This would be enough to get reach for a stiff drink . . . if it weren’t prohibitively expensive. Oregon legislators are proposing a 1900% tax increase so voters not only have to face the economic crisis but do it without beer.
Oregon House Bill 2461, which would impose a $49.61 tax on each barrel of beer produced by Oregon brewers.
The money would go to fund prevention, treatment and recovery programs for those addicted to alcohol and other substances. The increase is meant to fill a $4.15 billion shortfall — the equivalent of roughly four days that we spend on the war effort.
Legislators trying to fill budget gaps across the country can also rely on recent studies showing a correlation between tax increases and sobriety.
. Yet, there has been no study on the political impact of when people finally sober up and realize how legislators in Congress and the states have fouled up the economy. Fortunately, scientists are now working on a pill to erase bad memories.
The tax plan could prove devastating to Oregon’s native beer makers, forcing some to leave the state.
For now, you will at least know the answer to what ales you in Oregon and other states.
For the full story, click here.
White House to Release GM An Additional $4-Billion To Stay Afloat (UAW VOTE payoff for Dems)
Democrat Rep. Henry Waxman: ‘Oversight of the Internet is One of His Top Priorities’
Senators Flying on Private Jets To DC = OK; Auto Executives Doing the Same = Bad
Turley, Fatboy Olbermann never addressed the lying under oath Roland Burris tonight.
How come?
Turley, when is the next time you are going on fatboy Keith Olbermann’s “entertainment tonight” fiasco?
Can you ask him why he is afraid to have an honest debate instead of his regular blather?
(Dem) Feinstein blows our Pakistani cover
At the hearing, Feinstein expressed surprise at Pakistani opposition to the ongoing campaign of Predator-launched CIA missile strikes against Al Qaeda targets along Pakistan’s northwest border. “As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base,” she said of the planes.
Until now, most people assumed that the US conducted its Predator strikes on Taliban and al-Qaeda targets from bases in Afghanistan. Now, however, Senator Dianne Feinstein has exposed a Pakistani partnership on Predator launches that the previous administration tried to keep quiet. Her offhand remark may put the entire program in jeopardy.
Invitation to Keith Olbermann
February 13, 2009
NEW YORK, Feb. 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following is from Betsy McCaughey, Ph.D., the author of the recent Bloomberg.com article, “Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan.”
If Keith Olbermann of MSNBC could defend the health provisions slipped into the stimulus bill on their merits, he wouldn’t be resorting to personal attacks on me. Olbermann calls me a shill funded by the drug industry (2-12-2009). That’s not true.
I am not paid by the pharmaceutical industry or by the Hudson Institute. I hold only an honorary Fellows position at Hudson, and take no money or benefits from it. If Keith Olbermann has the courage, I invite him to debate me on his program.
The Obama administration promised transparency, but gave us a sleight of hand. Slipped into the stimulus bill are provisions that change healthcare in major ways. If these provisions are so good for us, why are they hidden in a stimulus bill and rushed through Congress?
Transparency is not a partisan issue. Good people may differ on their health care views. But who can argue with the fact that the health provisions in the stimulus bill should be removed and offered as separate legislation, so that the nation can consider the long term consequences and make an informed decision?
Mr. Olbermann, do you have the backbone (and the facts) to debate me?
http://health.einnews.com/article.php?nid=601272
GM calls Treasury’s bluff
February 15, 2009
When Congress started discussing a bailout for American automakers, critics pointed out that massive loans would do nothing to fix the problems of GM, Chrysler, and Ford. We argued that bailouts would prove counterproductive, as it removed the incentive for the real stakeholders in the company — stockholders, management, and labor — to substantially change their economic model to make themselves more competitive in the marketplace. Two stories bear that out this weekend. First, GM, Chrysler, and the UAW remain stubbornly unable to reach a realistic contract.
Why would neither management nor labor work towards a compromise? They have little incentive to do so as long as third parties keep refilling the bank accounts with cash. The bailout allowed both sides to hold out longer and maintain unrealistic demands, just as I predicted it would. Only when faced with imminent collapse and the loss of millions of jobs will these two sides start acting in the best interests of their business, rather than in the best interests of themselves. The government bailout only delayed the inevitable.
As if to prove that again, GM has now demanded another bailout as the price of continuing talks.
In fact, bankruptcy processes exist for just this kind of situation. Instead of bailing out GM and Chrysler, the government should have stayed out of the situation altogether. If labor didn;t want the companies to declare bankruptcy, they could have negotiated a contract that would have avoided it. Now we have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars to get us right back to the same point we were in the fall.
Obama can’t afford to alienate the unions by cutting the automakers loose. He’ll wind up pushing through another expensive bailout, which will kick the can down the road to about June or July. And once again, we will find ourselves at the same exact point, because the upcoming bailout will do what it did the last time, which is to allow management and labor to avoid making some hard choices about their business model.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result — or perhaps that’s the true definition of Hope and Change.
Whiskey Rebellion 2 to start in 3.. 2.. 1..
Figures these are Democrats doing this.
Funny thing how states are going bankrupt and all Democrats want to do is raise taxes and drive more jobs overseas.
I bet homemade beer kits sales go through the roof in Oregon
This one goes out to FFLEO,
There’s a Tear in my Beer…
Gyges,
Glad to hear from you again!
When it comes to taxes on beer we can all agree that it is a bad thing. there are going to be many lost jobs vis a vis the luxary boat tax a few years ago. once that happens hopefully the politicians will think again and get it right.
below is a link to the TARP bill and it is scary it basically gives the federal government the ability to meddle in any business, I think but I am not a lawyer so I would value any legal input.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/topics/paulsontext.pdf
Buddha,
We also wouldn’t have: the Beer Barrel Polka; One Bourbon, One Scotch, and One Beer; Beer Drinkin’ Woman; Sunday Morning Coming Down; In Heaven there is No Beer; Titties and Beer; Roadhouse Blues… the list goes on and on and on.
FFLEO,
Since you are on the source and values of country music as relates to booze, without it, we wouldn’t have Hank Williams, Sr. – one of the finest things to happen in American music of any genre. But then again, we wouldn’t have Hank Jr.’s questionable contributions and shilling for the Bush’s either so I guess it’s a trade off. Maybe Sr. would have ended up as obnoxious as Jr. had he lived longer, but we’ll never know.
While beer may be occasionally free, it would seem that lunch always has a price. And Hank Sr. was a musical steak dinner. And on that note, I’ll leave the flatulence jokes for seamus.
My favorite is “Homer no function beer well without.” or “Here’s to alcohol, the cause of—and solution to—all life’s problems.”
Besides if the govmit’ taxes hops out of existence, where will drunks get the inspiration to pen such great inspirational country songs like Johnny Russell’s, ‘Rednecks, White Socks, and Blue Ribbon Beer’…
“All work and no beer makes Homer go . . . go . . . ”
“Go crazy?”
“Don’t mind if I do!”
As one who abstains from alcoholic beverages, I still oppose this tax in these tough economic times. I prefer that there were no cigarettes, cigars, alcoholic drinks—and especially—no illegal drugs whatsoever. However, this tax is excessively unfair; it will cost the loss of some jobs, and then the further loss of justifiably derived tax revenue from that lost income.
As a historical note, the Pacific Coast is where most of the American Craft Brewing revolution started. Oregon also produces a large chunk of US Hops. Last I hear Portland also had more breweries than any other city in the US.
This yax could drive many breweries out of business. Few of the breweries in Oregon are big enough to absorb this kind of tax. This essentially adds a little under a buck per 6 pack. The brewers are faced with raising prices as their costumers have less money, cutting costs, or eating the cost themselves. Cutting costs usually means using cheaper ingredients which would lose any microbrewery costumers. I’m not sure what the profit margin on beer is, but I’d be very skeptical that any small brewery or most medium sized breweries could survive loosing $1.60 per gallon produced.