A Tax I Would Support

[ClydeR]

You all know that as a conservative Republican, I oppose most taxes. I especially oppose taxes that fall hardest on the most productive people in society. It will surprise you to learn that some Romanian lawmakers came up with a tax I would support.

They want to tax witches and fortune tellers. And there is an extra tax on fortune tellers who make wrong predictions.


Lawmakers Alin Popoviciu and Cristi Dugulescu of the ruling Democratic Liberal Party drafted a law where witches and fortune tellers would have to produce receipts, and would also be held liable for wrong predictions, a measure which was part of the government's drive to increase revenue.

Romania's Senate voted down the proposal Tuesday. Popoviciu claimed lawmakers were frightened of being cursed.

More... (http://www.kansascity.com/2010/09/09/2209754/abracadabra-romania-witches-win.html)

[Daragon]

You all know that as a conservative Republican, I oppose most taxes. I especially oppose taxes that fall hardest on the most productive people in society. It will surprise you to learn that some Romanian lawmakers came up with a tax I would support.

They want to tax witches and fortune tellers. And there is an extra tax on fortune tellers who make wrong predictions.

Umm, I am against this. Reason why is it is a tax on religion. Whether you agree with it or not, witchcraft is a religion, and fortune telling is ingrained in some religions. Thats like saying we are going to tax you to pray. No, don't agree at all.

[Rocktar]

You all know that as a conservative Republican, I oppose most taxes. I especially oppose taxes that fall hardest on the most productive people in society. It will surprise you to learn that some Romanian lawmakers came up with a tax I would support.

They want to tax witches and fortune tellers. And there is an extra tax on fortune tellers who make wrong predictions.

Can we tax the living fuck out of weathermen, they are wrong like 95% of the time? How about on all religions, properties of religious, clergy and membership because they make predictions all the time and they are wrong. OOOO, how about a tax on stock brokers because they make bad predictions too? Or economists and analysts who make wrong predictions?

If it's a uniform tax on small business, then I would be against it just on that part. As it stands, I am both against that AND against the tax specifying a religion and religious practices.

[Daragon]

Can we tax the living fuck out of weathermen, they are wrong like 95% of the time? How about on all religions, properties of religious, clergy and membership because they make predictions all the time and they are wrong. OOOO, how about a tax on stock brokers because they make bad predictions too? Or economists and analysts who make wrong predictions?

If it's a uniform tax on small business, then I would be against it just on that part. As it stands, I am both against that AND against the tax specifying a religion and religious practices.

What about a tax on Politician's when they lie? Or when they are wrong? Obama would be fucked...

[Jace Solo]

I think that doesn't count as taxing religion because it's a service charged for by individuals who practice their faith.

In a church, at least Christian churches, tithing is optional. It would be wholy disruptive to services to crank out receipts as well as destroy the idea of anonymous charity.

The idea is that the money donated to churches or other organizations, like the red cross, go back into helping society in larger quantities than, we'll say, a fortune teller at a circus could ever provide...I doubt she has a consistent enough following to provide mass service.

Would the tent or the whole circus count as her "church"?

I'm not speaking for all religions, just the one I know about. If there are some that demand an actual amount to attend, I don't know...my argument might be completely irrelevant.

Definitely never heard of circus folk apply for non-profit status.

[Daragon]

I think that doesn't count as taxing religion because it's a service charged for by individuals who practice their faith.

In a church, at least Christian churches, tithing is optional. It would be wholy disruptive to services to crank out receipts as well as destroy the idea of anonymous charity.

The idea is that the money donated to churches or other organizations, like the red cross, go back into helping society in larger quantities than, we'll say, a fortune teller at a circus could ever provide...I doubt she has a consistent enough following to provide mass service.

Would the tent or the whole circus count as her "church"?

I'm not speaking for all religions, just the one I know about. If there are some that demand an actual amount to attend, I don't know...my argument might be completely irrelevant.

Definitely never heard of circus folk apply for non-profit status.

If you tax a service that is an institution in a religion, then that is taxation of religion. It does not matter if a circus also uses the service as well. If a circus says a prayer, would you tax prayer?

[ClydeR]

I think that doesn't count as taxing religion because it's a service charged for by individuals who practice their faith.

Who says you can't tax a religion?


In a church, at least Christian churches, tithing is optional. It would be wholy disruptive to services to crank out receipts as well as destroy the idea of anonymous charity.

Churches already give receipts so people can deduct their contributions on their taxes. I don't mean to embarrass you, but the only reason you didn't already know about it is obviously because you never contribute.

[Daragon]

Who says you can't tax a religion?



Churches already give receipts so people can deduct their contributions on their taxes. I don't mean to embarrass you, but the only reason you didn't already know about it is obviously because you never contribute.

I do not get why people think I am you. People. Because churches are a charity. Not a business.