• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Obama taxes Christmas trees

Z

Zorro

New member
Hey, how many people think Obama would push for a burka tax?



This is from The American Thinker.



The American Thinker

November 9, 2011
Obama's Christmas gift to the people; a Christmas tree tax
Rick Moran


It's very expensive for liberals to play Santa Claus all the time while portraying conservatives as the offspring of Scrooge.
So what the liberals give with one hand, they take away with another in the form of increased taxes.
Just in time for Christmas - a new tax on Christmas trees to fund a cockamamie government program to improve the image and marketing of the trees.
Heritage:
President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees-the Christmas Tree Tax-to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees.
In the Federal Register of November 8, 2011, Acting Administrator of Agricultural Marketing David R. Shipman announced that the Secretary of Agriculture will appoint a Christmas Tree Promotion Board. The purpose of the Board is to run a "program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry's position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry" (7 CFR 1214.46(n)). And the program of "information" is to include efforts to "enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States" (7 CFR 1214.10).
To pay for the new Federal Christmas tree image improvement and marketing program, the Department of Agriculture imposed a 15-cent fee on all sales of fresh Christmas trees by sellers of more than 500 trees per year (7 CFR 1214.52). And, of course, the Christmas tree sellers are free to pass along the 15-cent Federal fee to consumers who buy their Christmas trees.
Acting Administrator Shipman had the temerity to say the 15-cent mandatory Christmas tree fee "is not a tax nor does it yield revenue for the Federal government" (76 CFR 69102). The Federal government mandates that the Christmas tree sellers pay the 15-cents per tree, whether they want to or not. The Federal government directs that the revenue generated by the 15-cent fee goes to the Board appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out the Christmas tree program established by the Secretary of Agriculture. Mr. President, that's a new 15-cent tax to pay for a Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees.
There are few things during the holiday season that are more beloved, more purely good than a Christmas tree. Why in the name of Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer do we need a government program to "improve the image" of something that already has such a strong hold on our imaginations?
What can the government possibly do to improve the image of the Christmas tree? Knowing the way that government works, they will probably end up somehow damaging the Christmas tree market, which will then necessitate an increase in the tax to further "improve" the image of the tree.
Click to expand...
 
Maybe the government can tax the sale of baby JESUS some how?:yum: this kind of thing is just wrong and will be more frequent as the debt crisis gets closer to home,hang on,we are only seeing the start of the cash grab.
 
Adillo303 said:
Government just does not get it.
Click to expand...

Sadly, neither does half the nation.
More than half the population thinks we shouldput more taxes on the rich. Totaly unaware of how that tax will trickle down into their own wallets.

So, while the governmet doesn't "get it" they will get away with it.
 
So let me get this straight. They're going to tax live Christmas trees in an effort to get people to buy live Christmas trees? Makes perfect f'ing sense. If they raised the taxes on grass seed, that will entice people to go buy seed as well.

Bunch of friggin' idiots.
 
I love the heading Obama taxes Christmas trees. Ah guys Presidents can tax anything and all economic policy starts in the House of Representives. It would be nice if perhaps some people brush up and actually read the Constitution of the US and that includes those that right this crap. Again no president can pass a tax, his only power is to sign it or veto it.
 
joec said:
I love the heading Obama taxes Christmas trees. Ah guys Presidents can tax anything and all economic policy starts in the House of Representives. It would be nice if perhaps some people brush up and actually read the Constitution of the US and that includes those that right this crap. Again no president can pass a tax, his only power is to sign it or veto it.
Click to expand...
\\



I love that dodge. Good one joec.:wink:
 
We get how the laws pass through Joe. To rephrase, whom was it that proposed this tax?
 
According to impeccable source Rush, the tax was at the request of the Christmas tree lobby group. Apparently the government can force farmers to participate in an advertising program whether they want to or not. Something like the closed union shop.

Rush also stated that Obama had backed down.
 
bczoom said:
We get how the laws pass through Joe. To rephrase, whom was it that proposed this tax?
Click to expand...
Obama can't pass tax legislation. True. Obama can direct his USDA to collect the advertising fee and hire the advertising agency.

If that doesn't work, then the president can just issue an executive order. This is something like a law but congress does not have a say.
 
joec said:
I love the heading Obama taxes Christmas trees. Ah guys Presidents can tax anything and all economic policy starts in the House of Representives. It would be nice if perhaps some people brush up and actually read the Constitution of the US and that includes those that right this crap. Again no president can pass a tax, his only power is to sign it or veto it.
Click to expand...

You simply have to hitch up that Obama-lovin' slip of your joec, 'cause it's showing again.

Obama only has the power to sign, veto or suggest a new tax, ala taxing the rich, repealing the Bush tax rates or having Cass Sunstein and the Apollo Group write the mandate into ObamaCare. Aside from Harry Ried's vain attempt at humor with the millionaire's surcharge, all of the new and improved taxes have come directly or indirectly from the administration.

But I must say you've got the spin down pat. If your health would allow, perhaps you could get some part time work next Spring helping David Axlerod fold, spindle and mutilate the truth during the upcoming campaign season.

Obama has a billion dollars (that's a thousand million dollars) to spend on good, wholesome professional prevarication. Seize the opportunity.

.
 
bczoom said:
We get how the laws pass through Joe. To rephrase, whom was it that proposed this tax?
Click to expand...

Now you know for fact that Obama proposed this tax?

Regardless he has proposed a number of taxes that the House shot down even under democrat control for 2 years. I sometimes think you guys are talking about another president that the congress walked in lock step with. Here is a Democratic President that not only was against the personal mandate but wanted something similar to Medicare for all. See how that worked out don't you. Democrats don't follow the party line any where near like the republican party does.
 
Kane said:
You simply have to hitch up that Obama-lovin' slip of your joec, 'cause it's showing again.

Obama only has the power to sign, veto or suggest a new tax, ala taxing the rich, repealing the Bush tax rates or having Cass Sunstein and the Apollo Group write the mandate into ObamaCare. Aside from Harry Ried's vain attempt at humor with the millionaire's surcharge, all of the new and improved taxes have come directly or indirectly from the administration.

But I must say you've got the spin down pat. If your health would allow, perhaps you could get some part time work next Spring helping David Axlerod fold, spindle and mutilate the truth during the upcoming campaign season.

Obama has a billion dollars (that's a thousand million dollars) to spend on good, wholesome professional prevarication. Seize the opportunity.

.
Click to expand...

Actually I didn't vote for him nor do I support him other than he is the president. I did the same for Bush also I might add.

My problem is the BS you guys tend to spout in here about him. First is he has a different point of view of how a country runs from you but that doesn't make him evil. I was against his health care but will give him credit when he should get it. So if you see me as being pro Obama then have at it as in fact you guys are pushing me more and more to his way of thinking as I see where the Republican party is going and flat don't like it at all. Now as for truth perhaps you fellows should actually look for it farther than you own opinions.

You guys need to actually get out of the country and visit a Communist or Socialist country you might learn we are a long way from it.
 
joec said:
I love the heading Obama taxes Christmas trees. Ah guys Presidents can tax anything and all economic policy starts in the House of Representives. It would be nice if perhaps some people brush up and actually read the Constitution of the US and that includes those that right this crap. Again no president can pass a tax, his only power is to sign it or veto it.
Click to expand...

Geeze, then why is he passing all these Presidential Decrees without the Congress approving it. They cost money to boot, so where do they get funded from.

This guy is a loon, sorry you can't see that.
 
fogtender said:
Geeze, then why is he passing all these Presidential Decrees without the Congress approving it. They cost money to boot, so where do they get funded from.

This guy is a loon, sorry you can't see that.
Click to expand...

Presidential decrees have nothing to do with taxes and only effect with a time limit what he has power over. As for presidential decrees perhaps you should look up how long they have been used and who did the most. I posted a list here a while back and Obama is not even close to the top of that list. Remember the executive is just one leg on a 3 legged stool and it takes all 3 in many cases.
 
According to the article,it says

"President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees-the Christmas Tree Tax-to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees."

I don't see Congress mentioned anywhere.

Seems depts like Agriculture and the EPA can impose fees on the industries they "regulate". This power is given them by the Congress.

Now JOEC I know you don't get this but just about any fee, when applied by the government, against the production of goods andservices, is really a tax. And like all taxes,(and Fees if you like) they are applied to te cost of providing those goods and services.

So when the government taxes an industry, they are putting those costs on the folks who buy those goods and services. Not on the folks who provide them.

And when the President's Secretary of the Agriculture does it, the Tax comes from the Whitehouse. IE the Executive Branch, where in the Secretary of Agriculture's office resides.

I think you will find how all of that works within the Constitution. I also think you will find it cool that the rich guy in a mansion pays the same 15 cents as the poor single mom with no income and six kids to feed.

Maybe not.
 
FrancSevin said:
According to the article,it says

"President Obama's Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees-the Christmas Tree Tax-to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees."

I don't see Congress mentioned anywhere.

Seems depts like Agriculture and the EPA can impose fees on the industries they "regulate". This power is given them by the Congress.

Now JOEC I know you don't get this but just about any fee, when applied by the government, against the production of goods andservices, is really a tax. And like all taxes,(and Fees if you like) they are applied to te cost of providing those goods and services.

So when the government taxes an industry, they are putting those costs on the folks who buy those goods and services. Not on the folks who provide them.

And when the President's Secretary of the Agriculture does it, the Tax comes from the Whitehouse. IE the Executive Branch, where in the Secretary of Agriculture's office resides.

I think you will find how all of that works within the Constitution. I also think you will find it cool that the rich guy in a mansion pays the same 15 cents as the poor single mom with no income and six kids to feed.


Maybe not.
Click to expand...

I get it that a fee is a tax. Now as for 15 cents extra on a Christmas tree hurts a mother with six kids to feed and no imcome, really? A single mother with 6 kids and no income needs to go without a tree as they cost a lot more than 15 cents. 40 years ago they ran about $10 to $25 depending on size, what does the average tree cost today? 15 cents is probably less than the sales tax on one. :yum::yum::yum:
 
joec said:
Presidential decrees have nothing to do with taxes and only effect with a time limit what he has power over. As for presidential decrees perhaps you should look up how long they have been used and who did the most. I posted a list here a while back and Obama is not even close to the top of that list. Remember the executive is just one leg on a 3 legged stool and it takes all 3 in many cases.
Click to expand...
I think we call presidential decrees executive orders. They were first used by Washington, and existed than and now to allow the president to sign meaningless bills that did not much effect, and to be able to do time sensitive things that did effect the country. The problem is that they no longer are limited to wishing the queen happy birthday. Barry has stated that he will use them to get his way if Congress does not approve something, even if the population is against it. Problem for me is it is easier for the voter to put pressure on Congress to do or not do something, but no constraints exist for the EO's.

Some recent EO's

Rural council: Establishes a committee that has broad power over the production of food, fiber, and energy of rural America. This committee has jurisdiction over all aspects of rural area.

Dream Act: No congressman has the guts to be in favor, established by EO. An amnesity bill.

Diversity Act: Basically a government quota bill.

Jobs act: A response to Congress reluctance to fund his new stimulus.

"Without a doubt, the most urgent challenge that we face right now is getting our economy to grow faster and to create more jobs…. we can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will." —President Barack Obama, October 24, 2011

Educational excellence for Hispanics: Basically another EEO bill aimed at Hispanics, does not exclude illegals in any way. Includes them in the head count. Worth reading.

There are many more. None seem to be any emergency, and none faced the Congress or the general public.

Unless these orders are free, they might have something to do with taxes. Somebody has to pay the bill, be it you or your kids.

I would not deny that other presidents did the same or similar, doesn't make it right.

I do not find the automatic expiration that your mention here and in other posts. Please advise. EO's carry the rule of law, and, for me, the most telling of all is that Barry has stated publicly that he will use them to bypass Congress.
 
I thought the 15 cents was for an advertizing campaign to get us to buy real trees instead of plastic??? The money would be used for an Ad Campaign. Of which I won't be helping cause I got a really good immitation a couple of years ago for nothing. Was a display.
 
jimbo said:
I think we call presidential decrees executive orders. They were first used by Washington, and existed than and now to allow the president to sign meaningless bills that did not much effect, and to be able to do time sensitive things that did effect the country. The problem is that they no longer are limited to wishing the queen happy birthday. Barry has stated that he will use them to get his way if Congress does not approve something, even if the population is against it. Problem for me is it is easier for the voter to put pressure on Congress to do or not do something, but no constraints exist for the EO's.

Some recent EO's

Rural council: Establishes a committee that has broad power over the production of food, fiber, and energy of rural America. This committee has jurisdiction over all aspects of rural area.

Dream Act: No congressman has the guts to be in favor, established by EO. An amnesity bill.

Diversity Act: Basically a government quota bill.

Jobs act: A response to Congress reluctance to fund his new stimulus.

"Without a doubt, the most urgent challenge that we face right now is getting our economy to grow faster and to create more jobs…. we can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will." —President Barack Obama, October 24, 2011

Educational excellence for Hispanics: Basically another EEO bill aimed at Hispanics, does not exclude illegals in any way. Includes them in the head count. Worth reading.

There are many more. None seem to be any emergency, and none faced the Congress or the general public.

Unless these orders are free, they might have something to do with taxes. Somebody has to pay the bill, be it you or your kids.

I would not deny that other presidents did the same or similar, doesn't make it right.

I do not find the automatic expiration that your mention here and in other posts. Please advise. EO's carry the rule of law, and, for me, the most telling of all is that Barry has stated publicly that he will use them to bypass Congress.
Click to expand...

First off I was responding using the wording of foggy that called it a decree, as I know they are executive orders.

Here is the list I posted in another tread a while back. Pick the president or period of time and have a ball. I found a few rather interesting.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/executive_orders.php

Now my comment was aimed at the title which everything is Obama fault in this group even if he may or may not have been aware of it. Now if you honestly think he is micro managing each cabinet under him it would amaze me really. But you guys tend to think everything that happens is his fault alone. Oh well have fun.
 
joec said:
I get it that a fee is a tax. Now as for 15 cents extra on a Christmas tree hurts a mother with six kids to feed and no imcome, really? A single mother with 6 kids and no income needs to go without a tree as they cost a lot more than 15 cents. 40 years ago they ran about $10 to $25 depending on size, what does the average tree cost today? 15 cents is probably less than the sales tax on one. :yum::yum::yum:
Click to expand...

Again a clever dodge? Well, hardly. And as usual, a purposeful diversion that completely ignores my point. In the end it proves you simply won't or don't get it.

EVERY dollar we must send to Washington is one we do not get to decide for ourselves. Money is power and every dollar sent to Washington is an accumulation of that power.

Since the begining of our nation that concentration has increased every year. And now, a significant percentage of that "power" is no longer in residence with the people.

The people cannot take back the power that once resided in them unless they curtail the source of the power going to DC. It really is that simple. We simply must say NO to any form of higher taxes.

"the natural progress of things is for liberty to yeild and government to gain ground" T Jefferson

I would presume his prophecy to be proven. Question for our nation today is, can we possibly reverse this trend?

I hardly think a tax on Christmas trees is stepping in the right direction.
 
FrancSevin said:
Again a clever dodge? Well, hardly. And as usual, a purposeful diversion that completely ignores my point. In the end it proves you simply won't or don't get it.

EVERY dollar we must send to Washington is one we do not get to decide for ourselves. Money is power and every dollar sent to Washington is an accumulation of that power.

Since the begining of our nation that concentration has increased every year. And now, a significant percentage of that "power" is no longer in residence with the people.

The people cannot take back the power that once resided in them unless they curtail the source of the power going to DC. It really is that simple. We simply must say NO to any form of higher taxes.

"the natural progress of things is for liberty to yeild and government to gain ground" T Jefferson

I would presume his prophecy to be proven. Question for our nation today is, can we possibly reverse this trend?

I hardly think a tax on Christmas trees is stepping in the right direction.
Click to expand...

I remember in the Viet Nam era that some deducted the amount for their taxes they figured was spent on that war. It turned out as a number of them went to jail for it.

Man you don't have a choice as to how your taxes are spent regardless. If you don't like the way they are spending then stop sending morons to represent you in congress to represent you. Presidents don't have the power to spend it unless authorize by congress period. So you can simply elect people that will represent you and not some special interest. But be sure you are really part of the majority as you might wake up one day and discover you aren't even close.
 
i call discrimination...

discrimination against christians

where's the menorah tax?

where's the prayer rug tax?
 
Drudge is now reporting the tax has been suspended because of all the negative press about it, especially conservative talk radio.

What the hell was the Idiot-In-Chief thinking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top