Bill Samuels Speaks

[barturtle]

Bill Samuels speaks to the Bluegrass Hospitality Association.

coverage here and here

[SBOmarc]

Neither article reports what type of reaction Bill Samuels received from his remarks. No doubt he was most likely in a friendly room but I would still like to know if there were smiles and nods or was there scoffs and booing.

[DeanSheen]

Man has a point. It's too bad they are throttling the golden goose.

What would KY have outside of horses and bourbon?

Sounds like it's time to join the 21st century instead of going backwards to the 18th and the "taxation w/out representation" model.

[ILLfarmboy]

Last year, Rep. Steve Riggs, a Louisville Democrat, suggested that only "wet" counties should receive the benefits of future alcohol taxes. In a General Assembly dominated by legislators from those mostly rural "dry" counties, the idea went nowhere.

[pepcycle]

Its time to thinking about reversing the trend on Sin Taxes and start taxing things that are not sins. I think a five cent tax on throw pillows would generate more dollars than an alchohol tax. (I hate throw pillows) How about decorative candles, flower bulbs, area rugs and plastic lawn chairs.

Why stop there. Plastic Deck lumber, lawn fertilizer and cutesie holiday flags.

Last but not least, paving stones, castle block and cobblestones that line driveways.

All useless luxury items that people will buy whatever the price is.

[cowdery]

The back story on this is interesting, in that the KDA has a new, young leader who is shaking things up and showing his members (i.e., the distilleries) how to lobby and promote effectively. I also believe Mr. Gregory is smart enough to have picked a fight he believes he can win. Bill Samuels is the ideal spokesperson because he is always good copy.

[barturtle]

I've got a better idea. Tax churches. Maybe a tithe on tithes.

Render unto Caesar...

Actually, most churches should likely be taxed, as they can loose their tax exemptions by speaking out for/against political policies....where did I read that...?

here's an about.com article on it.

Most people are aware that a church or religious organization can lose their tax exempt status for engaging in partisan political activity, like endorsing a political candidate. What many aren't aware of, though, is that the same can happen for promoting or engaging in things contrary to government policy. Tax exemption is a privilege, not a right.

I feel this thread will quickly get moved to the PR&C area...:grin:

[cowdery]

I don't think anyone supposes that no one in dry counties drinks and although some of them do buy from bootleggers, most do not. They buy legally where it is legal to sell and they pay the taxes. For that matter, bootleggers and their customers pay their taxes too, since virtually all bootlegged liquor is bought legally at retail, with all taxes paid. That's why it's not unfair that dry counties should share in alcohol tax revenues or that legislators from dry counties should support higher alcohol taxes. "Dry" just means no sales outlets. It is legal everywhere in Kentucky for persons of legal age to possess and consume alcoholic beverages, and there are tax-paying alcohol consumers in every Kentucky county.

[barturtle]

AH, but a large number of those counties that are dry aren't very close to wet counties in KY, so the tax revenue is lost to another state. Also those dry counties waste tax revenue going after bootleggers instead of spending that money on more important duties.

[ILLfarmboy]

...It is legal everywhere in Kentucky for persons of legal age to possess and consume alcoholic beverages, and there are tax-paying alcohol consumers in every Kentucky county.

I'm not 100 percent sure what your reasoning is. I think you mean that because it is a State tax, dry counties should have their say too? In a sense, I must grudgingly admit you are right. But the hypocrisy exhibited by the drys is blatant. They want to prevent within their borders what they see as "sin" but they still want to financially benefit from it.

I'm reminded of when California passed their ban on rifles chambered in .50 BMG, Ronnie Barret, Owner and CEO of Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc. decided not to sell any of his guns in California, and that includes selling to city or state agencies. I guess his reasoning was that if anti-Second Amendment California politicians wanted to vilify his products, the state and the cities within it, shouldn't benefit from them in a law enforcement capacity.

[cowdery]

Everybody decries the use of taxes as instruments of social policy, but everybody does it. Making this a wet-dry issue is just another way to generate publicity, because it gets people talking, even though the argument is specious.

The example it reminded you of isn't in any way analgous. Neither are all of the ones I've thought of. It's kind of a unique situation.

But the strategy is to rile people up so the KDA can advance its real argument, which is that there is a lot more tax revenue in supporting the industry than there is in strangling it.

(I expand on my thoughts here.)