do you support taxes to deter 'harmful' activities?

SmarterThanYou said:
and numerous supreme court decisions have invalidated taxes for being prohibitive, so there is obviously something there.
Click to expand...

Which is why I'm not advocating that any of the sin taxes I mentioned be above the 5-15% window. Enough to bank some revenue. I personally think its scandalous the way smokers are treated, but wouldn't advocate cutting taxes down to zero, even if they are majorly regressive.
 
Threedee said:
Which is why I'm not advocating that any of the sin taxes I mentioned be above the 5-15% window. Enough to bank some revenue. I personally think its scandalous the way smokers are treated, but wouldn't advocate cutting taxes down to zero, even if they are majorly regressive.
Click to expand...

now, how do you feel about taxing totally intrastate activities that do not involve any interstate travel?
 
Threedee said:
Well, according to SCOTUS there's no such thing, but the Feds should probably not play a role in taxing it...
Click to expand...

they didn't rule there was no such thing, but the ruling did make pretty much everything "affecting" interstate commerce, so there could still exist only intrastate commerce
 
Threedee said:
Yes, which still is only a small step away from the SCOTUS position from the Depression to 1995. The SC never specifically stated what I said in hyperbole (as Yurt pointed out), but it certainly acted and felt that way.
Click to expand...

slowly paring it back from the butchering that the new deal dems started in 1933. bastards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top