Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Understand why last thread was closed, but fascinating back and forth.
Where are the examples that raising taxes creates significantly more government revenue without damaging business?
bruh we get to do these political debates a couple times a year and get away with it until the mods close it down
Closing the last thread was appropriate move, trying to fire it up again, not so much
bruh we get to do these political debates a couple times a year and get away with it until the mods close it down
Closing the last thread was appropriate move, trying to fire it up again, not so much
Understand the sentiment, but it does affect our sport. (and every other aspect of life as well)
Skiing/riding is expensive enough, and adding to that expense narrows the potential new customer pool even more.
All business needs new customers to grow.
Understand why last thread was closed, but fascinating back and forth.
Where are the examples that raising taxes creates significantly more government revenue without damaging business?
From what I read, there's little chance the bill will pass. So this discussion is largely academic.So for the NH resorts, do they lower prices to compensate for the taxes and eat the loss themselves? Or do they allow the prices to jump and risk losing customers? Not an easy decision. And hopefully the tax doesn't pass so resorts don't need to make that decision in the first place.
I'm actually amazed, after looking, that Maine doesn't tax lift tickets. Everything else gets taxed here, after all.
Taxing day tickets only may be one of the dumber ideas I've heard—not only does it put the state in the position of incentivizing season-pass purchases, but it makes accounting stupid-complex. I worked in IT at a smaller Vermont ski area for a while, and managing the point-of-sale system to track what got which taxes applied, which taxes were baked into the prices (e.g. lift tickets) and which weren't (e.g. hardgoods in the retail shop), which items were taxable (lift tickets are, lessons are not, even when selling a combined lift/lesson package; a normal sweatshirt in the retail shop wouldn't be, but one with the ski area logo on it would be, etc), and which tax rates applied (6% sales tax, 10% rooms and meals, different tax rules for soda vs beer vs liquor, etc.) was a damn cluster. And of course the state of Vermont does pay attention, and not only will they fine you if you undercollect, they'll fine you if you overcollect (and no, the over-collected funds do not apply to the bill you owe for under-collecting). If we also had to determine day tickets versus "season pass" products for tax purposes, that would have another set of permutations and just increased the cluster factor by that much more.
With that said, having the sales tax apply to lift tickets doesn't seem to be dooming the Vermont ski industry. It is an additional cost of doing business, and 9% seems steep, but the reality is also that there is a real infrastructure hit from tourists, and applying some form of sales tax is often the most effective way to have them subsidize the infrastructure needed to support their presence. I spent a few years in Montana, as well, where I lived in one of a handful of municipalities in the state that had voted in a local sales tax for just that purpose; even in a state that's generally tax-averse (there's no statewide sales tax, for example), a local luxury tax got voter approval, because it was seen as a way to support necessary infrastructure spending without raising the cost of living further.
Taxing day tickets only may be one of the dumber ideas I've heard—not only does it put the state in the position of incentivizing season-pass purchases, but it makes accounting stupid-complex.
Government NEVER cares about that, because it doesn't have to deal with that.
SOX regulation is a nightmarish penalty for smaller businesses to ostensibly regulate financial responsibility. Meanwhile the Federal Government can run a debt equal to almost $200,000 PER taxpayer*.
*I prefer putting it in these terms, because $23 Trillion is an abstract figure to most, and people literally dont understand it.
Government NEVER cares about that, because it doesn't have to deal with that.
SOX regulation is a nightmarish penalty for smaller businesses to ostensibly regulate financial responsibility. Meanwhile the Federal Government can run a debt equal to almost $200,000 PER taxpayer*.
*I prefer putting it in these terms, because $23 Trillion is an abstract figure to most, and people literally dont understand it.
should be noted that
"leftist politicians unquenchable thirst for your money & government control"
aren't the one's primarily responsible for that $200k per taxpayer and growing number right now.
Underneath it all, BOTH parties just want to be in control so they can decide how to spend more of the now roughly 4 TRILLION dollar annual budget in ways that augment their re-election chances by in effect "bribing" more of their constituents to vote for them again. Those on the right tend to do this by "giving" voters more of their own money via tax cuts (in reality the voters just get to keep more of money that was their's, not the government's all along) whereas those on the left tend to do this by proposing more spending programs to "give" constituents something and claim that the "rich" don't pay enough.The number is getting higher everyday, and we happen to have a rightist politician in the Whitehouse. Coincidence?
Another coincidence, the federal deficit ALWAYS increase when rightist politicians are in the Whitehouse!
The number is getting higher everyday, and we happen to have a rightist politician in the Whitehouse. Coincidence?
Another coincidence, the federal deficit ALWAYS increase when rightist politicians are in the Whitehouse!
Thats why I’m a libertarian at heart, but not voting as one.Underneath it all, BOTH parties just want to be in control so they can decide how to spend more of the now roughly 4 TRILLION dollar annual budget
Actually they are, though both parties have had presidents that are in the "most guilty" category, so it's really BOTH their faults.
The all-time champion is the FDR Administration, both the New Deal & WWII expenditures were incredibly massive. FDR is the Wayne Gretzky of debt, his record will never be topped. We'll be Venezuela if it is.
Wilson was 2nd-worst all-time. Bush II & Obama were both terrible as well, and Reagan's military spending put him up there.