Calling bullshit
From an N&O article reporting today on a press conference held by opponents of Durham's proposed prepared meals tax:
This of course explains why Mr. Dallas Woodhouse is leading the fight to remove the 2% tax that Durham currently collects when you buy that uncooked chicken at the grocery store to take home and cook it yourself, right?
Except that, you know, he isn't.
What a load of bullshit from opponents to the tax. There's lots of legitimate reasons to oppose the tax. Its regressivity isn't one of them.
Here's some irony for you. I usually partake of the Friday afternoon oyster special at Fishmonger's. When i left for my California vacation, oysters were 5 bucks a dozen on Friday afternoons. When i got back, not only was Fishmonger's sporting a couple of "No To The Meals Tax" placards around the restaurant, but they had managed to raise the price of oysters 40%, to 7 bucks a dozen. Think that will reduce sales as much as taxing me a nickel for each dozen i used to eat, money which will pay for improvements to my community? Look, Gary can charge whatever he wants to for the food he sells in his restaurant. He doesn't even have to use his revenues to "renovate" the bar upstairs, or make the bathrooms a little more sanitary. But damn if i'm going to spend my money on that hypocrite.
UPDATE: And shame on the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People for getting into bed with the reactionary "Americans for Prosperity." Dr. LaVonia Allison's reputation has dropped to a new low in my book. Americans for Prosperity is actively campaigning against Democrats, including Kay Hagan, whom the Committee has endorsed in her Senate run against do-nothing incumbent Liddy Dole. Dr. Allison, as a member of the state executive committee of the Democratic Party, should know better than to give credence to an extreme right-wing group that exalts Ronald Reagan on their website.
Restaurant owner Gene Devine also spoke in opposition, along with N.C. Central University law student Norlan Graves, N.C. Restaurant and Lodging Association president Paul M. Stone, and Dallas Woodhouse, treasurer of the Durham Citizens group.
"Everything is in a crisis now," said Devine, referring to the national economic situation. "If there's the worst time to do anything, it's now."
The presentation included a display of grocery-store merchandise the opponents said would be subject to the tax, such as a bucket of fried chicken, a sandwich and cupcakes.
"Durham will survive without the tax," said Woodhouse, who organized the Durham opposition as state director of Americans for Prosperity, a national limited-government lobbying organization.
Woodhouse and several other opponents attended the pro-tax kickoff in September. Several proponents were on hand at today's press conference.
Julie Ketner-Rigby of the Museum of Life and Science said census data demonstrate that prepared-food taxes are actually progressive, affecting affluent consumers more than those of lower incomes.
Woodhouse said that claim is "a fundamental mistake. ... Nothing can be more regressive than taxing food."
This of course explains why Mr. Dallas Woodhouse is leading the fight to remove the 2% tax that Durham currently collects when you buy that uncooked chicken at the grocery store to take home and cook it yourself, right?
Except that, you know, he isn't.
What a load of bullshit from opponents to the tax. There's lots of legitimate reasons to oppose the tax. Its regressivity isn't one of them.
Here's some irony for you. I usually partake of the Friday afternoon oyster special at Fishmonger's. When i left for my California vacation, oysters were 5 bucks a dozen on Friday afternoons. When i got back, not only was Fishmonger's sporting a couple of "No To The Meals Tax" placards around the restaurant, but they had managed to raise the price of oysters 40%, to 7 bucks a dozen. Think that will reduce sales as much as taxing me a nickel for each dozen i used to eat, money which will pay for improvements to my community? Look, Gary can charge whatever he wants to for the food he sells in his restaurant. He doesn't even have to use his revenues to "renovate" the bar upstairs, or make the bathrooms a little more sanitary. But damn if i'm going to spend my money on that hypocrite.
UPDATE: And shame on the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People for getting into bed with the reactionary "Americans for Prosperity." Dr. LaVonia Allison's reputation has dropped to a new low in my book. Americans for Prosperity is actively campaigning against Democrats, including Kay Hagan, whom the Committee has endorsed in her Senate run against do-nothing incumbent Liddy Dole. Dr. Allison, as a member of the state executive committee of the Democratic Party, should know better than to give credence to an extreme right-wing group that exalts Ronald Reagan on their website.
Since 1949, Durhamites have slept soundly, secure in the knowledge that, in our town, erection can be depended upon. Now, thanks to the power of the internets, we can spread that security all over the world.
2 Comments:
People already pay a tax on prepared meals. It's called the sales tax. It's more than the grocery tax. FWIW, I'd be happy to see the grocery tax removed, but the fact that it's there doesn't make adding another tax right.
Also, comparing the tax with what FM charges for oysters is comparing apples and oranges. In one case, a restaurant picks a price, and you pick whether to eat there. [Or, in this case, you pick whether to eat there because they're for or against the tax. :) But I digress.] In the other, prices go up by an additional 1% in every restaurant, and you have no choice in the matter, other than not to buy prepared food.
"Progressive": I imagine the proposed tax is progressive in the sense that rich people go out to eat more often than poor people, and spend more money when they do. But it's regressive in that taxing a prepared meal is worse than, say, taxing the purchase of a car or house.
BTW, I'll bet oyster prices got all screwed up because of the Gulf of Mexico hurricanes, but I'm just speculating.
By
Joseph H. Vilas, at 10:32 AM
Here's my thinking.
A restaurant is a business of which i am a customer. A city is a business of which i am both a partner and a customer.
The only decision i can make about a business of which i am a customer is whether or not to remain a customer. I'm sure that the recent weather events in the Gulf have affected supplies of oysters. Gary's business decision is how much of his increased costs he feels he can pass on to his customers without driving them away.
As a business owner, that's his call.
As a partner in the business of the city of Durham, we also have to look at whether or not our costs have gone up, how much investment we want to make in our business in order to increase its value, etc. I believe that my investment in the business of the city of Durham is not increasing in value as much as it should. I believe that the business of the city of Durham needs to increase its spending on maintenance, on cultural activities, etc., in order to increase the value of the business for all of its partners. Those partners include all of the restaurants in town, as well as all of the residents who might patronize them.
Those restaurant owners who do not believe that the business of the city of Durham needs to increase its revenues in order to maximize its potential value are, in my opinion, mistaken. They hurt their own revenues, and the value of their own business, by their short-sighted decision making. There are more ways to cast a ballot than voting on Election Day. One way that i can express my opinion is by not patronizing restaurants that put their misguided opposition to the investment that the business of the city of Durham needs to make in itself front and center.
By
Barry, at 10:59 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home