That main income tax challenge -- roads and bridges -- revisited

I believe it's here that we've recently re-examined the old saw that people throw at you first thing when you tell them income taxes are voluntary: "But what would happen," they counter as if on cue, "to our roads bridges if everybody stopped paying them?"

The answer is obvious -- nothing would change! There's no connection. Here's where it gets deliciously easy: you just remind them of the real reason gas is so expensive -- the fact that the price of every gallon is roughly 1/3 to 1/2 TAXES for the maintenance of roads and bridges, plus building ever more of them. Your questioner has no option; everybody knows it's so. You've pinned him in one move.

The South Carolina Department of Transportation just proved it all over again "in living color". The agency brings the startling news that taxes aren't high enough and the people will just have to pay more. How much do you suppose will ever satisfy them?

http://www2.wspa.com/news/2011/may/19/scdot-higher-gas-tax-needed-maintain-roads-ar-1864894/
SCDOT: Higher Gas Tax Needed To Maintain Roads
by Graeme Moore

Published: May 19, 2011» 2 Comments | Post a Comment

The South Carolina Department of Transportation says a higher gas tax is needed to meet the repair demands of today's roads and bridges.

South Carolina's gas tax is the nation's third lowest at 16 cents per gallon, and that figure hasn't increased since 1987, though costs for everything else has increased, the DOT says.

Jason Allison, a district DOT engineer in Greenville, said an extra four cents a gallon would mean a 25% revenue increase for the department.

"Think about what 4 cents a gallon would do to fix these bridges, fix the potholes, do the re-surfacing that needs to be done," he said.

While Allison knows it's not a popular idea politically, he said it's the best way to get the repairs done, though any action would have to be taken by state lawmakers. When the idea has come up in the past, it's always been shot down.

What do you think?

..............Talbert Black has more news on our favorite subject. It reflects badly on our governor, as did something terrible I heard in an AM news radio broadcast today: She has enthusiastically signed the Orwellian new law to require photo identification at polls. Affecting a jingoistic Teddy Roosevelt-like tone on the subject, she told the people of South Carolina that if they have to show picture ID to get on a plane or get into a federal building (or something like that) they should be pleased as punch to do the same at the polls.

She made it sound like a real privilege. I couldn't believe it. It reminded me of the horrible days of president slick willy, who could always affect a "winsome" or "plucky" tone to sell something murderous to the sheeple. As he was the national cub scout for eight years through that ploy, is Gov. Haley morphing into South Carolina's winsomely earnest First Bobby-Soxer as we watch hoping against hope that there will be no gubernatorial bait-and-switch with her? Is this the week she's unofficially started to run with the big dogs and sell us down the river?

Friends of South Carolina!

The South Carolina House caved today!

In a vote of 97-20, the South Carolina House reversed an earlier vote of 47–71 that would have preserved equal protection under the law. The Amazon “safe harbor” tax exemption passed the House Wednesday.

South Carolina exempts more sales tax than it collects according to numbers published by the South Carolina Policy Council. In fact, if all the tax exemptions were eliminated, then the sales tax could be reduced to 3.15% without reducing the amount collected!

Through strong arm tactics, including reported threats regarding how district lines would be redrawn, the Speaker of the House, Bobby Harrell, and House Majority Leader, Kenny Bingham, were able to turn the hearts of an additional fifty representatives against all the traditional retailers in our state.

In one of the worst examples of leadership I have ever witnessed, Governor Nikki Haley “fought” this legislation by expounding all its faults, and then saying, “However, if you pass it, I won’t veto it.”

Huh?!? Is that anyway to lead the opposition against a bad bill?

How can she expect members of the House to take a risk and vote against the pressure brought to bear by the Speaker and the Majority Leader when she won’t even commit to using her only “vote” to veto the legislation if it makes it to her desk?

She keeps citing a memorandum of understanding sign by the previous administration. However, that does not prevent her from vetoing a law she disagrees with. It can’t! Only she can decide to sign or veto legislation.

Governor Haley needs to lead by example! Her actions must match her words!

For those who need a refresher on why this “safe harbor” tax exemption should be opposed, please follow this link to see a write up by Karen Martin of the Spartanburg Tea Party. She spent a lot of time researching the issue and has created the best summary I have seen regarding it.

Let me give you just one small example of how this bill helps Amazon to keep hurting small business in South Carolina.

Robert Schaeffer, owner of Rice Music House, told me people often walk into his store to find a piece of sheet music. But instead of buying it from him, they pull out their smart phone and order it from Amazon or another on line retailer. It is cheaper for them to buy on line because no sales tax is charged. They walk out of his store, never buying a thing from him.

Without a presence, or “nexus”, in our state, federal law prohibits South Carolina form collecting sales tax in a situation like this. Now, Amazon wants to move to our state and make use of our roads, airport, and emergency services which are paid for by our taxes. But they still don’t want to collect those taxes!

Amazon wants to keep their price advantage over traditional retailers. They still want Rob Schaeffer to maintain their free show room! Ninety-seven members of the South Carolina House think that is a good thing. And Governor Haley is talking a great talk, but refuses to walk the walk.

Here are the 97 House members who voted against every retail business, small and large, in South Carolina Wednesday:

Allen Allison Anthony

Atwater Bales Ballentine

Bannister Battle Bedingfield

Bingham Bowen Brady

Branham Brannon G. A. Brown

H. B. Brown Butler Garrick Chumley

Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter

Cole Cooper Crawford

Crosby Daning Delleney

Dillard Edge Forrester

Frye Gambrell Gilliard

Govan Hamilton Hardwick

Harrell Harrison Hart

Hayes Hearn Henderson

Hixon Hodges Horne

Hosey Huggins Jefferson

Johnson King Knight

Limehouse Loftis Long

Lowe Lucas McCoy

McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss

V. S. Moss Munnerlyn Murphy

Nanney J. H. Neal J. M. Neal

Neilson Ott Parker

Parks Patrick Pinson

Pitts Pope Quinn

Rutherford Sabb Sellers

Skelton G. M. Smith G. R. Smith

J. E. Smith J. R. Smith Sottile

Spires Stavrinakis Stringer

Tallon Taylor Thayer

Toole Weeks Whipper

White Whitmire Willis

Young

I’d appreciate it if you could make a small donation today to help us keep fighting for liberty in South Carolina. All the work is volunteered, I don’t get paid to do this, but the radio air time, postage, and such that are used to promote our ideals are paid for by your donations.

Follow this link please, and donate $10 if you can! All money donated through this link will be used in South Carolina.

Thanks for all you do!

Talbert Black, Jr.

Interim State Coordinator

Campaign for Liberty

..................Our next item will have resonance for any conservative who remembers the early Castro era. I certainly do -- I was in fourth grade during the Cuban missile crisis, apparently the same age as this guy. We children didn't know politics from nothin', but the stuff our teacher told us about what was going on 90 miles from ameriKan shores was enough to ruin the most stoic childhood.

What a shame ameriKa has had anything to do with Cuba or the USSR -- above all, any fear of them. I'm convinced we're exactly what kept communism going in both places in order for the fedgov to have bugbears to "save" us from, in stark contrast to its heroic dragon-slaying poses past and present. Just as Washington's totally needless involvement in World War II gave my mother night terrors as a young girl, my youth was sullied by mortal dread of names like Khrushchev, Castro, and Mao Tse-Tung. All needless, all irrelevant if this country had simply claimed its birthright as an island of neutrality in a "new world" with an ocean on each side to shield it from European and Asian woes!

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=32895

I remember asking dad about Castro when I was about 9 years old. I asked, "Is Castro a good guy or bad?" Dad said he couldn't tell!! This was about 1955. We were living in Louisiana at the time . Dad was in the army there.

Cuba was fairly close and in the news a lot. The Cubans were asking the same question! Ike was president.

This past July, we had the pleasure of sharing a summer barbecue with a refugee from Cuba. Our dinner conversation was starkly different than most. This refugee came to the United States as a young boy in the early 1960s. His family was more fortunate than most as they were able to bring a suitcase and $100 when they fled Castro's newly formed revolutionary paradise.

Our dinner consisted of all-American fare: hamburgers, potato salad, watermelon and fresh ars of sweet corn. This is a menu shared with family and friends nationwide, while celebrating the birth of our beloved America on the Fourth of July.

We began with a simple discussion about our country and the direction it has taken since Barack Obama came to power. We shared the usual complaints about the sour economy and liberal social engineering emanating from the rulers in Washington.

But then he said it. The sentence came naturally. I assume it was. unplanned. But it carried the weight of a freight train. "You know when Castro took power, none of us knew he was a Communist."

We sat stunned. He continued, "Yes, we all thought he was a patriot, a nationalist. Before the revolution he didn't sound like a radical."

The comparison at this point was easy, and I interjected, "You mean just like Barack Obama?"

He responded, "Yes, just like Barack Obama."

He continued, "We were all shocked as the government just continued to grab more power. First they said the revolution is over, so please turn.. in your guns. We all complied."

"I remember my uncle saying after it started, 'Castro will only nationalize some of the big industries, he will never come and take our family hardware store. 'But that is exactly what happened, Castro started with the sugar mills and the large industries, but they eventually came and knocked on the door of our family hardware store. My family had run this store for generations. They said we now own the hardware store, you work for us. And that nice, large four-bedroom home you own, it is now our property also, and you can move yourself and five children into two rooms of the house because others are moving in with you."

The lesson learned from this discussion is a lesson most Americans refuse to hear. Political leaders can lie about their agenda and once in office they can take totally unexpected turns.

If you had asked us three years ago if we thought General Motors would be nationalized, we would have never believed it. We could never contemplate a country where the rule of law, the most fundamental building block of a justice society would be evaporating just like it did in Castro's Cuba in the early 1960s.

But the news of injustice keeps increasing. Black Panthers are not charged with wrongdoing by the U.S. Department of Justice because their crimes are against whites. The bondholders of GM are stripped of their assets without due process by the government. Governmental leaders are bribed in full daylight only to have all investigation of the crimes stifled by the Attorney General. The U.S. borders are overrun with crime.. and illegal activity and the leaders in D.C. act as if it is important to protect the lawbreakers while the innocent are killed and overrun. When local communities attempt to enforce the law, they are ridiculed and threatened as racists and bigots. They are sued by the very administration entrusted with enforcing the law.

Without the rule of law the U.S. Constitution is a sham. Without the rule of law our beloved America is swiftly becoming a country where only the well connected and politically, powerful will be safe. As Michelle Malkin has so eloquently explained in her recent book, a culture of corruption has replaced honest government.

The only way this problem will be fixed is by massive citizen action. All honest citizens that want to be treated equally must come together and demand that the favoritism, the bribes, the uneven enforcement of law end now. And yes, it can happen here.

/\/.\/\/.