You can't sell it, if it isn't grown. Tobacco farmers have already been punished enough with the elimination of the government price support system. I'm glad I live in a dry county. I wish prohibition had worked, but since it didn't (due to corruption and a weak president who gave up too soon) let's punish the alcohol industry all we can for all the ills it causes in society: addiction, broken lives, broken homes, death on the highways........

 

My guess is that you are very pro 2nd Amendment despite of all the terrible "gun" deaths in this country......All counties should be wet and the same holier than thou people pushing this type of tax are the same ones blocking all the tax revenue and job creation that legalizing casino gambling would bring to our fine state. Sorry I know I got a little off topic.

You can't sell it, if it isn't grown. Tobacco farmers have already been punished enough with the elimination of the government price support system. I'm glad I live in a dry county. I wish prohibition had worked, but since it didn't (due to corruption and a weak president who gave up too soon) let's punish the alcohol industry all we can for all the ills it causes in society: addiction, broken lives, broken homes, death on the highways........

 

 

Or because making something illegal doesn't mean people say "Well shucks, now that my SB neighbors managed to get this alcohol stuff banned I will stop drinking it! Hodeeho." The demand does not disappear, it just makes the production and distribution a crime as such trying to meet said demand becomes criminal and you get less reputable individuals involved in its manufacture and dissemination throughout the populace.

 

Sorry Trampler. Prohibition, despite your religious ideology, does not work.

You can't sell it, if it isn't grown. Tobacco farmers have already been punished enough with the elimination of the government price support system. I'm glad I live in a dry county. I wish prohibition had worked, but since it didn't (due to corruption and a weak president who gave up too soon) let's punish the alcohol industry all we can for all the ills it causes in society: addiction, broken lives, broken homes, death on the highways........

The tax is going up on the finished product like dip and cigarettes not on the crop itself. If a county does not have any tobacco grown in it I would guess it's gas stations and supermarkets still sell tobacco products. So what in the world does growing it have to do with selling the finished products. And blaming alcohol for ills in society is like blaming a gun when someone gets shot.

When will the Fast Food Restaraunts be taxed? Big Macs are killing me!

 

If folks quit drinking and quit smoking, then where will the money come from. I will say that I am glad that they picked on an industry other than just tobacco.

 

Kentucky home of Tobacco, Bourbon and Gambling (Horses Only).....The original Sins!

Sure it's the same. The purpose of taxation is supposed to be to use the money for the "common good". If you are going to designate that money derived from one type of taxation only be used for certain citizens; then, why not prioritize all tax dollars, according to where they came from, who produced the revenue, etc. It sounds like you espouse the opinion of many of our forefathers who believed only the wealthy land owners and merchants should benefit from government.

 

Then we're right back to why isn't Jefferson County getting a full share of coal severance money.

 

You can't have it both ways. Either everyone gets to share the "common good" or no one should. If you truly believe that everyone should then 100% of the coal severance fund should be put into the state's general coffers for the "common good".

 

And FWIW when only less then 50 cents on every tax dollar that Jefferson County produces comes back and when Jefferson County has to beg the powers that be in Frankfort for anything then yes to a certain degree I do think that the wealthier counties ought to get more benefit from the tax dollars they produce. If you're not happy living in a less affluent area then move.

I've never understood why the government expects alcohol/tobacco users to bear a heavier tax burden than other luxury/sin/nonessential good users. If the product is such a "sin" that you are imposing a greater tax to discourage its usage, then just ban the product altogether. A cigarette smoker should not bear a heavier tax responsibility than a Twinkee eater, french fry eater, or eggnog drinker - they are all unhealthy for you. If it's a "luxury" tax, why not place stiffer taxes on fur coats, jewelry, certain cars? Why has it become the responsibility of smokers and drinkers to pay a higher percentage of our roads, bridges, education, and infrastructure?

 

Nice post. I'll add to your list; how about a higher tax on text messages? And tanning bed visits? Or clothes from J. Crew?

 

Really, what is this, other than a small band-aid? Is it really going to solve our revenue and budget problems? Or does it just work for a year or two? And then, what?

Gov. Beshear is not on the good side of the bourbon/liquor industry now. He basically stabbed them in the back, after receiving campaign funds from them and now he does this.....

My guess is that you are very pro 2nd Amendment despite of all the terrible "gun" deaths in this country......All counties should be wet and the same holier than thou people pushing this type of tax are the same ones blocking all the tax revenue and job creation that legalizing casino gambling would bring to our fine state. Sorry I know I got a little off topic.

Are you pro-automobile despite all those terrible "car" deaths in this country?

Nice post. I'll add to your list; how about a higher tax on text messages? And tanning bed visits? Or clothes from J. Crew?

 

Really, what is this, other than a small band-aid? Is it really going to solve our revenue and budget problems? Or does it just work for a year or two? And then, what?

 

Exactly. Doesn't matter what is taxed now because there is more to follow.

Most people want the care takers to keep our programs intact and that takes money. There is a very simple answer to this problem that many do not want to hear. Cut spending, which requires cutting programs.

To lend more credibility to this : How many people would cry if the Horse Park were done away with? I couldn't care less , but bring that up to the Gov. and see what happens.

Edited February 14, 200917 yr by rockmom

I think it is a good idea.

I have no qualms on taxing those things that causes higher expenses for government to deal with.

I would have no problem with an additional sales tax on fast food and other food items that contribute to poor eating habits that lead to higher medical insurance costs.

I understand why they taxed these things, I just don't like what the Governor did. He speaks face to face with the liquor industry, telling them they are "taxed too much" already and that he would not implement any more taxes on them.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, he is a politician afterall.

For those screaming for the raping of the coal severance funds away from the counties where it is generated consider this. When the CST was created in the early 70's, it was because of the realization that coal was a valuable natural resource and the citizens of the commonwealth who generate it should get more back from its depeletion than just wages and broken backs.

 

If you are not closely associated with the coal industry, you probably have no idea at what cost the mining of that resource brings with it to the men and women and communities who do the mining. Yes, the owners and the companies who operate the mines make out like bandits and many of them have no local ties.

 

But the citizens, communities and counties that have borne the brunt of the environmental, social and economic costs of coal mining have always felt a strong and justified entitlement to those funds, and rightfully so, IMO. For those communities where coal has dominated the economies and the politics for over 150 years, the severance funds are seen as a potential key resource for creating more diverse, stable and wholesome communities.

These communities have paid the price for the depletion of that natural resource and they need the diversity and stability that comes with the returning of the coal severance monies to the origin counties.

 

In the beginning, 50% of the monies were to go back to the origin counties before splitting up the rest in Frankfort, but for many years that formula has not been followed and the severance monies have been at the mercy of the legislature.

 

Before you decide where that money should go, drive through Johnson, Martin, Pike, Lawrence, Knott, Letcher, etc. counties and stop at random and talk with coal mining familes. Look at the roads and marvel at the lack of infrastructure and basic needs. It might change your perspective.

 

If Jed Clampett struck oil in Kentucky, his fortune would be split up and divided by the legislature instead of buying that mansion in Belverly Hills.

As far as the thread topic, I am not in favor of increased sales tax only on certain consumer goods. This is a punitive tax and that sets a bad precedent, IMO. For a state who generates a lot of its revenue from tobacco and bourbon, to tax it more heavily on its own consumers is bad business.

And the majority of counties that are dry will reap the benefits of this while paying nothing for it.

 

When will Jefferson County see their share of the coal severance money?

 

They do a lot more than you think. There is tons of it spend all over Kentucky. They are trying to use some of it right now to fix some of the general budget woes according to the Herald-Leader the other day.

Then we're right back to why isn't Jefferson County getting a full share of coal severance money.

 

You can't have it both ways. Either everyone gets to share the "common good" or no one should. If you truly believe that everyone should then 100% of the coal severance fund should be put into the state's general coffers for the "common good".

 

And FWIW when only less then 50 cents on every tax dollar that Jefferson County produces comes back and when Jefferson County has to beg the powers that be in Frankfort for anything then yes to a certain degree I do think that the wealthier counties ought to get more benefit from the tax dollars they produce. If you're not happy living in a less affluent area then move.

 

Jefferson County is not the end all that they are betrayed to be sometime. The illustrious governor just canceled a road that was suppose to be built in my community. The road is badly needed it serves at least a thousand people daily the mountain has suffered mud slides several times and has sheets of tin holding the dirt in place to keep the road there. It takes you roughly 20 minutes to 10 miles on this road. It is a road used by countless semi trucks daily that can't keep the truck on their side of the road, one of which hit my wife last spring and almost killed her. Don't think you aren't the only place not getting your fair share. I haven't heard of many major road projects in Louisville or Lexington being put off.