Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Angel Eyes on May 01, 2015, 08:55:03 PM
-
URL is self-explanatory:
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Senate-Passes-Sales-Tax-Free-Weekend-for-Gun-Purchases-302015101.html
If you listen carefully, you can hear left-wing heads exploding (more guns and no tax: two things they hate).
-
Every day is a sales tax free day in Anchorage. And I can buy guns at the grocery store. And open carry and CC with out permit. But Texans think they are the best :facepalm:
-
Every day is a sales tax free day in Anchorage. And I can buy guns at the grocery store. And open carry and CC with out permit. But Texans think they are the best :facepalm:
Stranger, 'round these parts we celebrate victories with a toast, a cheer, and maybe some good-natured snark. If you're gonna try and turn this into a pissing contest after a whopping six posts to the forum then you might want to shop elsewhere.
Brad
-
Stranger, 'round these parts we celebrate victories with a toast, a cheer, and maybe some good-natured snark. If you're gonna try and turn this into a pissing contest after a whopping six posts to the forum then you might want to shop elsewhere.
Brad
And you determined what I posted was not good natured snark? Yes your honor.
-
Stranger, 'round these parts we celebrate victories with a toast, a cheer, and maybe some good-natured snark. If you're gonna try and turn this into a pissing contest after a whopping six posts to the forum then you might want to shop elsewhere.
Brad
What victory? This may be taking "incremental victories" to a new level.
The senate passed a bill. The house still needs to vote on it.
And how is it that Texas does not require that fiscal bills originate in the house?
stay safe.
-
You'd prefer no one ever did anything? Positive moves deserve positive reinforcement. Otherwise there's no incentive for improvement.
Someone in a political position introduced a pro-firearms bill. The senate passed it. That, in itself, is a victory. And, yes, incremental is just fine with me. A step forward is a step forward no matter how minor. Marginalizing a small step because it's "not everything we want" is one of the reasons why firearms and firearms owners have made so few advances vs where we should be.
Brad
-
Hey, Brad, I'm just glad you're not posting about your local lacrosse team again. :P
But like Brad said, every little bit helps. Good for Texas. =)
-
And you determined what I posted was not good natured snark? Yes your honor.
Even if you intended it as good-natured snark it still comes across as embittered, confrontational one-upsmanship.
Brad
-
Hey, Brad, I'm just glad you're not posting about your local lacrosse team again. :P
*harumph* It's not lacrosse. :mad:
...It's synchronized underwater basket painting. =D
Brad
p.s. Interesting that should come up. Visiting the fam for an annual community celebration weekend. The coaching staff was in the football fieldhouse. Hadn't set so much as a toe in the place since November of 1985. It hasn't changed much.
-
It's nice someoine introduced a pro-gun bill and sheparded it through the senate. Where I come from bills dealing with budget/tax need to originate in the house - there can be a companion bill (exact same language as the house bill) introduced in the senate at the same time or later than the house bill. Anything otherwise is a grandstanding gesture with no chance of success (constitutional challenge) and a high probability of pissing off the house leadership to the point of not considering moving a bill on the subject forward in that session.
Le beau geste can sometimes be the guarantee of failure.
Which was why the query about fiscal bills originating in the senate.
stay safe.
-
Every day is a sales tax free day in Anchorage. And I can buy guns at the grocery store. And open carry and CC with out permit. But Texans think they are the best :facepalm:
I don't think Angel Eyes' post was superior or condescending in any way, but your tone and the facepalm were, implying that Texans are fatuous retards. Some of us surely are, but I also read your post as hostile rather than snarky.
-
Anytime someone posts something good about Texas and guns, one or a few people come out of the woodwork to complain that their state is better on guns. I think some people not from Texas have inferiority complexes. =D
-
And you determined what I posted was not good natured snark? Yes your honor.
:lol:
I think he's gonna do just fine 'round here.
-
While I will concede the lack of freedom in the "free" state of Texas' gun laws....
Alaska just gets it's revenue stream from the federal government taxation of the oil industries. Any time you don't pay a tax, it's taken elsewhere. It's just a shell game.
-
Every day is a sales tax free day in Anchorage. And I can buy guns at the grocery store. And open carry and CC with out permit. But Texans think they are the best :facepalm:
Then $DEITY bless Alaska too.
Oh, and welcome to the forum.
-
While I will concede the lack of freedom in the "free" state of Texas' gun laws....
Alaska just gets it's revenue stream from the federal government taxation of the oil industries. Any time you don't pay a tax, it's taken elsewhere. It's just a shell game.
You must be from Texas to get it so wrong. There is no FEDERAL tax on Alaska oil that Alaska is receiving. The State collects ROYALTIES from oil extracted from it's OWN LAND. See the difference? If you had a gold mine in your yard, would you just give it away?
-
Then $DEITY bless Alaska too.
Oh, and welcome to the forum.
Thanks. Sure didn't take me long to get on the wrong side of the Texas supporters. :lol:
-
Thanks. Sure didn't take me long to get on the wrong side of the Texas supporters. :lol:
1) We like it here.
2) How much fun would Alaska be supporting its' "fair share" of teat suckers?
=)
-
1) We like it here.
2) How much fun would Alaska be supporting its' "fair share" of teat suckers?
=)
[/quote
I need to get back to you. Don't have enough booze in me to figure out your post. Working on that now.
-
All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. =(
But I did appreciate it. =)
-
You must be from Texas to get it so wrong. There is no FEDERAL tax on Alaska oil that Alaska is receiving. The State collects ROYALTIES from oil extracted from it's OWN LAND. See the difference? If you had a gold mine in your yard, would you just give it away?
Royalty...tax....all the same when government is involved.
It increases the price the rest of us pay and that's where it comes from.
-
Anytime someone posts something good about Texas and guns, one or a few people come out of the woodwork to complain that their state is better on guns. I think some people not from Texas have inferiority complexes. =D
Hehe. Did anyone mention that a bill is going through the WI legislature right now that eliminates our stupid 48hr waiting period for buying handguns?
When this goes through, WI will have better (less) gun laws than Texas >:D
-
Royalty...tax....all the same when government is involved.
It increases the price the rest of us pay and that's where it comes from.
So you think Alaska should just give it's oil to BP? No charge?
-
All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. =(
All I got is that dumbass stick sounds like it's raining.
-
Hehe. Did anyone mention that a bill is going through the WI legislature right now that eliminates our stupid 48hr waiting period for buying handguns?
When this goes through, WI will have better (less) gun laws than Texas >:D
Good for you. Hope it passes. =D
-
Those sorts of royalties and export style taxes are probably the kind we should have. It is the income tax we should get rid of.
Also, a chunk of higher education funding in Texas comes from oil income from state owned land.
-
So you think Alaska should just give it's oil to BP? No charge?
Oh I didn't say that. Just not agreeing that the lack of direct taxes you pay isn't the same as taxation.
-
All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. =(
But I did appreciate it. =)
We can buy guns at our pet supply stores here.
-
All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. =(
But I did appreciate it. =)
I can imagine California missed out on a lot of taxes from you that day. =D
Oklahoma laws on firearms are middle of the road, need to change to constitutional carry, only reason I would like the permit/license to stay put is if they tied it into the NICS.
One place where Oklahoma is backwards is the damn liquor laws. You can buy 3.2 beer on Sundays but can't buy liquor anywhere other than liquor stores which are closed on Sundays and you want more than water you have to buy it in a liquor store and it isn't going to be cold.
-
Oh I didn't say that. Just not agreeing that the lack of direct taxes you pay isn't the same as taxation.
I am not sure what you are getting at. I pay Federal taxes at the same rate as any one. Alaska doesn't have a state tax because of oil royalties. They are not "taxing" anyone simply selling a natural resource they own.
-
I am not sure what you are getting at. I pay Federal taxes at the same rate as any one. Alaska doesn't have a state tax because of oil royalties. They are not "taxing" anyone simply selling a natural resource they own.
It is a fee. If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage. If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so. Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties." Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits. Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties." And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).
In the lower 48 we call that "welfare." But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.
-
It is a fee. If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage. If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so. Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties." Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits. Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties." And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).
In the lower 48 we call that "welfare." But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.
You feel Alaska should just sell off it's oil producing land to BP? Tell me who that would benefit and why. [popcorn]
-
It is a fee. If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage. If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so. Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties." Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits. Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties." And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).
In the lower 48 we call that "welfare." But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.
In point of fact Alaska both leases land to the oil companies (along with fed.gov and some native entities) AND taxes the revenues from that oil. It must not be that bad, because the market bears it.
As far as what you are calling wellfare, not so much. It is sharing of the profits of community owwned land. When I get a dividend payment from BP that's not wellfare, it's my share of the componies profits as part owner. Well the state owned lands in AK make a (large) profit, and each part owner of that land gets a dividend from that profit.
Alaska does have some wellfare programs, mostly native programs and some rural stuff, but they come from the general fund.
FWIW, AK is not unique in not having sales tax. FL doesn't either. We also leverage our natural resources (rich tourists and old people) to pay for our state gov.
-
You feel Alaska should just sell off it's oil producing land to BP? Tell me who that would benefit and why. [popcorn]
It would benefit me. I'm a BP stock holder.
-
It would benefit me. I'm a BP stock holder.
You must have enjoyed the oil spill :lol: This whole Alaska is a welfare state by people like Roo kills me.
-
Yeah, I'm not so sure people from states like Texas and California should be calling the Alaskan kettle black. CA and TX take royalties from oil companies as well, except instead of giving it to "every anus", they just give it to the anuses they like, such as public schools and "the environment". At least AK is treating every oil company and anus somewhat equally.
-
Yeah, I'm not so sure people from states like Texas and California should be calling the Alaskan kettle black. CA and TX take royalties from oil companies as well, except instead of giving it to "every anus", they just give it to the anuses they like, such as public schools and "the environment". At least AK is treating every oil company and anus somewhat equally.
Good post. Not real happy over all the "anus" reference's however regards to Alaska . :mad:
-
Good post. Not real happy over all the "anus" reference's however regards to Alaska . :mad:
Nothing to be unhappy about - everybody has one. :)
-
Nothing to be unhappy about - everybody has one. :)
True but I don't know how that would work out if I called every one "butthead" =D