![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jul. 4th, 2012
AAARRRGGGHHHHH!!!
Jul. 4th, 2012 03:06 pmIf I see one more story about whether the ACA individual mandate is, or is not, a "tax" I am going to run amok.
WHO THE FUCK CARES? Agree with the policy or don't agree with the policy, unless you're actually deciding whether it's within Congress's constitutional power to impose, why does it matter whether you call it a tax?
(And not for nothing, but the entire Court agreed it wasn't a tax for the purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, so I don't even know why anyone's looking to the Supreme Court to decide this question.)
And for fuck's sake, it's not like there's any functional difference between a fee and a tax. For example:
States Raise Fees, Fines To Salvage Budgets And Avoid Tax Increases
Findlay: Higher parking fees help avoid property tax increase
Waukesha Budget: Garbage Fees Help Avoid Tax Increase
It's all money! That you have to pay! To the government! In some circumstances! Either it's a good idea or it's a bad idea but what you call it doesn't matter.
Now, as a policy matter, I think that substituting fees instead of taxes is horrible in many instances because, unlike taxes, fees aren't imposed at graduated rates or as percentages of income. That means that, practically speaking, when you substitute a "fee" for a "tax," you disproportionately burden poorer people. But that's a substantive problem with the fee, not the name.
And yes I realize this is about marketing but it's insulting to pretend it's anything other than that, and incredibly frustrating to hear people discuss this issue as though these terms had some meaning.
WHO THE FUCK CARES? Agree with the policy or don't agree with the policy, unless you're actually deciding whether it's within Congress's constitutional power to impose, why does it matter whether you call it a tax?
(And not for nothing, but the entire Court agreed it wasn't a tax for the purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, so I don't even know why anyone's looking to the Supreme Court to decide this question.)
And for fuck's sake, it's not like there's any functional difference between a fee and a tax. For example:
States Raise Fees, Fines To Salvage Budgets And Avoid Tax Increases
Findlay: Higher parking fees help avoid property tax increase
Waukesha Budget: Garbage Fees Help Avoid Tax Increase
It's all money! That you have to pay! To the government! In some circumstances! Either it's a good idea or it's a bad idea but what you call it doesn't matter.
Now, as a policy matter, I think that substituting fees instead of taxes is horrible in many instances because, unlike taxes, fees aren't imposed at graduated rates or as percentages of income. That means that, practically speaking, when you substitute a "fee" for a "tax," you disproportionately burden poorer people. But that's a substantive problem with the fee, not the name.
And yes I realize this is about marketing but it's insulting to pretend it's anything other than that, and incredibly frustrating to hear people discuss this issue as though these terms had some meaning.