues, we'll
start of have "greenhouse" taxes. They'll start by imposing them on
asphalt related products, then move to glass... And in the end, the
home for the average joe (even if it is a crappy design from a mass
builder of Walmarchitecture) will be less attainable (and fulfill the
New Urbanists dream that we all live in apartments).
The point is that ALL taxes are passed along to the consumers.
| |
| RicodJour 2006-11-06, 3:25 am |
| 3D Peruna wrote:
>
> The point is that ALL taxes are passed along to the consumers.
How could it be otherwise and why would you want it to be?
R
| |
|
|
in Our school district
RicodJour wrote:
> 3D Peruna wrote:
>
> How could it be otherwise and why would you want it to be?
>
> R
Don't get me going about taxes.
I am in NY so we have separate city, county, and school taxes. Our
school taxes have a STAR system that exempts the first $35,000 in real
property value ($55,000 for senior) from taxes. On top of that, part
of our school district is on the Rez and part is off; part is in the
city and part is out of the city. Due to the Rez and the poverty, we
get a huge %age of state aid plus there are incentives for rehabbing
schools. Added to the complexity is the fact that the city and school
district get money from the casino (I have long argued against giving
it to the money-pit called the school) but that's another story.
So, our school administration says that they can this enormous
rehab+new construction project with "no effect on taxes" (the
construction is related to architecture, no?) because they can pay the
local share (about 2%) with "casino money".
I argue "no", it'll have a huge impact because they ignore the Null
Option. If they build it and don't raise taxes, the tax rates don't go
up. But if they don't build it, the taxes would go down. So of course
there's a impact on taxes. Doh. I guess this is the "new math" of
taxation.
| |
|
| "3D Peruna"> wrote
> In the UK, they have 'greenhouse' taxes. Interesting read here:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...31/ngreen31.xml
>
> One of the things that caught my eye "ordinary families have borne the
> brunt of environmental taxes and households are paying almost four times
> more than businesses for every ounce of pollution they create." And "A
> report published by the Government this month, shows that, despite
> generating only 22 per cent of UK greenhouse gases, consumers are paying
> 52 per cent of environmental taxes."
>
> Don't consumers pay all business taxes? Isn't the price of the tax to the
> business passed along to the consumer in the price of goods?
>
> Now...the stretch...
>
> Building materials. If this global warming lunacy continues, we'll start
> of have "greenhouse" taxes. They'll start by imposing them on asphalt
> related products, then move to glass... And in the end, the home for the
> average joe (even if it is a crappy design from a mass builder of
> Walmarchitecture) will be less attainable (and fulfill the New Urbanists
> dream that we all live in apartments).
>
> The point is that ALL taxes are passed along to the consumers.
If you're wondering about the method of reporting, 22% & 52%, the answer is
obvious.
It stirs the herd, to the benefit of the machine.
When a braindead consumer reads that he's generating 22% but is reguired to
pay 52% he'll rear up on his hindlegs and let loose like a ninnie and then
the powers that be will be justified in RAISING the greenhouse tax on the
businesses (which in turn pass it on to the consumer through higher
prices/fees) which will satisfy the emotions of the herd members.
You see, couch blobs (herd members) are easily distracted due to ADHA + TV
and don't mind being ripped off by the man as long as they're convinced
everybody else is getting ripped off equally, they're even MORE delighted
when they find out that business owners are getting the shaft.
Yes, the world flipped inside out back about 09 Aug 1988 @ 3:27pm and nobody
ever even noticed.....
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> Don't get me going about taxes.
>
> I am in NY so we have separate city, county, and school taxes. Our
> school taxes have a STAR system that exempts the first $35,000 in real
> property value ($55,000 for senior) from taxes. On top of that, part
> of our school district is on the Rez and part is off; part is in the
> city and part is out of the city. Due to the Rez and the poverty, we
> get a huge %age of state aid plus there are incentives for rehabbing
> schools. Added to the complexity is the fact that the city and school
> district get money from the casino (I have long argued against giving
> it to the money-pit called the school) but that's another story.
>
> So, our school administration says that they can this enormous
> rehab+new construction project with "no effect on taxes" (the
> construction is related to architecture, no?) because they can pay the
> local share (about 2%) with "casino money".
>
> I argue "no", it'll have a huge impact because they ignore the Null
> Option. If they build it and don't raise taxes, the tax rates don't go
> up. But if they don't build it, the taxes would go down. So of course
> there's a impact on taxes. Doh. I guess this is the "new math" of
> taxation.
In Lee County, FL public schools are a HUGE leash on the herd, and most of
them just love it.
10,000 people per year are moving to Lee Co. and I read earlier this year
that something like 40 new schools are expected to be built in the next 10
years at something like $40mil each. At least 1/2 of the property taxes go
to the schools and the lottery has boatloads of money going into them as
well.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the public schools are by far the
worst thing the gov't has ever done to this society for more reasons then
one.
The potential saving grace in all of this is that like most other factions
of leviathan the schools too are failing and 35,000 students per year
nationwide are being extracted from them to other sources, private,
homeschool, etc.
The public schools are one of the most ingenuously evil devices ever
created.
They reduce the populace to a braindead level and permanently burden the
citizens for the rest of their days with enormous financial liability.
| |
|
|
Don wrote:
> "Pat"> wrote
>
> In Lee County, FL public schools are a HUGE leash on the herd, and most of
> them just love it.
> 10,000 people per year are moving to Lee Co. and I read earlier this year
> that something like 40 new schools are expected to be built in the next 10
> years at something like $40mil each. At least 1/2 of the property taxes go
> to the schools and the lottery has boatloads of money going into them as
> well.
>
> I've said it before and I'll say it again, the public schools are by far the
> worst thing the gov't has ever done to this society for more reasons then
> one.
> The potential saving grace in all of this is that like most other factions
> of leviathan the schools too are failing and 35,000 students per year
> nationwide are being extracted from them to other sources, private,
> homeschool, etc.
>
> The public schools are one of the most ingenuously evil devices ever
> created.
> They reduce the populace to a braindead level and permanently burden the
> citizens for the rest of their days with enormous financial liability.
Hay, Eye wint too publik skool & stayt colledge
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-11-06, 1:25 pm |
|
Pat wrote:
> Don wrote:
....
Yeah, ontario Public Schools are a criminal organization.
I got the slugs 8 times in PS, 3 times in grade 3 when I
was a 7 yo, (the slugs is when some big guy hits your
hand hard with a heavy strap), because I fooled around,
but never hurt anybody, but in hindsight that's criminal
assault, that was legalized. I'd never do that to my kids,
or anyone elses, but that's how the crazies operate.
[color=darkred]
> Hay, Eye wint too publik skool & stayt colledge
Pat ya spelted hey rong its speldid hay.
Ken
| |
| RicodJour 2006-11-06, 1:25 pm |
| Don wrote:
>
> The public schools are one of the most ingenuously evil devices ever
> created.
> They reduce the populace to a braindead level and permanently burden the
> citizens for the rest of their days with enormous financial liability.
Did you go to a public school?
R
| |
|
| "RicodJour"> wrote
> Don wrote:
>
> Did you go to a public school?
Yes, I too was forced through the state mandated brainwashing.
There is a term called *unlearning* that takes place within all people when
they leave the state sanctioned programming centers.
It lasts all of the rest of your life.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-11-09, 5:25 pm |
| 3D Peruna <wharold@weirdness.com> wrote in
news:MOx3h.2379$vj4.1004@newsfe07.lga:
> In the UK, they have 'greenhouse' taxes. Interesting read here:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2006/10/31/ngreen3
> 1.xml
>
> One of the things that caught my eye "ordinary families have borne the
> brunt of environmental taxes and households are paying almost four
> times more than businesses for every ounce of pollution they create."
> And "A report published by the Government this month, shows that,
> despite generating only 22 per cent of UK greenhouse gases, consumers
> are paying 52 per cent of environmental taxes."
>
> Don't consumers pay all business taxes? Isn't the price of the tax to
> the business passed along to the consumer in the price of goods?
When business gets a tax break, most keep it and don't lower the prices;
meanwhile, the rest of us have to pay higher taxes to make up for the
portion that the businesses no longer have to pay.
Meanwhile, businesses will charge the prices they can get away with
charging - which usually means that, yup, a tax incresase to business is
inflated, and then tacked onto the prices of goods.
Of course, given that more and more goods are manufactured in China, yet
proces continue to go up, taxes do not tell the whole story. ((I used
to be able to get a US-made steel can-opener for under $3; in just a
short span of time, the only can-openers I could find were made in
China, and the inexpensive ones were not worth the bother because they
just broke so quickly - meanwhile, the sturdier ones ran $15 and higher.
If outsourcing is saving business such vast sums of $$, well, the
savings certainly is not being passed along to the rest of us. They
just add a red dot, or some other bit of insignificant fluffery, to
convince epole it's "new" and "different" and "must" cost that much
more...and you're stuck, because all the stores sell the same stuff...))
> Now...the stretch...
>
> Building materials. If this global warming lunacy continues, we'll
> start of have "greenhouse" taxes. They'll start by imposing them on
> asphalt related products, then move to glass... And in the end, the
> home for the average joe (even if it is a crappy design from a mass
> builder of Walmarchitecture) will be less attainable (and fulfill the
> New Urbanists dream that we all live in apartments).
>
> The point is that ALL taxes are passed along to the consumers.
The problem is that taxing goods is shoved down our throats as being a
solution, when what would *actually* be a solution would be a
combination of (1) consumer education, (2) a shift away from the old
ways (and esp. the old inefficiencies), and towards greater efficiency
and greater use of sustainable products, and (3) not higher taxes on
asphalt and so on, but rather, tax *credits* for people who choose to
"buy green".
Currently, the deck is stacked against consumers already, and since
"green" is still unusual, people who choose to "buy green" end up paying
more, usually a lot more. Just compare the price of a plain old cheapie
incandescent light buld to the price of a high-efficiency CFL. Yes, the
CFL *will* save you money in the long run, but most people have
forgotten how to think in terms even of next weeks budget (since so many
simply don't have a budget at all), never mind in terms of "over the
course of 5 years". Nor do people think of things like, "Air
conditioning is still far more expensive than heating, and a CFL will
not add as much heat to the house in the summer as do incandescents,
therefore, the CFL will also save me a bit off the AC bill".
Given that people generally, in recent, years have lost the ability to
think even of thinks to save themselves any money, it's absurd to expect
that they'll think of ways to lessen pollution. Especially if it means
they'll have to do thinks that require tremendous amounts of labor and
time, such as, putting newspapers and cans into a recycle bin and the
excrutiating exertion of taking the extra bin to the curb on trash day.
hell, my doofy neighbor can't even be bothered pulling the trash can out
of the street and into their driveway, so it sits in frot of my house
24/7. Given that sort of laziness, well, *of course* the offered
"answer" will be the simplistic rhetoric of "higher taxes for average
families". After all, it takes far less effort, for example, to kvetch
about rising taxes, than it takes to drag that whole extra bin <!> out
to the curb...
Basically, poeple want to have their cake, and eat it, too - they want
all their toys and luxeries and $200+ sneakers and so on, but they also
want someone else to pay for their *choices*.
Meanwhile, people who do try to make reasonable choices don't get much
of a benefit. So, in the end, something has to give - and *some* sort
of tax *will* be imposed. And whatever tax rises, the people who make
the worst choices will be those who are the lodest when they cry and
wail and moan and scream that it's "not fair".
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-11-09, 5:25 pm |
| "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in
news:1162821427.545880.109240@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> Don wrote:
[ snip ]
>
> Hay, Eye wint too publik skool & stayt colledge
>
I did the same, but luckily, I tended to live near libraries, so in spite
of my schooling, I was still able to get something resembling an education.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-11-09, 5:25 pm |
| "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in
news:1162838790.047243.195080@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>
> Pat wrote:
> ...
>
> Yeah, ontario Public Schools are a criminal organization.
> I got the slugs 8 times in PS, 3 times in grade 3 when I
> was a 7 yo, (the slugs is when some big guy hits your
> hand hard with a heavy strap), because I fooled around,
> but never hurt anybody, but in hindsight that's criminal
> assault, that was legalized. I'd never do that to my kids,
> or anyone elses, but that's how the crazies operate.
Heh, when I was in grade school, my parents got called in because I was
a "disciplinary problem". My Dad said something ebout me being bright,
but he got shot down fast by the holier-than-thou "administrator", who
said that "Well that isn't relevant, these kids tend to slow down as
they mature".
Well, gee, do ya think...? If it happened that, everytime you opened
your front door in response to the doorbell, someone bashed you over the
head with a baseball bat, do ya think you'd eventually stop answering
the doorbell, even if it was Ed McMahon with a million dollar chaeck...?
That's what passes, however, for "expertise" - a stupid statement that
is, in essence, the same as noting that if you kick the dog often
enough, it will eventually learn to cower all the time. Duh.
>
>
> Pat ya spelted hey rong its speldid hay.
> Ken
>
>
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-11-10, 1:25 pm |
|
Kris Krieger wrote:
> "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in
> news:1162838790.047243.195080@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> Heh, when I was in grade school, my parents got called in because I was
> a "disciplinary problem". My Dad said something ebout me being bright,
> but he got shot down fast by the holier-than-thou "administrator", who
> said that "Well that isn't relevant, these kids tend to slow down as
> they mature".
>
>
> Well, gee, do ya think...? If it happened that, everytime you opened
> your front door in response to the doorbell, someone bashed you over the
> head with a baseball bat, do ya think you'd eventually stop answering
> the doorbell, even if it was Ed McMahon with a million dollar chaeck...?
Yeah, that's why positive reinforcement should
be the norm, the negative only if necessary, but
that negative needs to be deliberated.
> That's what passes, however, for "expertise" - a stupid statement that
> is, in essence, the same as noting that if you kick the dog often
> enough, it will eventually learn to cower all the time. Duh.
Suppose the system gets us used to being pussy whipped.
Ken
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-11-10, 5:25 pm |
| "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in
news:1163179856.122073.50270@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>
> Kris Krieger wrote:
was[color=darkred]
bright,[color=darkred]
the[color=darkred]
chaeck...?[color=darkred]
>
> Yeah, that's why positive reinforcement should
> be the norm, the negative only if necessary, but
> that negative needs to be deliberated.
The funny (weird? sad?) thing is that this was an idea I didn't learn of
(and, embarassingly, had not thought up) until, of all things, I had
birds, esp. the conure, plus the realization that younger kids are not
all that different from smart birds (or other higher animals).
Punishment ("negative reinforcement") only instills fear.
*Occasionally*, that's important - a little kid can't understand a lot
intellectually, so they need to first fear dangerous things such as fire
and traffic.
But fear is an inefficient and poorly-tunable method for modifying
complex behavior. One thing I learned from birds is that, if someone
hits your pet because they don't like its behavior, the bird does *not*
learn to modify the behavior, but only learns to fear the person doing
the hitting.
>
>
> Suppose the system gets us used to being pussy whipped.
> Ken
>
Well, used to many things that are not exactly condusive to things like
creativity, constructive self-expression, or for that matter, enriching
social interaction and/or personal relationships. There is too much
based upon negatives such as submission to coercion, suspension of one's
rational analytic capabilities, realization of the complexity of most
things and situations, and so on. IMO, the "system" also therefore sets
kids up to learn to submit to abusive people. After all, they're
basically taught to "siddown and shaddup", "never talk back or question
your superiors" (IOW any person who claims to have some sort of
"authority", however false such claims may be), "stop thinking of
yourself, others are far more important", and so on. At the same time,
destructive behaviors are treated permissively or are called
"uncontrollable" or, even worse, "cute".
IOW, the system teaches kids (IMO) how to grow up to become neurotic
followers.
| |
|
| "Kris Krieger"> wrote
One thing I learned from birds is that, if someone
> hits your pet because they don't like its behavior, the bird does *not*
> learn to modify the behavior, but only learns to fear the person doing
> the hitting.
People are the same way.
But some folks live their whole lives refusing the obvious.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-11-14, 1:25 pm |
| "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in
news:ej3lg702r9o@news1.newsguy.com:
> "Kris Krieger"> wrote
> One thing I learned from birds is that, if someone
>
> People are the same way.
> But some folks live their whole lives refusing the obvious.
>
Which is why I keep telling my frineds that, hey, *somebody* has to state
the obvious <g!>
It' my birth-given mission and I take it very seriously <LOL!>
| |
| 3D Peruna 2006-11-20, 1:25 pm |
| Kris Krieger wrote:
>
> When business gets a tax break, most keep it and don't lower the prices;
> meanwhile, the rest of us have to pay higher taxes to make up for the
> portion that the businesses no longer have to pay.
You gotta problem with that? I begrudge nobody the ability to make more
profit.
>
> Meanwhile, businesses will charge the prices they can get away with
> charging - which usually means that, yup, a tax incresase to business is
> inflated, and then tacked onto the prices of goods.
So? The purpose of business is to MAKE MONEY. I charge as much as I
can for my services. I'd love to charge more if I could. Businesses
charge what the market will pay. If you want to profit, start a
business, or buy stock in a profitable one (that pays dividends).
>
>
> Of course, given that more and more goods are manufactured in China, yet
> proces continue to go up, taxes do not tell the whole story. ((I used
> to be able to get a US-made steel can-opener for under $3; in just a
> short span of time, the only can-openers I could find were made in
> China, and the inexpensive ones were not worth the bother because they
> just broke so quickly - meanwhile, the sturdier ones ran $15 and higher.
> If outsourcing is saving business such vast sums of $$, well, the
> savings certainly is not being passed along to the rest of us. They
> just add a red dot, or some other bit of insignificant fluffery, to
> convince epole it's "new" and "different" and "must" cost that much
> more...and you're stuck, because all the stores sell the same stuff...))
I'm getting really tired of this bash the Chinese crap. They make stuff
cheaper than we do. They use slave labor to do it. No...it's not
"fair." Since when was life fair? Of course it's not fair to the
Chinese. Let the Chinese figure out how to change their system.
And, the whole "protectionist" crap is really screwed up. We don't live
in a free market, and neither to the Chinese. They at least don't
pretend about it.
If you want to know why we don't have good jobs in the US look at two
things: 1) Unions and 2) Getting off the gold standard.
>
>
> The problem is that taxing goods is shoved down our throats as being a
> solution, when what would *actually* be a solution would be a
> combination of (1) consumer education, (2) a shift away from the old
> ways (and esp. the old inefficiencies), and towards greater efficiency
> and greater use of sustainable products, and (3) not higher taxes on
> asphalt and so on, but rather, tax *credits* for people who choose to
> "buy green".
It's crap...taxation for social policy is stupid. It doesn't work in
the long run.
Consumer education isn't going to change things. Things always change
from the "old ways" to the new ways (which aren't really that new
afterall). Tax Credits...yeah...that works.
>
> Currently, the deck is stacked against consumers already, and since
> "green" is still unusual, people who choose to "buy green" end up paying
> more, usually a lot more. Just compare the price of a plain old cheapie
> incandescent light buld to the price of a high-efficiency CFL. Yes, the
> CFL *will* save you money in the long run, but most people have
> forgotten how to think in terms even of next weeks budget (since so many
> simply don't have a budget at all), never mind in terms of "over the
> course of 5 years". Nor do people think of things like, "Air
> conditioning is still far more expensive than heating, and a CFL will
> not add as much heat to the house in the summer as do incandescents,
> therefore, the CFL will also save me a bit off the AC bill".
Here you go...people have the freedom to be stupid. One of the worst
problems we have is that there are do-gooders trying to protect stupid
people from themselves. Let people be stupid. It won't destroy the
earth. We haven't done it in the past and we're not doing it now.
http://www.climateaudit.org.
|
|
|
|
|