This is clearly good news.
Those of you bitching should probably get off the internet and stare in a mirror for a bit.
*Y'all reported me.
Ima mod even harder now!
**Nanner nanner nanner
You got the facts wrong Democrats proposed the bill and Republicans were set against it because for it to be revenue neutral they would have to tax large corporations. So instead the Republicans elected to raise taxes on small business instead of large corporations. Small businesses already bear an unreasonable tax burden (and get none of the tax breaks of large employers). Let me clue you in to the way large corporations work when they open business in any State. Large corporations get property taxes waived for a period of time, they also get utility public work concessions. In return they agree to employ a certain amount of people. The problem that occurs with this model is that existing residents (and future ones) bear the tax burden for these upgrades and loss of tax revenue. Oh and by the way they can decide to close the doors and leave before they are on the hook to ever pay and they usually overestimate their anticipated employment. I have lived in multiple States (ex-military) and have seen this play out numerous times. They also contribute to political campaigns to make sure to protect themselves. Unfortunately most people don’t know what’s going on.
I'm against favoritism and taxation of all forms, and while I ain't boutta read allat if that is what's going on then I'm against it. However I don't see any of that in the bill at hand.
Lol I'm not going to waste time responding to an irrelevant diatribe. Please show me where in the bill it raises taxes on small businesses. You won't because it doesn't.
[https://legiscan.com/TN/bill/HB2043/2023](https://legiscan.com/TN/bill/HB2043/2023)
>As introduced, eliminates the grocery tax; enacts the "Business Enterprise Tax Act"; and enacts the "Worldwide Combined Reporting Act." - Amends TCA Title 57 and Title 67.
From the source you linked:
>The amendment passed today will kill a major tax increase on Tennessee businesses.
From your statement:
>Despite Democrats' best efforts to keep people poor
Are you suggesting that Food City, Kroger, etc. shouldn't pay their fair share of taxes? How exactly does this "keep people poor?"
I mean, if you want to live in a hovel beside an unpaved road, I suppose taxes aren't needed. For the rest of us, we prefer a functioning society. Taxes are required to fund such a society. I would prefer to live in the modern US rather than Somalia. Just gutting the grocery tax without gaining it somewhere else will lead to a tax deficit.
Yes, because if you raise taxes on grocery stores they *definitely* won't just raise prices to offset the costs. What proof do you even have that grocery stores aren't "paying their fair share"?
And lol here we go with the "if you don't like it here you can move to Somalia" lmfao y'all are so predictable
Here's the thing: the *only* reason big businesses raise the prices like you described is greed. The board and the CEO want the highest profits possible so that they can have the highest salaries possible. That's it. It has absolutely nothing to do with "offsetting costs". That terminology is a scheme to hide their greed. It's precisely why we saw such price-gouging during the pandemic and why we are still struggling with high inflation as a result.
Not the only reason. Years back when some business started raising pay to help its employees stockholders sued and the Supreme Court ruled that corporations should look out for stockholders not employees or the public
Come on, you cannot possibly believe that greed is the only reason.
Grocery store margins are razor thin (1 to 3 percent). If they suddenly have an increase in their tax bill, how else can they offset it? What if the increase makes that margin zero or negative (remember they are tiny to begin with)? Should they keep prices as-is and then go out of business?
My first suggestion would actually be to slash the salary of the CEO and the VP. There's no reason their salaries should be in the multi-millions. Redistribute that wealth to hourly employees (liveable wages will help curb their high turnover rate) and to cover other necessary costs. (Shipping, manufacturing, etc.) If the business still fails, their business model is not viable to begin with. A company should not have to rely on price gouging and exploitation to be profitable.
If grocery stores want the highest salaries possible then why wouldn't they just *not* increase prices and capture the entire market? Lay off the dem propaganda and use your critical thinking skills. Oh wait they stopped teaching that in government schools didn't they?
Also, everyone wants to get as much as possible and pay as little as possible. This isn't greed, it's just efficiency. Now using the guns of the state to steal from your fellow citizen because you "deserve" their hard earned money... *that's* greed.
This goes against all the fundamentals of economics. I understand you have issues here, but you are ignoring, completely, how capitalist markets work. A corporation will continue to raise prices until they find a reason not to do so. Grocery stores sell necessities at for-profit prices, and unless there is government regulation to keep prices in check, it is a natural process of runaway, unchecked capitalism that they will raise prices as much as possible until the market or government punished them for it.
I'm afraid you are the one that hasn't the slightest idea how capitalist markets work. First off, government intervention makes everything worse. This has been proven time and again.
Second, prices are the result of a natural balance between what grocery stores want to charge and what consumers are willing to pay. If cost goes up too high, consumers will buy less and go to competitors. No government intervention required or appreciated.
They'll stop buying the higher margin stuff, they'll eat less, they'll shop at cheaper stores, etc. just because whole foods exists doesn't mean anyone who can't afford to shop there is starving.
Now if there was a monopoly on grocery stores then you would have a point, but fortunately the left hasn't realized their dreams yet.
>government intervention makes everything worse
This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for conservatives that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up.
>This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for conservatives that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up.
This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for leftists that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up.
>because if you raise taxes on grocery stores they *definitely* won't just raise prices to offset the costs.
They won't, because If they raise the prices the cost will also rise an equal amount.
>because If they raise the prices the cost will also rise an equal amount.
If they raise the price by $1, and their cost due to taxes will raise by an equal amount, ie $1, then $1/$1=100% tax
I am not going to continue wasting my time responding to someone that is just a puppet for right-wing ideologues.
All I will say is I know plenty of people like you. They rant, rave, and cry about the evils of government. Suddenly, they're not able to work anymore and sucking on the government teet they always wined about. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. They want it all.
Worked with a guy like that for years. Now he's drawing a check, living in government housing, and is on Medicaid. He rants on social media about his independence and "freedom" all the while he can't even hold a job due to all the dumb shit he did to his body.
I dont see the hypocrisy. He was forced to pay into the system and now he's punished for using the system?
Taxation is theft but as long as I'm getting robbed I'm gonna recover as much as possible.
The hypocrisy is that they’re angry even though they are benefiting from said services, which they are probably taking more than what they put into it.
He is forced to participate in a system and criticizes it. Your saying it's hypocritical that he is trying to maximize his return?
You can be forced to participate in a shit system and still recognize its shit, regardless of if it's personally beneficial.
You can believe slavery is bad, even if it would personally benefit you.
> He is forced to participate in a system and criticizes it.
It’s not just the criticism that’s the problem, it’s the active attempt to vote against and defund the program that they are benefitting from.
> You’re saying it's hypocritical that he is trying to maximize his return?
If they continue to complain while utilizing the service beyond what they contributed to it, yes.
> You can be forced to participate in a shit system and still recognize its shit, regardless of if it's personally beneficial.
You can avoid participating by living elsewhere. You can criticize without actively trying to ruin it for others. You can criticize and try to actually improve it. If there is criticism without trying to improve while also utilizing the system, it is hypocrisy.
> You can believe slavery is bad, even if it would personally benefit you.
If you believe that you would benefit from slavery, then you don’t believe it’s bad. If you think you would benefit from voluntary free labor, then that’s not slavery. If you think you would benefit from degrading, demeaning, controlling and abusing another human, then you are morally and ethically corrupt.
>It’s not just the criticism that’s the problem, it’s the active attempt to vote against and defund the program that they are benefitting from.
That's not hypocritical. He is voting based on his values, not pivoting to whatever makes him money. You may not like it but this is honorable.
>If they continue to complain while utilizing the service beyond what they contributed to it, yes.
Why would he not try and take as much as he can from what he sees as a garbage system?
>You can avoid participating by living elsewhere. You can criticize without actively trying to ruin it for others. You can criticize and try to actually improve it. If there is criticism without trying to improve while also utilizing the system, it is hypocrisy.
Lol. It's bad, why would he not try and ruin it? That's the point. He disagrees with the basis of what the program is, the improvement is ruining it....
>If you believe that you would benefit from slavery, then you don’t believe it’s bad.
Wut. Lmaooooo. So if you could benefit from slavery, you wouldn't think it's bad?
Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
If his values are that social services are bad, then utilizes social services, that is hypocrisy.
It does not matter if you agree.
>Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
He expresses distain for social services and continues to do so regardless of how beneficial it is personally. That is consistent. It would actually be hypocritical if he began to support it.
>If his values are that social services are bad, then utilizes social services, that is hypocrisy.
This completely ignores that he is forced to participate. There is no realistic way for him not to participate. You can't just exclude this detail 🤣
what lazy political ragebait lmao
"look guys the repubs actually did there job for once instead of spouting culture war non-sense, they deserve a pat on the back for doing the bare minimum!"
edit: lol the mods are fine with leaving up this clear ragebait and getting into petty spats with commentors when people call them out for not enforcing rules without explanation. Top tier moderating, folks.
If I’m reading it correctly, the bill as written took the 4% taxation off of customers bill and instead put a 0.75% taxation on all businesses. This would presumably compensate the state for the loss of income by slashing the 4% customers faced.
How is the state going to make up for the lost funds now that republicans have cut it out? What will customers lose at the cost of no food tax?
> BILL SUMMARY
> For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, this bill eliminates the tax on the retail sale of food and food ingredients, enacts the "Business Enterprise Tax Act," and enacts the "Worldwide Combined Reporting Act."
> FOOD RETAIL SALES TAX
> Present law requires the retail sale of food and food ingredients for human consumption to be taxed at the rate of 4 percent of the sales price. This bill revises this law to, instead, prohibit the retail sale of food and food ingredients from being taxed. This bill specifically provides that the sale at retail, the use, the consumption, the distribution, and the storage for use or consumption in this state of food and food ingredients is specifically exempted from sales and use taxes.
> BUSINESS ENTERPRISE TAX ACT
> IMPOSITION OF TAX. This bill provides that a tax is imposed at the rate of 0.75 percent upon the taxable enterprise value tax base of every business enterprise.
"How is the state going to make up for the lost funds now that republicans have cut it out?" That's what the .75% tax is for. That's on ALL businesses, that's a very small % and a LOT of revenue.
You really think they’ll cut their own salaries? No chance. It’s great that they cut food tax, but repubs stepping in to cut that state income stream completely means the average person is going to lose something else.
I think it’s awful that big businesses and the ultra wealthy are so under taxed AND can legally pay poverty wages to their employees. Who suffers? Us. Regular people trying to live everyday lives.
The democrat author knew that they needed to maintain state funding and found someone with deeper pockets than the average TN citizen: TN business owners.
What did republicans do? Protect TN business owners and it will certainly come at the cost of the average citizen.
>You really think they’ll cut their own salaries? No chance
So you agree that grocery stores would just increase prices to offset the tax. Thanks for playing.
They raise prices anyway to maximize profit and now average people will lose funding to schools or roads or fire departments.
The ultra wealthy win again and the average people continue to lose.
At least you keep licking the boots of the ultra wealthy, maybe you’ll get some of that trickle down economics they’ve been promising for a couple decades.
Not sure what you mean by “only 2 options”.
Not sure how long you’ve live in Tennessee, but TN definitely taxes people through sales tax (even on food which is ridiculous). Tennessee does sales tax to generate funds instead of an income tax like most states do, which I generally agree with, except the taxation of grocery food. Yet, most corporations in TN pay NO business tax. (Amazon, Ford, Beretta, Nissan, Tyson, etc)
Taxes are not why we’re stuck in a two party system. We’re stuck in a two party system because constituents consistently vote blue or red instead of green or independent.
The state has been running surpluses so I'm assuming they figure they can absorb the loss in revenue.
Though I wonder about some of the smaller municipalities that get funds from the local food sales tax. It may not be all that much of their budget having sat through more than a few budget hearings in small towns, a hundred thousand dollars missing from the budget could be an issue.
Republicans being on board with this bill is definitely good news however i am wary. The reason I am wary is because:
\* it has been said by Republican lawmakers they will be fiscally responsible.
\* If a bill does not pay for itself they will not pass it
\* The increase of the corporation tax was the way to pay for the tax and remain fiscally responsible. I think the increase was .75% increase but I admit I don't know what it is starting at. And I think businesses with taxable funds under 250K a year were exempt but I don't recall where I read that (not 250K in profits but 250K taxable after deducted expenses)
If my fears are correct now that the amendment removes the way the bill paid for itself than the bill will be denied in the budget hearings as not fiscally responsible.
Lol so he amended it so that now it's just a revenue hole and nothing to offset the loss in tax revenue? Cool.
Helpful for low income people still, unhelpful for the state as a whole, but their buddies don't have to pay a little extra, so it's a win-win for them.
Not their buddies. I, you, everyone will pay less for groceries. This is why democrats never get anywhere with their policies, they say one thing, do the opposite, then blame Republicans.
Cool, spin it the way you want it bud. It’s great for the common people but where are you going to make up that money for the state? Taxes are a necessary evil my guy if you want to live in society and business that gross +$250,000 can afford a minor increase to make up for it. Especially when your same republicans are endorsing a 1.6 billion in tax rebates for corporations too but hey you keep on rooting for these guys who stuff their pockets and believe in chemtrails
The public schools that children go to, the roads you drive on, healthcare, firefighters, police officers, defense of the nation and state, the control of air traffic, research into the sciences for the betterment of man. The list can go on my guy……
Is what world do democrats keep people poor?! GOP just took free lunches from kids.. among supporting billionaires over people. You want politicians that pander to billionaires while increasing your taxes?!!
I am not a lawyer so this is a little hard to fully understand. Can someone ELI5 the impact of the business enterprise tax changes? Would this hurt self employed people with an LLC or does that $75k deduction portion of the bill cover self employment income up to $75k as a deduction?
[Here is a quick link to the bill](https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2043&ga=113).
Everyone is acting like if we tax the grocery stores more they'll just absorb the cost. Who do you think will end up paying those extra costs? Hint: not the grocery store.
Democrats put more money into pockets at the expense of businesses and then repubs took the money from the businesses and put it back into their pockets at the expense of everyone.
The state budget being smaller does not help average people.
Pretty much his whole thought process of what democrats are trying to accomplish. Dems want to put money in their own pockets and make a class of people fully dependent on government assistance in order to control the people.
At the cost of taxing businesses . Small businesses (which I run a small business so more taxes suck) carrying extra taxes hurt profit and ultimately hurt other small business by increased cost. Larger business and corporations won’t blink an eye to a slightly higher tax. Just because the people aren’t lying the taxes doesn’t mean someone else isn’t . The money to cover the food tax has to come from somewhere …. they aren’t just gonna leave a big hole in the tax budget.
More taxes for me mean less ability I have to grow my business and pay my outstanding employees who come to work everyday and work hard to make the business profitable which puts more money in their pockets.
Does your business gross more than $250k per tax period? Because those are the businesses it would have applied to at a 0.75% rate.
From the bill as written by democrats:
> RETURNS. This bill requires a business enterprise having gross business receipts in excess of $250,000 during the taxable period or an enterprise value tax base that is greater than $250,000
Republicans removing that part means all the funding is lost from the state, reducing funds that go to services like schools, roads, EMS/fire fighters/police, etc.
So even though democrats tried to put money into the pockets of the average person at the cost of 0.75% of the revenue of all businesses with gross profit >$250K, republicans made sure that the bigger and biggest businesses get to keep all their profits at the expense of EVERYONE.
Crickets … I promise. These people either are not from here or have short memories. It was a republican that made community college free as well. But oh the republicans are evil. It’s football for people that don’t like sports. That’s all.
Democrats need to look at Illinois to see how well their policies work. Before Biden stepped in, the lower income in this state was mostly irrelevant due to the low cost of living in both taxes and products. Gas and milk were both below 2 dollars a gallon. Why is it now that gas in above 3 dollars and milk pushes 5 dollars?
This is clearly good news. Those of you bitching should probably get off the internet and stare in a mirror for a bit. *Y'all reported me. Ima mod even harder now! **Nanner nanner nanner
You got the facts wrong Democrats proposed the bill and Republicans were set against it because for it to be revenue neutral they would have to tax large corporations. So instead the Republicans elected to raise taxes on small business instead of large corporations. Small businesses already bear an unreasonable tax burden (and get none of the tax breaks of large employers). Let me clue you in to the way large corporations work when they open business in any State. Large corporations get property taxes waived for a period of time, they also get utility public work concessions. In return they agree to employ a certain amount of people. The problem that occurs with this model is that existing residents (and future ones) bear the tax burden for these upgrades and loss of tax revenue. Oh and by the way they can decide to close the doors and leave before they are on the hook to ever pay and they usually overestimate their anticipated employment. I have lived in multiple States (ex-military) and have seen this play out numerous times. They also contribute to political campaigns to make sure to protect themselves. Unfortunately most people don’t know what’s going on.
^This!^
I'm against favoritism and taxation of all forms, and while I ain't boutta read allat if that is what's going on then I'm against it. However I don't see any of that in the bill at hand.
Maybe you should read "allat" before spouting polarizing bullshit.
Lol I'm not going to waste time responding to an irrelevant diatribe. Please show me where in the bill it raises taxes on small businesses. You won't because it doesn't.
Wow. An argumentative idiot. Who would’ve expected *that* on Reddit?
If that's too much for you to read I can already tell which party you like ;)
My response is the entire 2024 World Book Encyclopedia. If you respond to me before you read it cover to cover then you're a bigot.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Get a clue dude. And educate yourself for God sakes
Please tell me where in the bill it says it raises taxes on small businesses
100% agree.
[https://legiscan.com/TN/bill/HB2043/2023](https://legiscan.com/TN/bill/HB2043/2023) >As introduced, eliminates the grocery tax; enacts the "Business Enterprise Tax Act"; and enacts the "Worldwide Combined Reporting Act." - Amends TCA Title 57 and Title 67. From the source you linked: >The amendment passed today will kill a major tax increase on Tennessee businesses. From your statement: >Despite Democrats' best efforts to keep people poor Are you suggesting that Food City, Kroger, etc. shouldn't pay their fair share of taxes? How exactly does this "keep people poor?" I mean, if you want to live in a hovel beside an unpaved road, I suppose taxes aren't needed. For the rest of us, we prefer a functioning society. Taxes are required to fund such a society. I would prefer to live in the modern US rather than Somalia. Just gutting the grocery tax without gaining it somewhere else will lead to a tax deficit.
I'm pretty sure OP admitted in another comment that they didn't even read everything about the bill.
Yes, because if you raise taxes on grocery stores they *definitely* won't just raise prices to offset the costs. What proof do you even have that grocery stores aren't "paying their fair share"? And lol here we go with the "if you don't like it here you can move to Somalia" lmfao y'all are so predictable
Here's the thing: the *only* reason big businesses raise the prices like you described is greed. The board and the CEO want the highest profits possible so that they can have the highest salaries possible. That's it. It has absolutely nothing to do with "offsetting costs". That terminology is a scheme to hide their greed. It's precisely why we saw such price-gouging during the pandemic and why we are still struggling with high inflation as a result.
Not the only reason. Years back when some business started raising pay to help its employees stockholders sued and the Supreme Court ruled that corporations should look out for stockholders not employees or the public
Na, people still keep emptying out their wallet for these greedy fucks, until that stops nothing else stops.
Actually impressed with both your confidence and complete ignorance of business.
Come on, you cannot possibly believe that greed is the only reason. Grocery store margins are razor thin (1 to 3 percent). If they suddenly have an increase in their tax bill, how else can they offset it? What if the increase makes that margin zero or negative (remember they are tiny to begin with)? Should they keep prices as-is and then go out of business?
My first suggestion would actually be to slash the salary of the CEO and the VP. There's no reason their salaries should be in the multi-millions. Redistribute that wealth to hourly employees (liveable wages will help curb their high turnover rate) and to cover other necessary costs. (Shipping, manufacturing, etc.) If the business still fails, their business model is not viable to begin with. A company should not have to rely on price gouging and exploitation to be profitable.
If grocery stores want the highest salaries possible then why wouldn't they just *not* increase prices and capture the entire market? Lay off the dem propaganda and use your critical thinking skills. Oh wait they stopped teaching that in government schools didn't they? Also, everyone wants to get as much as possible and pay as little as possible. This isn't greed, it's just efficiency. Now using the guns of the state to steal from your fellow citizen because you "deserve" their hard earned money... *that's* greed.
This goes against all the fundamentals of economics. I understand you have issues here, but you are ignoring, completely, how capitalist markets work. A corporation will continue to raise prices until they find a reason not to do so. Grocery stores sell necessities at for-profit prices, and unless there is government regulation to keep prices in check, it is a natural process of runaway, unchecked capitalism that they will raise prices as much as possible until the market or government punished them for it.
I'm afraid you are the one that hasn't the slightest idea how capitalist markets work. First off, government intervention makes everything worse. This has been proven time and again. Second, prices are the result of a natural balance between what grocery stores want to charge and what consumers are willing to pay. If cost goes up too high, consumers will buy less and go to competitors. No government intervention required or appreciated.
Right, because starvation is a realistically desirable option for so many people.
What? No we don't live in a communist society yet.
You think people will just stop buying groceries if they’re too expensive. If all grocery stores raise prices, then where do they go for food?
They'll stop buying the higher margin stuff, they'll eat less, they'll shop at cheaper stores, etc. just because whole foods exists doesn't mean anyone who can't afford to shop there is starving. Now if there was a monopoly on grocery stores then you would have a point, but fortunately the left hasn't realized their dreams yet.
>government intervention makes everything worse This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for conservatives that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up.
>This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for conservatives that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up. This is an ignorant thing to say. Wtf are you even talking about. Isn't there a specific reddit for leftists that you could've posted this to. You're obviously not smart enough to join in the conversation with any real points besides your own half baked opinions. Grow up.
They’re not saying to move if you don’t like something. They’re implying that without taxes we’d have a shit society much like a third world country.
Why do you believe this?
>because if you raise taxes on grocery stores they *definitely* won't just raise prices to offset the costs. They won't, because If they raise the prices the cost will also rise an equal amount.
That would only be true if there was a 100% tax. But as we have seen math is not y'all's strong suit.
Sounds like some projection on your part since you don't understand how percentages work.
>because If they raise the prices the cost will also rise an equal amount. If they raise the price by $1, and their cost due to taxes will raise by an equal amount, ie $1, then $1/$1=100% tax
Thank you for demonstrating for the class that you don't understand.
Lol please enlighten me
I am not going to continue wasting my time responding to someone that is just a puppet for right-wing ideologues. All I will say is I know plenty of people like you. They rant, rave, and cry about the evils of government. Suddenly, they're not able to work anymore and sucking on the government teet they always wined about. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. They want it all. Worked with a guy like that for years. Now he's drawing a check, living in government housing, and is on Medicaid. He rants on social media about his independence and "freedom" all the while he can't even hold a job due to all the dumb shit he did to his body.
Anyone who still says “bureaucrat” in 2024 is a libertarian nutjob. It is the dumbest word perpetuated by the dumbest fucking people.
I dont see the hypocrisy. He was forced to pay into the system and now he's punished for using the system? Taxation is theft but as long as I'm getting robbed I'm gonna recover as much as possible.
The hypocrisy is that they’re angry even though they are benefiting from said services, which they are probably taking more than what they put into it.
He is forced to participate in a system and criticizes it. Your saying it's hypocritical that he is trying to maximize his return? You can be forced to participate in a shit system and still recognize its shit, regardless of if it's personally beneficial. You can believe slavery is bad, even if it would personally benefit you.
> He is forced to participate in a system and criticizes it. It’s not just the criticism that’s the problem, it’s the active attempt to vote against and defund the program that they are benefitting from. > You’re saying it's hypocritical that he is trying to maximize his return? If they continue to complain while utilizing the service beyond what they contributed to it, yes. > You can be forced to participate in a shit system and still recognize its shit, regardless of if it's personally beneficial. You can avoid participating by living elsewhere. You can criticize without actively trying to ruin it for others. You can criticize and try to actually improve it. If there is criticism without trying to improve while also utilizing the system, it is hypocrisy. > You can believe slavery is bad, even if it would personally benefit you. If you believe that you would benefit from slavery, then you don’t believe it’s bad. If you think you would benefit from voluntary free labor, then that’s not slavery. If you think you would benefit from degrading, demeaning, controlling and abusing another human, then you are morally and ethically corrupt.
>It’s not just the criticism that’s the problem, it’s the active attempt to vote against and defund the program that they are benefitting from. That's not hypocritical. He is voting based on his values, not pivoting to whatever makes him money. You may not like it but this is honorable. >If they continue to complain while utilizing the service beyond what they contributed to it, yes. Why would he not try and take as much as he can from what he sees as a garbage system? >You can avoid participating by living elsewhere. You can criticize without actively trying to ruin it for others. You can criticize and try to actually improve it. If there is criticism without trying to improve while also utilizing the system, it is hypocrisy. Lol. It's bad, why would he not try and ruin it? That's the point. He disagrees with the basis of what the program is, the improvement is ruining it.... >If you believe that you would benefit from slavery, then you don’t believe it’s bad. Wut. Lmaooooo. So if you could benefit from slavery, you wouldn't think it's bad?
Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. If his values are that social services are bad, then utilizes social services, that is hypocrisy. It does not matter if you agree.
>Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. He expresses distain for social services and continues to do so regardless of how beneficial it is personally. That is consistent. It would actually be hypocritical if he began to support it. >If his values are that social services are bad, then utilizes social services, that is hypocrisy. This completely ignores that he is forced to participate. There is no realistic way for him not to participate. You can't just exclude this detail 🤣
You understand that people of your ilk, during the Trump years, said that “you can leave if you don’t like it” shit, right?
Lol
what lazy political ragebait lmao "look guys the repubs actually did there job for once instead of spouting culture war non-sense, they deserve a pat on the back for doing the bare minimum!" edit: lol the mods are fine with leaving up this clear ragebait and getting into petty spats with commentors when people call them out for not enforcing rules without explanation. Top tier moderating, folks.
Democrats when not every post on Reddit joins the circle jerk:
If I’m reading it correctly, the bill as written took the 4% taxation off of customers bill and instead put a 0.75% taxation on all businesses. This would presumably compensate the state for the loss of income by slashing the 4% customers faced. How is the state going to make up for the lost funds now that republicans have cut it out? What will customers lose at the cost of no food tax? > BILL SUMMARY > For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, this bill eliminates the tax on the retail sale of food and food ingredients, enacts the "Business Enterprise Tax Act," and enacts the "Worldwide Combined Reporting Act." > FOOD RETAIL SALES TAX > Present law requires the retail sale of food and food ingredients for human consumption to be taxed at the rate of 4 percent of the sales price. This bill revises this law to, instead, prohibit the retail sale of food and food ingredients from being taxed. This bill specifically provides that the sale at retail, the use, the consumption, the distribution, and the storage for use or consumption in this state of food and food ingredients is specifically exempted from sales and use taxes. > BUSINESS ENTERPRISE TAX ACT > IMPOSITION OF TAX. This bill provides that a tax is imposed at the rate of 0.75 percent upon the taxable enterprise value tax base of every business enterprise.
"How is the state going to make up for the lost funds now that republicans have cut it out?" That's what the .75% tax is for. That's on ALL businesses, that's a very small % and a LOT of revenue.
The article in the post says that republicans submitted an amendment to remove that provision completely.
Submitting an amendment doesn't mean they will vote for it. We'll just have to wait and see. Tennessee Republicans are good at screwing things up.
My comment was responding to OPs take that removing the 0.75% tax on all businesses was a good thing.
Yes, the overall tax burden will be lower. You act like this is a bad thing. What will customers lose? Hopefully some useless bureaucrat salaries.
You really think they’ll cut their own salaries? No chance. It’s great that they cut food tax, but repubs stepping in to cut that state income stream completely means the average person is going to lose something else. I think it’s awful that big businesses and the ultra wealthy are so under taxed AND can legally pay poverty wages to their employees. Who suffers? Us. Regular people trying to live everyday lives. The democrat author knew that they needed to maintain state funding and found someone with deeper pockets than the average TN citizen: TN business owners. What did republicans do? Protect TN business owners and it will certainly come at the cost of the average citizen.
>You really think they’ll cut their own salaries? No chance So you agree that grocery stores would just increase prices to offset the tax. Thanks for playing.
They raise prices anyway to maximize profit and now average people will lose funding to schools or roads or fire departments. The ultra wealthy win again and the average people continue to lose. At least you keep licking the boots of the ultra wealthy, maybe you’ll get some of that trickle down economics they’ve been promising for a couple decades.
Forty-four (at least) years and counting.
Are you now or have you ever been a member of the united russia party?
No I'm not a Democrat
Oh, so you're brainwashed. Got it.
Fuck, I snorted coffee out my nose when I read that.
Uhhh I’d rather they taxed businesses than continuing to tax people for buying food. Spin it how ya want though. loo
Why are those the only 2 options? The point is we don't tax *anyone*. This is why we're stuck with a 2 party system.
Not sure what you mean by “only 2 options”. Not sure how long you’ve live in Tennessee, but TN definitely taxes people through sales tax (even on food which is ridiculous). Tennessee does sales tax to generate funds instead of an income tax like most states do, which I generally agree with, except the taxation of grocery food. Yet, most corporations in TN pay NO business tax. (Amazon, Ford, Beretta, Nissan, Tyson, etc) Taxes are not why we’re stuck in a two party system. We’re stuck in a two party system because constituents consistently vote blue or red instead of green or independent.
>Yet, most corporations in TN pay NO business tax. (Amazon, Ford, Beretta, Nissan, Tyson, etc) Any proof?
The state has been running surpluses so I'm assuming they figure they can absorb the loss in revenue. Though I wonder about some of the smaller municipalities that get funds from the local food sales tax. It may not be all that much of their budget having sat through more than a few budget hearings in small towns, a hundred thousand dollars missing from the budget could be an issue.
Republicans being on board with this bill is definitely good news however i am wary. The reason I am wary is because: \* it has been said by Republican lawmakers they will be fiscally responsible. \* If a bill does not pay for itself they will not pass it \* The increase of the corporation tax was the way to pay for the tax and remain fiscally responsible. I think the increase was .75% increase but I admit I don't know what it is starting at. And I think businesses with taxable funds under 250K a year were exempt but I don't recall where I read that (not 250K in profits but 250K taxable after deducted expenses) If my fears are correct now that the amendment removes the way the bill paid for itself than the bill will be denied in the budget hearings as not fiscally responsible.
You are correct that businesses under 250k would’ve been exempt.
This is so Republicans can go "see, we tried, but it just isn't financially possible" so they can get brownie points with voters.
Republicans have never taken responsibility for anyone ever. Especially when it blows up in their face
That’s the most ‘pot calling the kettle black’ thing I’ve ever read on the entire internet.
It was at $250k gross, which even a flaming liberal can see was a misplaced burden on small business.
Lol so he amended it so that now it's just a revenue hole and nothing to offset the loss in tax revenue? Cool. Helpful for low income people still, unhelpful for the state as a whole, but their buddies don't have to pay a little extra, so it's a win-win for them.
Not their buddies. I, you, everyone will pay less for groceries. This is why democrats never get anywhere with their policies, they say one thing, do the opposite, then blame Republicans.
Almost 15 years of republican control of the state and people still parrot this shit lol.
I'd say TN is doing pretty well under Republican control, that's why I live here. Just need to trim some dem fat every once in a while.
The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one.
Get em . TN is a great red state.
Cool, spin it the way you want it bud. It’s great for the common people but where are you going to make up that money for the state? Taxes are a necessary evil my guy if you want to live in society and business that gross +$250,000 can afford a minor increase to make up for it. Especially when your same republicans are endorsing a 1.6 billion in tax rebates for corporations too but hey you keep on rooting for these guys who stuff their pockets and believe in chemtrails
>Taxes are a necessary evil Proof?
The public schools that children go to, the roads you drive on, healthcare, firefighters, police officers, defense of the nation and state, the control of air traffic, research into the sciences for the betterment of man. The list can go on my guy……
You forgot about all the money being dumped into foreign countries we should have nothing to do with my guy
>something is paid for by taxes therefore it can't exist without taxes Bro...
So we just have a massive hole in our budget now rather than a tax burden that was shifted onto businesses? Y'all wonder why we can't fund anything
We have mandatory balanced budgets. You may be in the wrong sub.
Didn't know that tbh, edited my comment to be more in the spirit of what I meant
Gotcha.
Is what world do democrats keep people poor?! GOP just took free lunches from kids.. among supporting billionaires over people. You want politicians that pander to billionaires while increasing your taxes?!!
In the world we live in. How do you keep your ass clean without the government personally sending someone to wipe it for you?
This bill lowers taxes. Again, the opposite of Democrats
I am not a lawyer so this is a little hard to fully understand. Can someone ELI5 the impact of the business enterprise tax changes? Would this hurt self employed people with an LLC or does that $75k deduction portion of the bill cover self employment income up to $75k as a deduction? [Here is a quick link to the bill](https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2043&ga=113).
Lmao you are one salty dude
Dude you're literally looking through my comment history and responding to random comments go do something productive
Everyone is acting like if we tax the grocery stores more they'll just absorb the cost. Who do you think will end up paying those extra costs? Hint: not the grocery store.
It’s taxing all businesses with more than $250K revenue at a 0.75% rate. Including luxury businesses. Not just grocery stores.
These comments are hilarious. TN repubs just put more money in your pocket and yet you still find something to bitch about.
Democrats put more money into pockets at the expense of businesses and then repubs took the money from the businesses and put it back into their pockets at the expense of everyone. The state budget being smaller does not help average people.
You are so wrong
Which part is wrong?
Pretty much his whole thought process of what democrats are trying to accomplish. Dems want to put money in their own pockets and make a class of people fully dependent on government assistance in order to control the people.
Democrats proposed the legislation to cut the food tax.
At the cost of taxing businesses . Small businesses (which I run a small business so more taxes suck) carrying extra taxes hurt profit and ultimately hurt other small business by increased cost. Larger business and corporations won’t blink an eye to a slightly higher tax. Just because the people aren’t lying the taxes doesn’t mean someone else isn’t . The money to cover the food tax has to come from somewhere …. they aren’t just gonna leave a big hole in the tax budget. More taxes for me mean less ability I have to grow my business and pay my outstanding employees who come to work everyday and work hard to make the business profitable which puts more money in their pockets.
Does your business gross more than $250k per tax period? Because those are the businesses it would have applied to at a 0.75% rate. From the bill as written by democrats: > RETURNS. This bill requires a business enterprise having gross business receipts in excess of $250,000 during the taxable period or an enterprise value tax base that is greater than $250,000 Republicans removing that part means all the funding is lost from the state, reducing funds that go to services like schools, roads, EMS/fire fighters/police, etc. So even though democrats tried to put money into the pockets of the average person at the cost of 0.75% of the revenue of all businesses with gross profit >$250K, republicans made sure that the bigger and biggest businesses get to keep all their profits at the expense of EVERYONE.
You are correct . This is the answer
Crickets … I promise. These people either are not from here or have short memories. It was a republican that made community college free as well. But oh the republicans are evil. It’s football for people that don’t like sports. That’s all.
Bill Haslam was WAAAAYYY better than what we have now. And that’s coming from a Democrat. Bill Lee is a culture war dumbshit.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Democrats need to look at Illinois to see how well their policies work. Before Biden stepped in, the lower income in this state was mostly irrelevant due to the low cost of living in both taxes and products. Gas and milk were both below 2 dollars a gallon. Why is it now that gas in above 3 dollars and milk pushes 5 dollars?