Skip to comments.The Air Boehner Tax ["Sorry. My Irish is up."]
Posted on 12/17/2013 4:09:49 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
He is the new tax collector for the welfare state. And House Speaker John Boehners latest gift to the American people a 124% tax increase on air travel can aptly be called The Air Boehner Tax.
But first a short time travel trip.
The date: Monday. January 11, 1982
The place: The White House
Wrote President Ronald Reagan in his diary of this day:
Repub. House Leaders came down to the W.H. Except for Jack Kemp they are hl bent on new taxes
Another date: Wednesday, August 4, 1982
The place: The White House.
Another entry from Reagans diary:
Met with Jack Kemp (alone) & then in leadership meeting. He is adamant that we are wrong on the tax increase. He is in fact unreasonable. The tax increase is the price we pay to get the budget cuts.
Kemp could not have disagreed more, and this episode from 1982 is worth recalling as Speaker Boehner and Congressman Paul Ryan go about the business of selling the Ryan-Murray budget deal.
A budget deal that specifically imposes a 124% tax increase on air travelers, as noted in the Daily Caller.
As Reagan correctly recorded at the time, Congressman Jack Kemp, the leading proponent of the tax cuts that were the foundation of the job-creating machine that was famously scorned by Democrats as Reaganomics furiously opposed the tax increase that was pushed not only by congressional Democrats but, tellingly, the House and Senate Republican leadership as well. Specifically then-Senate Finance Committee chairman, Kansas GOP Senator Bob Dole.....
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Those in leadership should know their history & learn from it. Sadly, they never do.
No longer merely spineless, stupid, and cowardly, Cry Baby must now be considered willfully complicit in the destruction of the US economy.
For one thing, the GOP (correctly) sees this kind of revenue as a palatable alternative to income taxes, corporate taxes, etc. -- mainly because it is targeted to discretionary customers of a certain industry that relies heavily on taxpayer funds to stay in business.
Secondly, the author of the article is disingenuous when he suggests that there is something wrong with directing the revenue from the passenger tax/fee to the general fund instead of the TSA. The airline industry already costs the taxpayers a lot of money from the general treasury that goes way beyond just the TSA (the entire Federal Aviation Administration, for example). These Federal expenditures are hardly a justifiable use of tax revenues that are paid by the general public, most of whom will go through an entire year without even boarding an airplane.
This particular issue was the subject of an interesting radio interview I heard last weekend, and the consensus of the participants was that one of the long-term goals of the GOP is to gradually replace general tax revenues with industry-specific taxes and fees that actually make more sense from the perspective of a user-beneficiary comparison.
Boehner will allow a vote on immigration reform, piecemeal or otherwise. But it matters not as the Senate bill will be inserted in any bill the Speaker allows the House to vote on.
The illegals will be legalized and they will vote in 2014 even though they are not citizens. They will register and vote because laws do not matter to them.
It will be a gargantuan task to remove the millions of illegals that will register to vote from the voter rolls. But they must be removed! It will be difficult because the leftist press will shriek that the removals constitute discrimination and voter suppression. And it will be difficult because there must be positive proof that they are not citizens. They will sign on penalty of perjury that they are citizens and are eligible to vote. But laws do not matter to them.
So how to remove illegals from voter rolls?
BUT during an election any number of shills here will tell you he’s better than the democrat. Really? How is that? Looks to me like he does all the same things a dem would do but in just a slightly different way.
What is being overlooked here is the concept of trends..If businesses and private families deem it too expensive to fly they can stop doing it in droves and suddenly with devastating effect on the industry. Investors see low profits and shift their money somewhere else and overnight another American industry goes the way of the buffalo. As noted in Dr. Zhivago, one person stealing firewood is not a problem, but if millions start doing it, it will destroy a city.
More importantly, politicians don’t even pretend anymore to look at ways to cut government costs.. only look for ways to increase taxes... May a revolution engulf them!
These are all good points. But when you’re talking about an industry that is as heavily subsidized as the airlines, you have to include a lot of other considerations when you look at the impacts of taxes and fees on the customers.
Sorry, to disagree, but is the government in the business of taxing businesses out of business now? Where do you suppose a business will take their company when they get tired of taxes?
It also seems the general public has lost sight of one important fact if they are all in favor of taxing industry to raise revenue, or taxing anybody for that matter, and that is this: Some of us want the government to STOP SPENDING; simple fact of life, if you don’t have the money, don’t spend it!
Maybe it’s time to educate the “new” citizens and remind the “old” ones why some of our ancestors left England, and fought the British for Independence.
How many choices to passengers have?
American Airlines just became the largest airline with the merger with U.S. Air. That surely cuts down on competition and market share pricing battles.
One of the advantages of going Galt is not having to fly and therefore not having to pay this new tax.
My Irish is up too!
“you have to include a lot of other considerations”
Agreed but if people and businesses decided with conviction to make do without flying it could start a chain reaction that would push out all private company competition, clearing the way for a federal takeover of the industry, which might be the game plan, anyway. We are, and have been, behind the socialist curve for decades now.
How many choices to passengers have?
Not many choices, CW, but one of them is to stop using the airlines. I havent flown in 13 years. If I cant drive there, I dont go. Business dealings, weddings, funerals.. What if every business that flys its people around says lets cut back 90% and we can save that money?
Even heavily subsidized businesses can go broke. Even the US Post Office, the king of subsidized businesses, may fold its tent.
Consolidation certainly makes the “transition” to state run smoother.
And, people wonder why I go to the expense of owning a private plane and flying myself. As much as I travel, it’s cheaper and safer.
Sorry, but I disagree with your synopsis of the TSA. I frequent airports often, and they prevent nothing. They are a joke, period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.