Until now, that is. We’re even in a country with a partially nationalized banking system.
The headline from yesterday’s Daily Mail is scary: "It’s outrageous that banks demand taxpayers’ money yet impose 15 pc interest rates on small businesses." The article then outlines the high interest rates that borrowers have to pay.
I guess more easy credit is what we need and nationalization is the way to get there. If I can believe this morning’s headline, the United States may be headed to the same place. Remember all that junk — like the subsidy for small arrows — that they ended up sticking into the Paulson plan?
Oh man, if gov’t gets into the
loan shark business,this is going to
end very badly.
Yeah, they call it “The Tory wife’s paypah” !
You need to repost your criticism of bank nationalization — at least as a link.
“I guess more easy credit is what we need and [bank] nationalization is the way to get there.”
This blog has jumped the shark.
The question everyone really wants to know but is afraid to ask: does Alex snore?
Nationailized banks, wow this is a very very very very bad idea.
I’m was in the Title/Deed industry (car titles/house titles) for years and I got a very good grasp of how bad the government operates. I can just see it now, the bank lender who will try to do as little as possible, the bank teller who can’t count, the bank manager who is a moron but knows how to climb the government ladder, and of course, the one lender who is trying to help (don’t worry, this hard working lender will quit out of frustration). Banks loans being halted by a typo, bank forms being misplaced by incompetent interns, and of course calling 20 different agencies to get a bank loan approved.
Excise tax on arrows: Baptists and Bootleggers (or didn’t you remember “Volunteering” for the excise tax?)
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/press/pr021103a.pdf
“MR. PRESIDENT, along with my colleagues, Senators Hatch, Miller, Bayh and
Grassley, I am pleased to introduce the Archery Excise Tax Simplification Act of 2003.
This bill will protect funding for the Wildlife Restoration Program (the Pittman-
Robertson fund) by simplifying administration and compliance with the excise tax and
closing an unintended loophole that allows arrows assembled outside the United States to
avoid the excise tax imposed on domestic manufacturers.
The creation of the Wildlife Restoration Program is one of the great success
stories of cooperation among America’s sportsmen and women, state fish and wildlife
agencies, and the sporting goods industry. Working together with Congress, Americans
who enjoy the outdoors volunteered to pay an excise tax on sporting arms and
ammunition to be used for hunter education programs, wildlife restoration, and habitat
conservation.
Originally the archery industry did not participate in this program. However, the
growth of bow hunting in the ‘60s and ‘70s led the archery industry to decide they would
support the excise tax that funds state game agencies. As a result, the tax was extended
to archery equipment in 1975. The tax on archery equipment was meant to parallel the
tax that hunters were paying on firearms and ready-to-fire ammunition. The archery
industry and bow hunters are pleased to contribute to the success of the Wildlife
Restoration Program.
Because current law taxes components and not arrows, foreign manufacturers are
selling arrows in the United States without paying the excise tax that is imposed on
arrows made in the United States. Not only are these untaxed imports unfair to American
workers, they threaten the integrity of the Wildlife Restoration Fund.
This issue is important to companies in Montana. Mike Ellig, a manufacturer of
archery products in Bozeman, Montana, pays this tax. He supports the tax, but asks that
it be fair. Mike’s company, Montana Black Gold, and the archery industry want to
support the Wildlife Restoration Program. But the way the tax works today, American
manufacturers are at a competitive disadvantage. That is why the 800 members of the
Montana Bowhunters Association support this measure.
This legislation will close the loophole that allows imported arrows to avoid the
excise tax paid by domestic manufacturers. While keeping the current 12.4 percent tax
on arrow components, the proposal will impose a tax of 12 percent on the first sale of an
arrow assembled from untaxed components. U.S. manufacturers and foreign
manufacturers will be treated equally.
Since this loophole was inadvertently created in 1997, archery imports (mostly
finished arrows), increased from $430,000 in 1998, to $1.6 million in 1999, to $3.2
million in 2000, to $7.8 million in 2001 and to $11.0 million in 2002 (through
November). If Congress does not act quickly to close this loophole, domestic
manufacturers will be forced to relocate outside of the United States. They simply cannot
afford to lose market share for a fifth year to competitors who do not pay the same tax
they pay. If a few more move overseas, the rest will follow. The result will be a
catastrophic loss of revenue for the Federal Wildlife Restoration Fund.
Current law also taxes non-hunters, contrary to Congressional intent. To relieve
non-hunters from the requirement to pay for wildlife management, the legislation would
eliminate the current-law tax on bows with draw weights of less than 30 pounds. Those
bows are not suitable or, in many states, legal for hunting. To preserve the revenue for
the Wildlife Restoration Fund, the bill would retain the current tax on bows that are
suitable for hunting. “
a good men
Comments on this entry are closed.