• 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!

Is the New Tanning Tax Racist?

Is The New Tanning Tax Racist?

  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .
Partisan

Partisan

Banned
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
3,629
Reaction score
435
Location
LIBTARDISTAN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What say you?......:confused:
I say yes, it is by its nature discriminatory......
 
Last edited:
On what grounds is it racist?

Taxing tanning beds in my mind is just like increased taxes on cigarettes... these things are not necessities, and they can damage your health.

I'm assuming tanning beds are already taxed, but I'm not sure an increase in taxing will do any good. The only thing it will do is bring in more tax revenue, and that doesn't go over well in my mind.

I'd be more in favor of tanning salons being required to have their customers read warnings on the dangers of tanning beds, just like they add warnings on cigarettes. Might not do a lot of good, but at least we'd be ensuring everyone knows the dangers... and people have a right to know these dangers. From there they can make up their own minds.
 
It is along the lines of a cigarette tax or any other vice tax.
In the future, people who tan will likely accrue tanning-related medical costs.
It makes sense that they begin to help defray those costs now.
 
Stupid, pointless busybodying yes. Racist, no.
 
1069 said:
It is along the lines of a cigarette tax or any other vice tax.
In the future, people who tan will likely accrue tanning-related medical costs.
It makes sense that they begin to help defray those costs now.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree, as long as that tax revenue is going to the health care system directly. Is it possible to confirm this though?
 
Jucon said:
Oh I agree, as long as that tax revenue is going to the health care system directly. Is it possible to confirm this though?
Click to expand...

The tax was created as part of the healthcare legislation for that very purpose, so yes.
 
I think only a racist would think a luxury tax is racist.

This tax has nothing at all to do with race anymore than motorcycles or cigarette taxes.
 
Beyond that, I have it on good authority that Obama tans, or at least has in the past.
This is entirely anecdotal, but a friend of mine used to work at this very posh health spa (as an interesting side note, she quit because she got her pinky finger severed in a door there, but that's entirely irrelevant to the story).
Anyway: several years ago, before he was president, even before he won the democratic convention, Obama came here to speak.
My friend was instructed to come in very early in the morning and open the spa, because Obama wanted to work out in privacy.
So she did, and he came in with a couple of other guys, worked out, and tanned.
She got to talk to him briefly, just small talk, and said he was very laid back and charming, very "normal".

But at any rate, he did tan while he was there.
So, clearly, the tax is not entirely aimed at whites.

* edit: just wanted to make it clear that I'm not referring to any sort of adult-oriented business here, or implying that Obama ever has or ever would patronize one. This was a legitimate health spa, with exercise and tanning facilities.
 
Last edited:
It's indirectly racist against the pale :mrgreen:
 
1069 said:
Beyond that, I have it on good authority that Obama tans, or at least has in the past.
This is entirely anecdotal, but a friend of mine used to work at this very posh health spa (as an interesting side note, she quit because she got her pinky finger severed in a door there, but that's entirely irrelevant to the story).
Anyway: several years ago, before he was president, even before he won the democratic convention, Obama came here to speak.
My friend was instructed to come in very early in the morning and open the spa, because Obama wanted to work out in privacy.
So she did, and he came in with a couple of other guys, worked out, and tanned.
She got to talk to him briefly, just small talk, and said he was very laid back and charming, very "normal".

But at any rate, he did tan while he was there.
So, clearly, the tax is not entirely aimed at whites.

* edit: just wanted to make it clear that I'm not referring to any sort of adult-oriented business here, or implying that Obama ever has or ever would patronize one. This was a legitimate health spa, with exercise and tanning facilities.
Click to expand...

I wonder if it was to quell the "He's not black enough" crowd?.....:confused:
 
There's evidence against that assertion in this very thread. Which portion would that be, or is the racist assumption yours, in seeing something not there, on the grounds of differing shades of skin colour? I'm a Scot. My natural skin colour is mottled blue. I need at least six hours of sunlight before turning white.
 
Partisan said:
What say you?......:confused:
I say yes, it is by its nature discriminatory......
Click to expand...

I think it is one of those taxes designed to pass under the assumption that most people do not go to tanning salons will support it since it does not affect them, just like cigarette taxes and other things that do not effect the majority.
 
It's as racist as an extra FET on Cadillac Eldorados, fried porkchops or pickled pig lips would be. If you don't think that would be racist, then I guess this tax isn't racist.

Taxes are considered racist when they effect more blacks than anyone else. Since this tax doesn't effect blacks, at all, then you'll have a hard time finding anyone with the balls to call it racist.
 
apdst said:
It's as racist as an extra FET on Cadillac Eldorados, fried porkchops or pickled pig lips would be. If you don't think that would be racist, then I guess this tax isn't racist.
Click to expand...

If that is not a racist and stupid statement, I don't know what is.

apdst said:
Taxes are considered racist when they effect more blacks than anyone else. Since this tax doesn't effect blacks, at all, then you'll have a hard time finding anyone with the balls to call it racist.
Click to expand...

Oh bull****. :roll:

It's a luxury tax, race had nothing to do with it.

****ing morons. :roll:
 
Blackdog said:
If that is not a racist and stupid statement, I don't know what is.



Oh bull****. :roll:

It's a luxury tax, race had nothing to do with it.

****ing morons. :roll:
Click to expand...

It's not a luxury tax. It's a, "we wanna control your lifestyle because we're going to pick up the tab", tax. If the government is worried that a person's lifestyle will cost them more money in medical care expenses, then let's not work towards single payer healthcare. But, we know it ain't about that. Don't we? It's about, "if we can get away with this, we can get away with the other **** we wanna do".

Your freedom is being taken away from you, while you sit back and try to look like a cool non-partisan. I'll see ya in the camp. Maybe we can get assigned to the same barracks and go on the same work details and talk more about it.
 
apdst said:
It's not a luxury tax. It's a, "we wanna control your lifestyle because we're going to pick up the tab", tax. If the government is worried that a person's lifestyle will cost them more money in medical care expenses, then let's not work towards single payer healthcare. But, we know it ain't about that. Don't we? It's about, "if we can get away with this, we can get away with the other **** we wanna do".
Click to expand...

Tanning is a frivolous and useless thing. If people want it, cool but the tax is nothing more than the same type of tax on motorcycles or cigarettes in every state for example.

This is irrelevant to my statement, or the one you made about this tax being racist.

apdst said:
Your freedom is being taken away from you, while you sit back and try to look like a cool non-partisan. I'll see ya in the camp. Maybe we can get assigned to the same barracks and go on the same work details and talk more about it.
Click to expand...

Nothing but silly hyperbole.

This has again nothing to do with your comments or my response to them.
 
apdst said:
It's not a luxury tax. It's a, "we wanna control your lifestyle because we're going to pick up the tab", tax. If the government is worried that a person's lifestyle will cost them more money in medical care expenses, then let's not work towards single payer healthcare. But, we know it ain't about that. Don't we? It's about, "if we can get away with this, we can get away with the other **** we wanna do".

Your freedom is being taken away from you, while you sit back and try to look like a cool non-partisan. I'll see ya in the camp. Maybe we can get assigned to the same barracks and go on the same work details and talk more about it.
Click to expand...

So there's no way it could be, "you cost the health care system more by partaking in an unhealthy lifestyle, so you should have to pay more"?

Cancer these days has a higher survival rate, but at an extreme cost to the patient and the insurance companies / health care system.

What's the difference between raising someone's health care rates when the person goes tanning compared to if they are taxed the extra ahead of time?

If it were me I would rather pay the tax and not have to worry about my health care rates going up because I use the tanning salon.
 
Last edited:
Jucon said:
On what grounds is it racist?

Taxing tanning beds in my mind is just like increased taxes on cigarettes... these things are not necessities, and they can damage your health.

I'm assuming tanning beds are already taxed, but I'm not sure an increase in taxing will do any good. The only thing it will do is bring in more tax revenue, and that doesn't go over well in my mind.Logically, this will ease the budget deficit.

I'd be more in favor of tanning salons being required to have their customers read warnings on the dangers of tanning beds, just like they add warnings on cigarettes. Might not do a lot of good, but at least we'd be ensuring everyone knows the dangers... and people have a right to know these dangers. From there they can make up their own minds.
Click to expand...
Agree on the taxes - this tanning stuff is a "luxury", a foolish one at that.
Strongly disagree on the warnings, people ignore them, and I do not blame them. We have far too many warnings and cautions, this must stop. Its a terrible waste of ink and paper.
How this tax can be racist is beyond me.
 
Last edited:
1069 said:
It is along the lines of a cigarette tax or any other vice tax.
In the future, people who tan will likely accrue tanning-related medical costs.
It makes sense that they begin to help defray those costs now.
Click to expand...

Where do you draw the line, though? Is it the government's business to "punish" us for how we chose to live in these United States? Will people who live near the beach get a special tax on top of already high property taxes? They get sunburned, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom