Latte tax

brbr
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3163141.stm



Idiots in seattle now want to tax non-drip coffee to help subsidize daycare centers. God dammit if you are going to have kids BE PREPARED TO FOOT THE BILL! I'm tired of people who have proven that their genitalia work getting these kinds of breaks from the government at the expense of the rest of the population. If you can't afford kids don't have them. This just promotes more irresponsibility. I'm fed up.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 94
    Quote:

    This just promotes more irresponsibility.



    I concur wholeheartedly and I say thank you to Starbucks and their loyal coffee whores. This is a great incentive to have kids, because not only will I save on daycare in the future because of this tax but I also won't have to buy rubbers anymore. If I can find enough fellow irresponsible poor welfare hos to cavort with I can have a bakers' dozen in the oven before the sun rises again. If we do it doggie style, I can even fill out the daycare forms on her back while I'm getting my groove on.
  • Reply 2 of 94
    argentoargento Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath

    If I can find enough fellow irresponsible poor welfare hos to cavort with I can have a bakers' dozen in the oven before the sun rises again.



    My tweleve o'clock is free.
  • Reply 3 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath

    I concur wholeheartedly and I say thank you to Starbucks and their loyal coffee whores. This is a great incentive to have kids, because not only will I save on daycare in the future because of this tax but I also won't have to buy rubbers anymore. If I can find enough fellow irresponsible poor welfare hos to cavort with I can have a bakers' dozen in the oven before the sun rises again. If we do it doggie style, I can even fill out the daycare forms on her back while I'm getting my groove on.



    No no no no no. Starbucks OPPOSES THIS VEHEMENTLY.
  • Reply 4 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    I'm sick of coworkers that get out of, beg off of, cut out and leave, drop projects for others to put back together, leave things undone .... all because they have kids. Just because they have a kid doesn't mean they get to stop working. They still get paid don't they?
  • Reply 5 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    I'm sick of coworkers that get out of, beg off of, cut out and leave, drop projects for others to put back together, leave things undone .... all because they have kids. Just because they have a kid doesn't mean they get to stop working. They still get paid don't they?



    Prepare to be blown away...



    Scott, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
  • Reply 6 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Of course the guy I have in mind was a big time slacker before the kid. Now it's just the excuse. I'm surprised he got around to ****ing his wife.
  • Reply 7 of 94
    chinneychinney Posts: 1,019member
    Non-drip coffee? Never heard of it. Tax away. Tax away.



    However, if any of the kids turn out like Scott, or for that matter, BR, well then....
  • Reply 8 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Hey!
  • Reply 9 of 94
    half-caff, low-fat, non-dairy latte makers should know how to have non-drip relations

    they're capable of removing the active mojo from every other ingredient

    </frasier to niles mode>
  • Reply 10 of 94
    giaguaragiaguara Posts: 2,724member
    That is a stupid law. If they want to add a tax to the coffee = espresso and derivates, they should add the same tax also the "coffee" = the filtered dirty water. And teas. And chocolate. And yerba mate and so on.
  • Reply 11 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Giaguara

    That is a stupid law. If they want to add a tax to the coffee = espresso and derivates, they should add the same tax also the "coffee" = the filtered dirty water. And teas. And chocolate. And yerba mate and so on.



    Or...get this...have parents PAY FOR THEIR OWN KIDS' DAY CARE AND NOT TAX EVERYONE!
  • Reply 12 of 94
    giaguaragiaguara Posts: 2,724member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BR

    Or...get this...have parents PAY FOR THEIR OWN KIDS' DAY CARE AND NOT TAX EVERYONE!



    That makes a lot more sense.
  • Reply 13 of 94
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    So we'll spend billions to fight Afghanis and Iraqis to indirectly save American souls, but not millions to directly save kids?
  • Reply 14 of 94
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by curiousuburb

    half-caff, low-fat, non-dairy latte makers should know how to have non-drip relations

    they're capable of removing the active mojo from every other ingredient

    </frasier to niles mode>








    Oh that's beautiful.



    Alright, I'm originally *from* the Great Wet North, and I don't see the problem with this one...



    1) The money is going to already-subsidized daycare, like HeadStart. Yeah, I think parents should take responsibility for their own kids, pay for their own day care, etc, etc, etc. But it ain't gonna happen for the lowest economic levels. It just ain't. So... this.



    2) The tax is a luxury tax, not a caffeine tax. Really, think about it... you *can* get your caffeine from cheap drip coffee, or cheap Coke. If you want to shell out $3.50 for adding some milk, that's a *luxury*. If you can afford that, you can afford an extra 10 lousy cents. (And yeah, I buy lattes all the time... if I could get them in an IV, I'd be in heaven.)



    Personally, I think it's a brilliant way to raise money by taxing a voluntary luxury item that is sold in insane quantities in Seattle. It's purely voluntary, it's purely luxury. *shrug*
  • Reply 15 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    So we'll spend billions to fight Afghanis and Iraqis to indirectly save American souls, but not millions to directly save kids?



    Oh jesus christ. What happened to personal responsibility? LAZY POOR PARENTS SHOULDN'T BE SUBSIDIZED FOR POPPING OUT KIDS! Can't afford a kid? DON'T FVCKING HAVE ONE!



    Stop taxing me so you can raise your kids.

    Hell, give incentives for those poor people NOT TO HAVE KIDS! It will do society as a whole a favor.
  • Reply 16 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha





    Oh that's beautiful.



    Alright, I'm originally *from* the Great Wet North, and I don't see the problem with this one...



    1) The money is going to already-subsidized daycare, like HeadStart. Yeah, I think parents should take responsibility for their own kids, pay for their own day care, etc, etc, etc. But it ain't gonna happen for the lowest economic levels. It just ain't. So... this.



    2) The tax is a luxury tax, not a caffeine tax. Really, think about it... you *can* get your caffeine from cheap drip coffee, or cheap Coke. If you want to shell out $3.50 for adding some milk, that's a *luxury*. If you can afford that, you can afford an extra 10 lousy cents. (And yeah, I buy lattes all the time... if I could get them in an IV, I'd be in heaven.)



    Personally, I think it's a brilliant way to raise money by taxing a voluntary luxury item that is sold in insane quantities in Seattle. It's purely voluntary, it's purely luxury. *shrug*




    It's not purely voluntary. Purely voluntary would mean that if you want to support these leeches, you write the day care centers a check. Ooooh, only 10 cents. The cost isn't the point. The point is this is just another law in the long line of stupid laws that have destroyed the principles of PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY in this country. God dammit this pisses me off.
  • Reply 17 of 94
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BR

    It's not purely voluntary. Purely voluntary would mean that if you want to support these leeches, you write the day care centers a check. Ooooh, only 10 cents. The cost isn't the point. The point is this is just another law in the long line of stupid laws that have destroyed the principles of PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY in this country. God dammit this pisses me off.



    It's unconscionable to decry a breach in principle of "personal responsibility" when a "latte tax" can help the children of the poor. Who really gives a flying **** about another conservative principle being sacrificed for practical reasons. The tax will send a message to the poor that no matter what, government will help raise their children.



    And they need the help, God dammit.



    If people don't want the poor to reproduce, then I suggest subsidizing contraception and sex education in addition to any of the current measures. If the government already does that, then subsidize more of the cost while educating more of the poor.
  • Reply 18 of 94
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,455member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShawnJ

    It's unconscionable to decry a breach in principle of "personal responsibility" when a "latte tax" can help the children of the poor. Who really gives a flying **** about another conservative principle being sacrificed for practical reasons. The tax will send a message to the poor that no matter what, government will help raise their children.



    And they need the help, God dammit.



    If people don't want the poor to reproduce, then I suggest subsidizing contraception and sex education in addition to any of the current measures. If the government already does that, then subsidize more of the cost while educating more of the poor.




    Is there anything that isn't "unconscionable" to you and bunge when "helping" the poor?



    Why do they need the help? Who says that two parents working is better than one or that lack of personalized attention from a parent is preferable to financial gain?



    I don't make these declarations from on high. I have worked as a teacher in these neighborhoods for over a decade.



    Especially among the hispanic population, the trend is clearly sacrifice financial gain for parenting. This trend is so clear among this group, that stay at home mothers went up as a percentage of the population for the first time in over two decades.



    In your view it is helping. In my view it is cultural imperialism. Likewise I have also worked as a day care/day camp worker. The ratio for workers is 15 children to 1 adult. Why would you advocate a child getting up to 15 times less personal attention from an adult just so a mother or father can go slave away for an employer who will just exploit them. (Surely in your view they must be exploited or else they wouldn't be poor in the first place right?)



    Double the exploitation, 15 times less attention and anyone who stands against it is "unconscionable." Please....



    My wife and I have decided to forgo a second income so that she may stay home with our children and give them personalized attention. To make this choice has cost us over $200,000 of lost income. However we prefer our children to have our attention instead of any adult who had taken 12 units at a community college and wandered into a day care center to earn a whole $8-9 an hour.



    Your presumption of superiority is insulting. Your questioning of the decisions, and the cultural traits that lead to them is even more so. Advocating that the poor send two adults off does not insure they are any better off. I'm sure you have yet another array of governmental programs to assist the traits their children show due to lack of adult interaction and attention. I'm sure you will attempt to medicate them for their "ADD" give them fatty, crappy "free" cafeteria school lunches and breakfasts which contribute to the growing rate of obesity, etc.



    Likewise I'm sure you will advocate "afterschool programs, etc. to address again, the lack of individualized attention from their parents.



    Your real agenda of course is seperate the child from their parents. Then you can instill whatever values, etc. you desire. I know I'll declare it "unconsciounable" when you advocate a tax for an afterschool "youth brigade."



    Nick
  • Reply 19 of 94
    trick falltrick fall Posts: 1,271member
    Quote:

    I'm sick of coworkers that get out of, beg off of, cut out and leave, drop projects for others to put back together, leave things undone .... all because they have kids.



    When I was younger I used to feel the same way, but as I get older and spend more time with people who do have kids I feel quite differently. When you start to hear about all the challenges parents face from people you know and respect it makes it a little bit more palatable when they're ducking out early to bring junior to the dentist, soccer etc....
  • Reply 20 of 94
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trick fall

    When I was younger I used to feel the same way, but as I get older and spend more time with people who do have kids I feel quite differently. When you start to hear about all the challenges parents face from people you know and respect it makes it a little bit more palatable when they're ducking out early to bring junior to the dentist, soccer etc....



    The point is they shouldn't be expected to make the same wage if they refuse to put in the same time, effort, and dedication to the job.
Sign In or Register to comment.