|
Confessions of a Homeschool Dad
Oct. 18, 2006
Oh Yeah? What will you do if I poke my *other* eye out?
Imagine this scenario: You're running a business. It doesn't matter what it is, but let's say it's Dandy Doily Paper Manufacturers- The Fanciest Little Papers West of the Mississippi.
Overall, doilies have been selling like hotcakes. I'm not sure why - perhaps the new "in" thing is "Old Lady Chic". But, whatever the reason, there's a lot of people buying doilies, and you're supplying a lot of the Doily Makers with their doily paper. Business is good.
There's only one problem. About 2/3 of that special doily paper that the doily makers use is manufactured overseas. And the state that you live in is concerned that too much of the state's residents money is going overseas.
So, being in government and all, the state decides that some sort of tax incentive should do the trick. After all, 1/3 of the doily paper is manufactured in their state, why not the rest of it?
Now, what kind of tax incentive would you suggest if you were working on the "State Doily Committee"? Probably something that would encourage doily paper manufacturers to produce doily paper in your state, right?
Ah, but suppose I told you that the state was California. That changes everything, doesn't it?
Being California, they decide to tax you, the existing doily paper manufacturer in California (I told you not to set up shop in California, but noooooo....you wouldn't listen!) in order to fund a "Doily Paper Manufacturer Initiative" to get other doily paper manufacturers into the state.
Effectively, they are taking your money and using it to get your competitors to come to town. That sounds fair and reasonable, doesn't it?
WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA - THE LAND OF THE BLIND WHERE THE ONE-EYED MAN IS KING
Well, California is actually doing that in a way. No, it's not with Doily Paper Manufacturers (though there certainly aren't enough of those), but with the Oil Companies.
You see, they've got a initiative called Proposition 87 on the ballot. What this measure does is tax in-state oil producers in order to fund alternative energies.
What's the rationale for this? Well, as I say, it's in California, so I'll do my best to explain...
As Al Gore says in a commercial for Prop 87, "Here is the truth the oil companies won't tell you. Half the foreign oil they import to California is from the Middle East. As a result, California is dangerously dependent on foreign oil."
Now, what Al doesn't tell anyone is what percentage of the oil is foreign. He is <.i>trying to make you think that 50% of the oil pumped in California is from the Middle East, which would support his "dangerously dependent on foreign oil" statement.
However, what he actually says is that 50% of the foreign oil is Middle Eastern. So, if say 40% of the oil in California is from foreign sources (which it is), 20% is from the Middle East. Hence, 20% of the oil in California came from the Middle East.
DANGER: MORONS AT WORK
Is 20% "dangerously dependent"? And, if it is, how is taxing the people you want to encourage (companies that produce oil in California) going to help that dependency?
It won't, of course. But taxes on oil is something that Californians can't pass up. Frankly, if you proposed "Prop 300: Taxing Oil Companies Because We Don't Like Them and Think They Make Too Much Money", it'd probably pass.
And so, we end up with a measure that taxes in-state oil producers, encouraging them to leave the state. And encouraging nobody else to bring competition to the state, which would do the most to reduce what has to be paid at the pump. And we make gas even more expensive for the average Californian, who will end up paying this tax.
Think gas prices are too high? Just wait until the government gets through with them. They'll tax you into oblivion creating an alternative energy souce that will cost even more. Go, California!
No, really. Go. Away.
|
| • Post A Comment! • Send to a Friend!
|
Comments
|
