Christmas tree tax? Sounds like it should have come from the onion...

[RandomGuy]

"Given conservatives' proclivity to go with the emotionally appealing outrage, despite inconvienient things like facts, I am going to have to take this with some large amount of skepticism."
GFY CG!

Unastonishingly enough, it isn't quite as outrageous as the OP makes it seem.

There is a reason why I tend to be skeptical of claims by conservative bloggers about what I need to be outraged.

They have a tendency to leave out things an objective person would find relevant, such as was the case here.

Do you think the omission was careless or intentional?

Mr. President, that’s a new 15-cent tax to pay for a Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees.

Nobody is saying President Obama doesn’t have authority to impose his new Christmas Tree Tax — his Administration cites the Commodity Promotion, Research and Information Act of 1996. Just because the Obama Administration has the legal power to impose its Christmas Tree Tax doesn’t mean it should do so.

The economy is barely growing and nine percent of the American people have no jobs. Is a new tax on Christmas trees the best President Obama can do?

[CosmicCowboy]

Finished reading.

Since the moron doing the blogging was at least smart enough to include his source material, I got a lot closer to an answer.

Ultimate source material for the fake/stupid outrage:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011...2011-28798.htm


Why this is fake/stupid outrage:



OUTRAGE! The people paying the fee designed it! Horrors!!



Not only that, they can roll it back in three years if they don't like it!!

Federal overreach if I ever saw it!

GMAFB.


Datapoint:
The State Department maintains programs designed to help exporters when companies want to sell their products overseas. Programs and fees like this from the Ag department feed into these programs.

Claiming this is "Obama's Christmas tree tax" is vastly and baggingly misleading, given it was asked for by the very people who will be paying it.

Not that conservative bloggers will care for the actual facts, when they find them inconvenient.

I didn't say anything about obama...the link did...

The difference is, that most of the trade organizations are voluntary...

example:

Certified Angus Beef...The growers pay a fee to the organization to use the label "certified angus beef" which pays for the promotion campaign. Beef growers don't have to pay the fee if they don't want to use the label...In this case the hundreds of growers that didn't want to belong are still forced to pay the fee.

[coyotes_geek]

the only saving grace I can see for this is that from an environmental standpoint, real trees are actually better for the environment than buying an artificial one.....even if you keep it for 10 years.

I'm just as guilty as the next person, but honestly, our need to cut down a tree that belongs outside and stick it in our living room for 2+ weeks before tossing it out on the curb is deplorable.

Deplorable? Please.

[RandomGuy]

I didn't say anything about obama...the link did...

That's why I didn't bust yer balls over it and called the blogger a moron.

You had the decency to look up some extra facts, something worth noting as well.

[ElNono]

Newsflash: ppl of other religions think shutting office down in christmas is discrimination:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...religions.html

What do you think?

[cantthinkofanything]

the only saving grace I can see for this is that from an environmental standpoint, real trees are actually better for the environment than buying an artificial one.....even if you keep it for 10 years.

I'm just as guilty as the next person, but honestly, our need to cut down a tree that belongs outside and stick it in our living room for 2+ weeks before tossing it out on the curb is deplorable.

Agreed. But it is preferable than the old Southern tradition of the Christmas Ring of Negros. It was only last century when it was common in the south to bring in about 8-10 black people to the home for full month of December. They would hold hands in a circle, usually in the living room, and sing Christmas songs. About the middle of the month, presents would be placed in the middle of them. On Christmas morning, the negros would take turns calling out the name of a family member, indicating that they could come pull a present out of the middle. When it was time for the last present, they would rotate around the present and sing Jingle Bells. However, once the yuletide season was over, they were forced to leave the house and resume a life of poverty.

[coyotes_geek]

Finished reading.

Since the moron doing the blogging was at least smart enough to include his source material, I got a lot closer to an answer.

Ultimate source material for the fake/stupid outrage:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011...2011-28798.htm


Why this is fake/stupid outrage:



OUTRAGE! The people paying the fee designed it! Horrors!!



Not only that, they can roll it back in three years if they don't like it!!

Federal overreach if I ever saw it!

GMAFB.


Datapoint:
The State Department maintains programs designed to help exporters when companies want to sell their products overseas. Programs and fees like this from the Ag department feed into these programs.

Claiming this is "Obama's Christmas tree tax" is vastly and baggingly misleading, given it was asked for by the very people who will be paying it.

Not that conservative bloggers will care for the actual facts, when they find them inconvenient.

The outrage is certainly overblown, but that doesn't mean there aren't legitimate reasons to be opposed to something like this. You basically have one group of growers wanting to use the power of government to forcibly compel other growers into financially participating in something they have no interest in doing. Without a prevailing concern by the government to some kind of public interest here, I see no reason for the government to get involved.

[scott]

The outrage is certainly overblown, but that doesn't mean there aren't legitimate reasons to be opposed to something like this. You basically have one group of growers wanting to use the power of government to forcibly compel other growers into financially participating in something they have no interest in doing. Without a prevailing concern by the government to some kind of public interest here, I see no reason for the government to get involved.

Finally a reasoned argument against this proposal that isn't "ZOMG HE EVEN KNOWS HOW TO RUIN CHRISTMAS!!!" like has popped up in my email box today from a conservative friend.

One has to wonder why there isn't just some "National Christmas Tree Growers Association" that couldn't accomplish this via association dues. That's how my industry handles these kinds of things.

[CosmicCowboy]

Finally a reasoned argument against this proposal that isn't "ZOMG HE EVEN KNOWS HOW TO RUIN CHRISTMAS!!!" like has popped up in my email box today from a conservative friend.

One has to wonder why there isn't just some "National Christmas Tree Growers Association" that couldn't accomplish this via association dues. That's how my industry handles these kinds of things.

That was my point, that participation was not voluntary.

[scott]

That was my point, that participation was not voluntary.

My apologies. I hearby add you to the "credit for making a valid point against rather than overreacting like a Fox News anchor" list.

[hater]

What do you think?

LOL what the does it matter?

you mentioned a christmas tree tax might be discriminatory due to religion, I said that is similar to saying the Federal Christmas Holiday is discriminatory due to religion.

If you fail to see the similarities, then that's on you.

[CosmicCowboy]

My apologies. I hearby add you to the "credit for making a valid point against rather than overreacting like a Fox News anchor" list.

Minor point, but IMHO Fox NEWS is actually pretty balanced and middle of the road. Shephard Smith is really quite good. If it's Hannity, Greta, O'Reilly etc. that you object to they are opinion personalities and not news anchors.

[scott]

Minor point, but IMHO Fox NEWS is actually pretty balanced and middle of the road. Shephard Smith is really quite good. If it's Hannity, Greta, O'Reilly etc. that you object to they are opinion personalities and not news anchors.

Well, I'm talking about the station FoxNews not the News that the station might report...

I've found the majority of all "news" reports to be fairly balanced and middle of the road... it's the opinions that follow that aren't (which I have no problem with, so long as opinions are not incorrectly stated as facts).

[hater]

Fox NEWS is actually pretty balanced and middle of the road.

yeah, this road

[ElNono]

you mentioned a christmas tree tax might be discriminatory due to religion, I said that is similar to saying the Federal Christmas Holiday is discriminatory due to religion.

I actually asked if it would be. The difference here is that EVERYBODY that works for the federal government get a day off, regardless of their religious beliefs, but this tax only hits those that buy christmas trees, which I would suspect are overwhelmingly Christian.

[CosmicCowboy]

yeah, this road

Typical lack of reading comprehension from hater.

[DarrinS]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...tmas-tree-fee/

[cantthinkofanything]

how the is $6,000,000 +/- going to change anything in the ing Christmas Tree industry.

[coyotes_geek]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...tmas-tree-fee/

I can't decide which is funnier / more pathetic. Outrage from the masses over the possibility that the cost of a live Christmas tree might go up by an amount less than what we should be able to find in between couch cushions? Or the Obama administration caving in to that faux outrage?

[cantthinkofanything]

I can't decide which is funnier / more pathetic. Outrage from the masses over the possibility that the cost of a live Christmas tree might go up by an amount less than what we should be able to find in between couch cushions? Or the Obama administration caving in to that faux outrage?

It's all funny until they decide to cancel Christmas this year because of the crappy image Christmas trees have.

[Spurminator]

I can't decide which is funnier / more pathetic. Outrage from the masses over the possibility that the cost of a live Christmas tree might go up by an amount less than what we should be able to find in between couch cushions? Or the Obama administration caving in to that faux outrage?

It's all pretty depressing, imo.

[scott]

I can't decide which is funnier / more pathetic. Outrage from the masses over the possibility that the cost of a live Christmas tree might go up by an amount less than what we should be able to find in between couch cushions? Or the Obama administration caving in to that faux outrage?

Quoted for truth.

[bus driver]

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/08/...tmas-tree-tax/

President Obama’s Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees—the Christmas Tree Tax—to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees.
In the Federal Register of November 8, 2011, Acting Administrator of Agricultural Marketing David R. Shipman announced that the Secretary of Agriculture will appoint a Christmas Tree Promotion Board. The purpose of the Board is to run a “program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry” (7 CFR 1214.46(n)). And the program of “information” is to include efforts to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States” (7 CFR 1214.10).
To pay for the new Federal Christmas tree image improvement and marketing program, the Department of Agriculture imposed a 15-cent fee on all sales of fresh Christmas trees by sellers of more than 500 trees per year (7 CFR 1214.52). And, of course, the Christmas tree sellers are free to pass along the 15-cent Federal fee to consumers who buy their Christmas trees.

i have a fake holiday tree so i guess i am good.

[coyotes_geek]

It's all funny until they decide to cancel Christmas this year because of the crappy image Christmas trees have.

Christmas will never get cancelled and the reason why it won't doesn't even have that much to do with religion.

[cantthinkofanything]

Christmas will never get cancelled and the reason why it won't doesn't even have that much to do with religion.

Wrong. It won't never get cancelled because Wal-Mart loves Baby Jesus.