Skip to main content

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes.

In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes.

It doesn't stop there.

In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes.

But guess what!

It doesn't stop there.

No, no, no, no. 

In California, there's always another tax.



After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda.

The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes everywhere!

But wait, there's more! 

Despite the multitudes of layers of fees, penalties and taxes for breathing and existing on this part of the planet, the friendly Bay Area progressives, who publicly denounce every whiff and possible hint of discrimination, have incredibly wiggled their way into yet another inexplicable fee at the local public park, which the resident has already ostensibly financed through the myriad of previously-mentioned taxes: this time, the holier-than-thou progressives have discriminated against our furry friends, requiring a $2 payment for admittance of each pet. 

Now, this may seem sort of reasonable to the untrained visitor, as this fee hardly breaks the bank and hopefully goes toward a positive cause.

After all, who's going to pay for waste pickup after our little pups relieve themselves alongside the park trails?

Well, hold your horses. Things aren't always as they appear to be.

The park employee describes the $2 fee as one which covers the cost of "plastic pet waste bags," which cost roughly $14 per every one thousand bags; this averages out to less than two cents per bag!

How can anyone possibly justify the 14,200-percent price difference?

So here we are, left with yet another feature of the socialist utopia or dystopia, depending on perspective  this time a $2-per-dog fee at the local public park for “plastic pet waste bags” that we don’t use, which are miraculously not covered by the aforementioned taxes and somehow cost 142 times the market price of a plastic pet waste bag. 

Ironically, the bureaucrats and talking heads excuse the soda tax on the basis of purported health benefits, then they tax you again when you’re out exercising. 

When you ask what exactly you’re paying for, if not for 1-cent bags that you’re not using because you’ve brought your own, they tell you they’re working on minimum wage and just following orders, that we can reach out to the administration if we wish to submit questions. 

When you reach out to the administration, however, no one’s got any answers; they’re all just following orders. 

Well, that's government in a nutshell: our resources going to waste, prices make no sense, no one’s got an explanation, and everyone’s just following orders.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Kaepernick Craze: Exposing the Nation's Fools One Conversation at a Time

The Kaeparnick craze and other viral movements haven't merely pressured people into becoming simpler caricatures of their prior selves, but they have manifestly exposed people for how foolish and uninformed they've been all along. 



In his final year in the NFL, Kaepernick ranked 17th in passer rating and 34th the year before that. 

He played through an entire season in only two of his six years in the league, and his best full-season performance ranks far outside of the NFL's top-250 single-season passing performances in the league's history. 

For reference, the oft-criticized Tony Romo posted a career passer rating of 97.1, as compared to Kaepernick's 88.9. 

Romo's passer rating dipped below 90 for only one season of the eleven seasons he played, whereas Kaepernick failed to eclipse the 90 mark on three of his six seasons, a full 50 percent of his time in the NFL. 

In fact, Kaepernick accomplished this feat only once if we are to discard those other two seasons in …

Institutional Racism: The Sasquatch of Political Folklore

A great confusion has arisen out of the clamor of political debate, one which presupposes that any dismissal of the merits of “institutional racism” somehow equates to one’s rejection of personal struggle. 

Whereas the struggle of any individual remains always and everywhere unique and wholly personal, his common bond of complexion with others who have struggled serves inadequately as the basis for any argument which regards this commonality as the cause, or as the reason, for that veritable struggle. 

To condemn the unidentifiable and nebulous abstraction, then, by castigating an unnamed institution which persists beyond our specific capacity to recognize its power, serves only to absolve individuals of their personal responsibility, to shift blame and culpability to a specter which exists only by the creative designs of our imaginations, which exists as the scapegoat for all outcomes popularly maligned as undesirable. 

This unactionable practice, then, swiftly and categorically excuses…

Homelessness More Lucrative than $150,000/Year Job in SF Bay Area

Most people in the United States long for a $150,000-per-year salary. This makes sense, as the nation's median personal income is roughly 80 percent below that mark. 

It's a lot of money. 

In fact, this income level qualifies for the top 4 percent of Americans and the top 0.1 percent of the world's population; it is 109 times the global average.

If this is true, how could an unemployed homeless person possibly make more money? Well, the federal, state and local governments: that's how!

Let's take a look at the numbers.

A single Bay-Area Californian earning $150,000 per year pays an effective income tax rate of 32.23 percent: this figure is inclusive of a 7.20-percent effective state income tax (and 9.30-percent marginal rate), an 18.27-percent effective federal income tax (and 24.00-percent marginal rate), and a 6.76-percent effective rate for Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes. 



In addition to income taxes, the homeowner incurs an annual mortgage cost amou…