**URGENT** CRIPPLING TAXES ON PIPE TOBACCO PROPOSED

Brothers of Briar

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Just took a quick peek around to see if the admin costs were really that high - does not seem that they are....


On his September 16 show, nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh repeated his frequent but false claim that administrative costs account for 78 cents of every dollar of welfare spending. Media Matters for America was unable to determine the origin of Limbaugh's wildly inaccurate figure, but Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports reveal that actual costs are far lower, with combined federal and state administrative expenses for most of the welfare programs studied remaining below 20 percent of total expenditures.

A June 30 GAO study reported total federal and state expenditures as well as federal and state administrative costs for several means-tested government programs for FY 2004. Dividing "administrative expenditures" by "total expenditures," Media Matters for America determined that administrative costs for Medicaid -- by far the country's largest means-tested welfare program -- were 4.9 percent of total costs. For the food stamp program, administrative costs were higher: 17.1 percent. Administrative costs were 4.5 percent for the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and 2.1 percent for the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). The report notes that "[t]he specific types of expenditures that are considered administrative differ considerably across the programs."

In addition, the Office of Family Assistance recently reported to Congress that combined federal and state administrative costs for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program were 10.3 percent of total expenditures in fiscal year 2002.
 
"for the 'old white guy' comment. It was in many ways a better system. Those that had nothing to lose didn't get a vote, those that had a stake did. "


We all have something to lose, in the case of non whites at the time, the laws prevented them from being free - and they had no vote to alter that, or anything else.

The very concept that some deserve a vote and some do not is forgetting that we are each, individually, the ones that the constitution protects - and that we are all equal - rich or poor.

 
To the original poster or others. Aside from the venting and analysis, which I think we all took part in. If you are closely following this issue, as this is the first I am hearing of it, keep us posted on timeframes and when (or hopefully not) these new taxes are scheduled to pass at the proposed or reduced rates and when they will take effect.
 
Gandalf. I haven't listen to rush in about 12 year. And I haven't listened to the news in about 3 months. Totally burned out on the whole delusion.

My sister works for the state. Her job? To find ways to spend money. Literally.

As for administrative cost. Figure up all the payroll hrs, the rent, the vehicles, etc etc. I don't know about any 78 cent on the dollar. But I would bet it's more that 50%.

Like I said earlier I'm not against paying for services. And I don't even mind Big Government. But I want a lean mean extremely efficient government.

My mother used to make underwear for the military in a non profit organization. They charged $700 a set. When Ann Northup ( former Republican Congresswoman out of Louisville KY) was defeated and lost her congressional seat the non profit closed down. That's not efficient, it's not even sane. It's government waste and thievery by the people we put in office.
I don't give a damn what party they belong to, this system has failed us due to the overseers robbing the pot an people letting them for the kickbacks they get in entitlements, tax breaks, etc. Poor guy ain't goin to say anything he gets a check, middle class guy ain't saying anything because he gets credits on his kids and mortars, rich guy doesn't say anything because his corporation beats the system on special loop holes designed just for them.

Anyway, I'm done ranting.
 
Gandalf, this quote from your post above says it all really:

"[t]he specific types of expenditures that are considered administrative differ considerably across the programs."


As long as they can make up definitions of terms to suit themselves the numbers will be whatever they want them to be. Don't forget also that Media Matters is just as biased as Rush and co. Being that they are funded in large part by George Soros and the far left, much like Rush being funded by the far right.

When looking at news stories, never fail to consider the source.
 
Guy -- My bet is Harkins' proposal will never come up for a vote. As I said before, he is a darling of the Left and this proposal is, IMHO, the type of "I've never seen a tax I didn't like" tax increase sentiment that he, and others like him, often pull out of the swamp to appease their base.
 
forsooth":ww5xyuve said:
Guy -- My bet is Harkins' proposal will never come up for a vote. As I said before, he is a darling of the Left and this proposal is, IMHO, the type of "I've never seen a tax I didn't like" tax increase sentiment that he, and others like him, often pull out of the swamp to appease their base.
Click to expand...
Thank you, good insight, worth keeping an eye on. A realistic up charge from say $2.30 to $5.00 is one thing, an up charge that would make a large tin of Half and Half about a “C-note’ is another matter. :affraid:
 
Vercer":xhwa6bq5 said:
Gandalf, this quote from your post above says it all really:

"[t]he specific types of expenditures that are considered administrative differ considerably across the programs."


As long as they can make up definitions of terms to suit themselves the numbers will be whatever they want them to be. Don't forget also that Media Matters is just as biased as Rush and co. Being that they are funded in large part by George Soros and the far left, much like Rush being funded by the far right.

When looking at news stories, never fail to consider the source.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure - the GAO accounting practices are quite good - I could spend the time researching the figures, as could any one of us - it is hardly fair to simply claim that all is corrupt and that all numbers are lies.

Saying that welfare admin costs are 80 percent is not accounting - it is a false claim which demonizes the system.

If you want to gut welfare you make such claims - along with those claims that all those on welfare are lazy and would be better off without it.

The truth is that a society is judged by how it treats it's poor, and that we avoid having to say "f@ck the poor, I don't care about them" by claiming they don't exist or that the programs that help them are corrupt wasteful drains on a great society.

When we put a face on welfare it is not the face of an innocent child, it is always the face of the lazy moocher.

Anyone going to bring up tithing?

As for pipe tobacco taxes - they are going up - and up - at least for many blends, as the RYO makers have bundled us in with cigarettes.

Cellar now - or hoard if that's what you like to call it - I call it saving money in the long run.



 
It feels like I mention this every time Federal tobacco legislation is proposed, but here it is again:

Any time you see "tax parity" pitched for tobacco products, the behind-the-scenes villain is Big Tobacco. Premade cigarettes are their biggest and highest-margin business by a longshot, and they are more than willing to sacrifice smokeless, pipe, and RYO to increase their shares in the cig market.

They will do this even if it means quietly backing an increased tax on all tobacco, because they've reached the point where taxes no longer change the purchasing behavior of cigarette smokers in any way that hurts profits. Taxes go up and up, smokers die and quit in some number, but profits are relatively flat.

It's fine to talk about the ideologies and partisan platforms of politicians, but the practical matter of passing tobacco legislation comes down to a large bloc of legislators who will do what Philip Morris tells them to. And pipe smokers matter even less mathematically to the tobacco corporations as customers than we do to the government as voters.

It sucks, but there's not much you can do besides boycott big-brand pipeweed, and convince smokers to quit cigs for the pipe.
 
FWIW: I'm not saying fudge anyone (except the politicians)
That's class warfare and it must stop if this country has a prayer.

I'm just saying we need to spend what we collect with a bit more wisdom.
If we need more tax more, if we need less tax less.

This Tax, spend, think up more needs, tax sone more, create emergency , tax some more crap that's went on the past 20 years has to stop.
 
puros_bran":895s9318 said:
FWIW: I'm not saying fudge anyone (except the politicians)
That's class warfare and it must stop if this country has a prayer.

I'm just saying we need to spend what we collect with a bit more wisdom.
If we need more tax more, if we need less tax less.

This Tax, spend, think up more needs, tax sone more, create emergency , tax some more crap that's went on the past 20 years has to stop.
Click to expand...
Agreed :)
 
gandalfpc":pv5o84mn said:
puros_bran":pv5o84mn said:
FWIW: I'm not saying fudge anyone (except the politicians)
That's class warfare and it must stop if this country has a prayer.

I'm just saying we need to spend what we collect with a bit more wisdom.
If we need more tax more, if we need less tax less.

This Tax, spend, think up more needs, tax sone more, create emergency , tax some more crap that's went on the past 20 years has to stop.
Click to expand...
Agreed :)
Click to expand...
Ya hit the nail on the head.
 
Guy":w6xcg9r9 said:
To the original poster or others. Aside from the venting and analysis, which I think we all took part in. If you are closely following this issue, as this is the first I am hearing of it, keep us posted on timeframes and when (or hopefully not) these new taxes are scheduled to pass at the proposed or reduced rates and when they will take effect.
Click to expand...
Yes..... I've been watching this thread with interest.

Frankly I'm not one to follow the developments on a daily basis due to myriad circumstances. It seems that there are enough posters that have taken up the torch however. My on-line time isn't up to much right now so I greatly appreciate those who can step in.


Cheers,

RR
 
Is there a site up for writing your congressman/senators like there was for the last bill? Someone should post it if so.
 
I appreciate all the well thought-out discussion here. It concerns me that the governments, under both the Dems and the Reps. seem unable to spend within a defined budget and, oh I don't know, balance their checkbook at the end of the month/year? If my checkbook says $0 and all my credit cards are maxed out, well, I'm SOL.

Let's talk about the program people call "welfare." If you try to look up welfare in the Statistical Abstract of the US. you won't find it. What you will find instead are things such as WIC (food stamps) and Unemployment benefits, and a plethra of over social programs. Where I have a real issue is that working class people, like myself, need a social safety net. Not because I'm lazy, or don't want to work, but because corporate greed and the political fat-cats who get rich from this corporate greed can very easily cause a financial collapse, akin to the twentieth century stock market collapse. The rich are always bailed out by their friends (politicians) but the working class, and poorer classes pay for these bailouts, and other inappropriately spent money, through taxes.

I grew up in a socialist country, and there are many issues there as well. People are people. And if they can get away with being lazy, and collecting money for doing nothing, many chose to do so. However, there is a very important flip-side to all of this. My good friend works probably 12 hours a day, is a self-employed general contractor, and has no health insurance. My wife is only able to work 8 months out of the year, because her company puts everyone on temporary lay-off for about 5 months out of the year. She has almost completed her Phd. in this field, and has a hard to come by job.

My friend can't afford health insurance, and can't afford to go to the doctor when he's ill. My wife and I barely make ends meet during her lay-off months, despite saving money when we can, because the cost for everything is constantly increasing. Gas, food, clothing, tobacco, you name it.

What I'm getting at is that we need better oversight over how things are spent, and a grassroots effort to make our tax system fair for all. I think that Rupert Murdock has it right. We should all be paying our fair share of income tax.

But the issue is so much more complicated. Where do you draw the line? Should my wife not be allowed to draw unemployment? After all, she could work a name tag job, and we wouldn't have to use unemployment benefits. But, she doesn't work during those months because her unemployment check is greater than what name-tag job would pay. My friend, should he have affordable health care?

So what does this mean? I'm not sure. Maybe the minimum wage needs to be a real, living wage? Maybe something else? The issues are myriad, complex and simply mind numbing. What I can't stand are the politician's broad statements, made for media sound bites. They mean nothing, and no more than sound and fury.

We need intelligence, introspection and guts on the part of the politicians.

For the thing we call "welfare," we need more case workers, who can make sure that people on long-term unemployment are actually actively seeking jobs. For long-term disability issues, we need case workers who can enforce the laws that we have, and make sure that people are actually disabled, and not just lazy. This means more taxes in the short term, but maybe there would be massive tax savings in the future.

We need better oversight, to ensure that there are better campaign finance regulations, and that someone is keeping a close eye on cronyism. Too many politicians reward the biggest givers with legislation that profits them. From what I've read through the years, these lobbyist make pretty much decide make our laws, through money, corruption and undo influence. But no one does anything about it. After all, if taxes increase on our tobacco, I bet that someone will be making a lot of money. Oh, and that someone will either be a corporation or a politician, maybe both.

Maybe, in all that I said, it boils down to the fact that we need better control over lobbyists and the entire lobbying system, and enough people on the streets who can work the cases and enforce the existing laws.

There nothing more I despise than freeloaders, who could do for themselves but cannot, and where the "freeloading" is generational. But those who have lost their jobs, and are struggling, deserve help. How do you tell the difference? How do you judge not on outward appearances, but by what is really going on. My neighborhood has a multitude of Section 8 houses. I'm not really convinced that the majority of these people couldn't be in the workforce, making money, and earning their keep. Of course, at the current minimum wage, no one can make ends meet.

We all want things cheap, but someone's always got to pay. I'd rather pay a little more, for some things, and have the money from my taxes spent wisely, than what's been the norm in the country for decades.

Okay, I think this is long enough. I'm not even sure I'm making any sense now. The entire thing is just a big mess, and the baccy' tax is just a symptom of a much, much large problem.
 
Just revisiting this thread after some time. Using the link below it appears that the issue might be dead in the water, provided the info is up to date.

Anyone have any further info on this?


TIA



Cheers,

RR



Milan":e4edcg7d said:
Here's a link to watch the status on this.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-1403
It looks as though the committee that it has been referred to has just a few bills to discuss. They should get to it let's say... probably never if they're going in order.
Milan
Click to expand...
 
Top