• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maryland decides to tax residents when it rains

sangha said:
Gee, I thought that the rightwingers believed that when you tax something, it decreases.

They are taxing the covering of permeable land with unpermeable materials. Obviously, tax this will reduce it, thereby reducing runoff
Click to expand...

I'm not a rightwinger, so your first sentence is foreign to me. But please explain the rest. I'm not arguing, just wondering how taxing people will reduce the runoff. Wouldn't eliminating the pollution be the way to go here?
 
The Man said:
I'm not a rightwinger, so your first sentence is foreign to me. But please explain the rest. I'm not arguing, just wondering how taxing people will reduce the runoff. Wouldn't eliminating the pollution be the way to go here?
Click to expand...

The pollution of runoff is caused by numerous factors which are too difficult to control, and often, impossible to control without completely re-organizing our economy and culture. These sources of pollution include tailpipe emission, fluids leaking from trucks and car, soil, pesticides and fertilizers, pet waste, detergents, lawn clippings, and host of other things which are spread diffusely and would require a totalitarian govt to eliminate. So eliminating the pollution is not feasible.

Contrary to the hysteria of the wingnuts, rain is not being taxed. Covering permeable ground with impermeable materials is being taxed. People can (and according to economic theory, will) reduce their tax burden by reducing the amount of ground that is covered with impermeable materials. Once some of this impermeable material is removed, there will be more permeable ground to soak up these pollutants, so the rain won't run off these pollutants into the water.

on edit: Please don't think I'm foolish enough to believe what you say in your lean. I've seen you change it several times now.
 
Wouldn't surprise me if they started taxing everyone for everytime they wiped their backsides. They could call it the "Bend Over" tax.
 
Binky said:
Wouldn't surprise me if they started taxing everyone for everytime they wiped their backsides. They could call it the "Bend Over" tax.
Click to expand...

*sniffle* but what about my right to pollute?
 
The Man said:
I just don't understand how taking money from people is going to all of a sudden stop the pollutants? Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Just the mindset of a Maryland politician. If they can find a way to get more money then it's a good idea regardless of the reason they give for it.
 
Surtr said:
I bet O'Malley has I'm Only Happy When it Rains on a constant loop.
Click to expand...

I think he dreaming for more big box stores since the bigger your roof the bigger the tax. Some places are considering up to $30k/year tax for businesses.
 
notquiteright said:
I watched the Bay and it's tributaries almost die, the tax isn't on rain but what the rain washes into the Bay.... :peace
Click to expand...

And yet none of the Eastern Shore counties are effected by the law. Great idea, taxing people in the Catoctin mountains for nitrogen and phosphate run off while leving the million chicken a year ranch next to the Miles River alone.
 
sangha said:
They are taxing the covering of permeable land with unpermeable materials. Obviously, tax this will reduce it, thereby reducing runoff
Click to expand...

Well except for the roads and driveways which is more area than all the roofs and driveways in the effected counties. But those farms in Baltimore City, they have to PAY for all the run off they create!
 
Binky said:
Wouldn't surprise me if they started taxing everyone for everytime they wiped their backsides. They could call it the "Bend Over" tax.
Click to expand...

They already have that, it's called the Flush Tax and it was implemented 8 years ago to do the exact same thing as the Rain tax is suppose to do.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
And yet none of the Eastern Shore counties are effected by the law. Great idea, taxing people in the Catoctin mountains for nitrogen and phosphate run off while leving the million chicken a year ranch next to the Miles River alone.
Click to expand...

True and that COULD show the power of the argibusiness sector vs the urban sector when it comes to exemptions. I don't know about the Eastern Shore agricultural practices of today, DO know out here we have curtailed large chemical and fertilizer outlays. We still trail the towns and cities, well WE call them cities, in chemical and fertilizer run-off.

Would be interesting to know the farmland vs suburban run-off comparison.
 
notquiteright said:
True and that COULD show the power of the argibusiness sector vs the urban sector when it comes to exemptions. I don't know about the Eastern Shore agricultural practices of today, DO know out here we have curtailed large chemical and fertilizer outlays. We still trail the towns and cities, well WE call them cities, in chemical and fertilizer run-off.

Would be interesting to know the farmland vs suburban run-off comparison.
Click to expand...

The whole thing makes no sense as the counties where the tax is being put on are based on population alone, as if having more people living in an area means more nitrogen and phosphate are put in the ground. There is virtually no un-pearmeable surfaces in Baltimore City outside a few parks. Most lawns are so small that it takes you longer to walk from the front yard to the back yard than it takes to cut either. The number of people in Baltimore City that would even consider fertilizing their lawns is miniscule. There are no farms in Baltimore City. There is no agriculture. Yet the people and businesses will be taxed to try and reduce it run off that is mostly generated by farms. On the Eastern shore and St. Mary's country there is a LOT of agriculture very close to the Bay and the rivers that feed it yet they are not taxed. You either have to be a Maryland politician or a special kind of screw ball to think this will have any impact on the Bay.

Now if the tax was to reduce TRASH run off it might make some sense to tax Baltimore City as much more of that is generated than in the Eastern Shore counties and it does run into the harbor which runs into the Bay but that's not the purpose of the tax becasue it wouldn't require as much money to implement. This tax is estimated to generate $14 billion by 2025, about 1/2 billion a year, assuming it is not increased like the Flush Tax recently was. It will be collected and wasted just like every other program in the past 40 years that was suppose to Save the Bay.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Maryland decides to tax residents when it rains



Read the rest at the link.
Click to expand...

The title or the article is borderline retarded. They aren't taxing people "when it rains" as in you get taxed per the amount of water it rained on your property, they are taxing people based on the size of their property, and structures on the property in order to finance improved drainage.

Exactly where do people think governments get the money for improving drainage?
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Well except for the roads and driveways which is more area than all the roofs and driveways in the effected counties. But those farms in Baltimore City, they have to PAY for all the run off they create!
Click to expand...

Roads are owned by the govt, and taxing the govt has already been shown to be absurd. And driveways makes up a small part of the total.
 
sangha said:
Roads are owned by the govt, and taxing the govt has already been shown to be absurd.
Click to expand...

So is taxing people for the size of their roof, driveway and patio but just because it's absurd it doesn't stop people from defending it.
 
sangha said:
Only for those who can't, or don't want, to understand the reasoning
Click to expand...

That would be you.

The reasoning is faulty but keep on believing it's a good idea. Maybe your State will implement it too. All those farm in Manhatten sure are causing nitorgen and phosphate run off I'm sure. since the Susquahanna starts in NY and ends in the Bay perhaps you should volunteeer to do your part to Save the Bay too. I'm sure MOM won't turn down a check from you.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
That would be you.

The reasoning is faulty but keep on believing it's a good idea. Maybe your State will implement it too. All those farm in Manhatten sure are causing nitorgen and phosphate run off I'm sure. since the Susquahanna starts in NY and ends in the Bay perhaps you should volunteeer to do your part to Save the Bay too. I'm sure MOM won't turn down a check from you.
Click to expand...

Actually, my state has been taking action to clean up its' waterways for several decades now. Contrary to your delusions, the govt has done a lot to keep our waterways clean.
 
sangha said:
Actually, my state has been taking action to clean up its' waterways for several decades now. Contrary to your delusions, the govt has done a lot to keep our waterways clean.
Click to expand...

You act like this is the first thing ever proposed here. There have been programs to 'save the bay' for 40 years, both at the State and Federal level. This particular one will do nothing more than the others. You should be grateful it's not Federal money so you don't have to contribute.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
You act like this is the first thing ever proposed here. There have been programs to 'save the bay' for 40 years, both at the State and Federal level. This particular one will do nothing more than the others. You should be grateful it's not Federal money so you don't have to contribute.
Click to expand...

You act like reality is a liberal conspiracy
 
sangha said:
You act like reality is a liberal conspiracy
Click to expand...

Oh no, this is just standard Maryland stupidity it has nothing to do with any political philosophy.

It's a tradition. Lets target the smallest percentage of pollution, exempt 1/2 the surfaces that contribute to it because the government owns them, base the taxing solely on population and call it problem solved until we squander the money raised. The repeat.
 
Banning phosphates in laundry detergent apparently made a huge dent is helping save the bay. As for this fee, it just depends on what they earmark the proceeds toward. If they spend it on schools, not benefit. If they spend it on improving storm water management, then it might could help some. Other than being a state tax, it is really no different than the sewage fee my city charges which is the cost of sewage treatment pro-rated based on water consumption---the more water you use the higher your sewage fee even if you are using that water on your garden. There is no poop meter on the sewer lines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom