The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(09-01-2016 07:54 AM)KSUBlazer Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 11:01 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:36 PM)uabbean Wrote:  Does anyone know if this bill passed in the session so far. If it is not out of at least the house - the fight over the BP money could make a further hot mess of the legislature. The BJCC stadium may be postponed for a year or two The delay could be fatal to the fragile cooperation between suburban republicans and the two warring black groups

It passed and will be on the Nov ballot.

The real trick is persuading the majority of the voting folks of Alabama to vote for ANY tax. I've seen county school districts ask for a 1/2 cent increase in property tax that would have made a world of difference to the tune of less than $100 a year for almost all of the property owners, and then seen the measure fail overwhelmingly because "them so called edjookaters need to live within their means and get by with what they already done got" . When it comes to taxes, voters frequently have a tendency to go against their own long term best interests.

Not just for taxes...

(09-01-2016 07:54 AM)KSUBlazer Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 11:01 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:36 PM)uabbean Wrote:  Does anyone know if this bill passed in the session so far. If it is not out of at least the house - the fight over the BP money could make a further hot mess of the legislature. The BJCC stadium may be postponed for a year or two The delay could be fatal to the fragile cooperation between suburban republicans and the two warring black groups

It passed and will be on the Nov ballot.

The real trick is persuading the majority of the voting folks of Alabama to vote for ANY tax. I've seen county school districts ask for a 1/2 cent increase in property tax that would have made a world of difference to the tune of less than $100 a year for almost all of the property owners, and then seen the measure fail overwhelmingly because "them so called edjookaters need to live within their means and get by with what they already done got" . When it comes to taxes, voters frequently have a tendency to go against their own long term best interests.

The root of the tax problem in Alabama is that the lobbyists for the Farm Bureau and the Business Councils will only allow the legislature to consider those taxes that fall most heavily on the same bottom 60% of households who now pay over 10% of their annual income in state taxes while the top 10% pay less than 3% of theirs. That is a 300% differential in favor of the wealthiest Alabamians.

The legislature considers taxes like on cigarettes and propose a state lottery while passing on action on real property which allows agribusiness giants like GA-Pacific, LA-Pacific, coal companies and USX to hold vast tracts at virtually no tax cost that would force them to develop land for economic return. Alabamians resist additional taxes on that same bottom 60% which are the only ones the legislature will even debate.

There are a lot of stupid voters out there that don't even have a clue what they are voting for or why. Presidential election aside.

They are more like sheep goose stepping to the slaughter house bathed in marmalade going baaaaaa baaaaaa baaaaaa with a smile on their face.

(09-01-2016 02:40 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  The legislature considers taxes like on cigarettes and propose a state lottery while passing on action on real property which allows agribusiness giants like GA-Pacific, LA-Pacific, coal companies and USX to hold vast tracts at virtually no tax cost that would force them to develop land for economic return. Alabamians resist additional taxes on that same bottom 60% which are the only ones the legislature will even debate.

Yes, I know I am going on a tangent here but when you have US Surgeon Generals and respected organizations like the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society claiming that thousands of non-smokers are killed each year from cigarettes I say that any legislative action against them is a good thing. They should be illegal but if not they should be taxed much more than they already are with these funds used to create a health care fund to cover cancer and heart disease related expenses in non-smokers.

(09-13-2016 06:34 AM)Blazer on the southside Wrote:  

(09-01-2016 02:40 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  The legislature considers taxes like on cigarettes and propose a state lottery while passing on action on real property which allows agribusiness giants like GA-Pacific, LA-Pacific, coal companies and USX to hold vast tracts at virtually no tax cost that would force them to develop land for economic return. Alabamians resist additional taxes on that same bottom 60% which are the only ones the legislature will even debate.

Yes, I know I am going on a tangent here but when you have US Surgeon Generals and respected organizations like the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society claiming that thousands of non-smokers are killed each year from cigarettes I say that any legislative action against them is a good thing. They should be illegal but if not they should be taxed much more than they already are with these funds used to create a health care fund to cover cancer and heart disease related expenses in non-smokers.

As the father of a daughter who died at 49 from lung cancer after smoking since she was a kid, I know the evils of smoking. As an American History teacher, I also know the history of interdiction efforts to correct bad habits in America. We could not stop alcohol (Prohibition), imported drugs (War on Drugs) and therefore have not tried to do it with tobacco. It is basic Capitalism - if you don't reduce demand, someone will provide a supply to meet it.

A tax on "sinful habits" is designed to raise revenue just like every other tax. The only one Alabama won't try besides a state tax on real property is gaming. We leave that as a monopoly to the Creek Indians while supporting lotteries and casinos in contiguous states. It is not by accident that about 80% of scholarship athletes in our state's FBS universities are from high schools and JUCOs in gaming states.