Tag Archives: taxpayer

City Slaps Sin Tax on Pregnant Pooches

Got a license for that?

Got a license for that?

An effort to cut down on the number of homeless pets in one Texas city has prompted officials to slap pet owners with a $75 sin tax to help deter their furry friends from breeding. Failure to register your pet’s new litter within 14 days “could result in fines and penalties,” states El Paso’s new animal ordinance.

City officials have also limited dogs and cats to 2 planned or unplanned pregnancies a year in an effort to prevent shelters from being overwhelmed. Professional breeders complain that the city’s crackdown on careless pet owners unfairly punishes their responsible businesses that provide in-demand pets to welcoming new homes.

El Paso Animal Services received $250,000 from the city council to step-up its enforcement efforts that will include monitoring newspapers and other media to ensure citizens selling puppies and kittens have registered their new litters and paid the sin tax for their pets’ intentional or unintentional ‘romantic encounters.’

Your taxpayer dollars hard at work!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Advertisements

AMA Study: Taxpayers Should Subsidize Gym Memberships for Obese

Would you want to pay for these ladies' gym memberships and meals until they slimmed down to healthier weights?

Would you want to pay for these ladies' gym memberships and meals until they slimmed down to healthier weights?

According to a new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, commercial weight-loss programs that bundle exercise with meal plans should be paid for by taxpayers and not the obese clients of profit-oriented businesses like Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers.

Rena Wing, a professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown University’s Warren Alpert Medical School, proposes that if the federal government subsidized weight-loss programs, “both retention and average weight loss outcomes might be far better than when participants must pay for these programs.”

Call it a hunch, but the thing that keeps weight-loss centers like Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers in business is their clients constantly falling off the wagon due to their lack of personal responsibility and motivation once they’ve reached their goals. Many newly slim customers don’t realize that once they’ve lost the excess baggage and quit the programs, a constant self-motivated maintenance routine and healthy diet are needed to ensure the weight doesn’t return.

Do we get our money back when people in these programs fail to keep the weight off? Should taxpayer money be used to pay for obese citizens’ gym memberships and meal plans until they slim down to healthier weights?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Idaho Wants Smokers and Drinkers to Pay for Budgetary Indiscretions

Potato head bureaucrats want to loot smokers and drinkers.

Potato head bureaucrats want to loot smokers and drinkers.

Idaho bureaucrats are struggling to provide continued funding for health and welfare, education and the state’s prison system, so they’re hoping smokers and drinkers will help pay the bills.

“Our reserves are gone,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Dean Cameron (R-Rupert). “We can’t expect more federal stimulus.”

Sensing desperation, anti-smoking advocates are telling lawmakers they can pull-in a quick $46 million in revenue with a $1 per pack cigarette sin tax increase. House Minority Leader and wordsmith John Rusche (D-Lewiston) managed to pass-off the penalty tax targeting smokers as “another smoking prevention tool [for kids].”

Rep. Lenore Hardy Barrett (R-Challis) scolded greedy big government lawmakers for budgetary indiscretions in the past and wanting smokers and drinkers to pay for their mistakes today.

“Boil it down: stop spending and lower taxes,” Barrett advises fellow legislators.  She defended smokers and drinkers targeted by sin taxes, stating, “that’s their choice and they’re not breaking the law.”

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

State Blows Remaining Stimulus Money on Cockfighting Crackdown

"Get this, Barry ... I'm gonna use my stimulus money to staff an anti-cockfighting task force. It sounds legitimate, right?"

"Get this, Barry ... I'm gonna use my stimulus money to staff an anti-cockfighting task force. It sounds legitimate, right?"

In March 2007, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) signed a bill outlawing cockfighting in the state. Now, Richardson wants to use federal stimulus money to staff and train an anti-cockfighting task force that will be charged with enforcing the more than three-year-old law.

New Mexico is down to its last few dollars worth of stimulus funds and Gov. Richardson in getting creative with its usage. He has designated $150,000 to be spent combatting cock-and-dog-fighting, as well as “animal hoarding,” wire services report.

The New Mexico Department of Public Safety will be awarded the full $150K to staff, train and provide enforcement tools to the state’s newly-deputized ‘animal rights’ cops, reports The New Mexico Independent.

Basically, Richardson has created a budget for a new police force to do the job of the state’s existing police force. It sort of sounds like the roles the so-called “czars” play in the Obama Administration, doesn’t it?

More bureaucracy. More of taxpayers’ money being wasted to create it. Talk about a ‘pet’ project of a(nother) big government bureaucrat!

New Mexico’s anti-cock-and-dog-fighting effort will not spur our nation’s economic growth as American citizens were led to believe the enormous stimulus bill would eventually achieve. It has absolutely nothing to do with achieving the goals defined on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 website.

Blast Gov. Richardson if you are disgusted by his wasteful usage of New Mexico’s remaining ‘Porkulus’ funds. It’s still your money!

Contact Gov. Richardson via email or call his office at (505) 476-2200.

Office of the Governor
490 Old Santa Fe Trail
Room 400
Santa Fe, NM 87501

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

UK: Government Funds ‘Happy Endings’ Program for Sex-Starved Disabled Citizens

Talk about "Hot Wheels!"

Talk about "Hot Wheels!"

A government program designed to enhance the “health and wellbeing” of disabled adult British citizens is quite possibly the most absurd nanny state initiative we have discovered, making San Francisco bureaucrats sound like heartless bastards in their ongoing plight to lend a ‘helping hand’ to the needy masses.

The UK’s Daily Mail reports that Freedom of Information requests reveal big government bureaucrats in England are using money allocated to the “Putting People First” program to ensure disabled citizens receive a fair chance to live out their sexual fantasies, just like everyone else. The scheme includes using taxpayer money to pay disabled citizens’ tabs at strip clubs, sexually-themed resorts and for the ‘healing’ services of prostitutes.

British bureaucrats want disabled citizens to “have the best possible quality of life, irrespective of illness or disability,” states an official “Putting People First” brochure. The government’s health care tie-in program has been funded with £520million to help disabled citizens “retain maximum dignity and respect,” and there seem to be no limits to the ‘benefits’ they can request and receive.

The Daily Mail cited one example of the government ’empowering’ a man with a brain injury by prescribing a prostitute as part of his health care plan. According to social workers familiar with his case, the goal was to “teach him to become sexually ‘self-reliant’ after his wife left him and took all their money,” and apparently, it worked.

Engaging in sex with prostitutes “has increased his confidence and restored his faith in women” declared social workers familiar with the case.

Another disabled beneficiary of big government’s ‘helping hand’ was flown to Amsterdam at taxpayers’ expense to have sex with a prostitute because he was deemed a “frustrated virgin” by his social worker. Foreign prostitutes, especially those in Amsterdam’s famed Red Light District, are regarded by British social workers as being safer than those in the UK.

If you’re questioning the logic behind the Putting People First program’s efforts to grant ‘happy endings’ to all participants in this sordid fairy tale, it’s all about protecting the “human rights” of citizens most vulnerable to abuse, says one social worker who routinely enables disabled clients to live out their sexual fantasies.

“Wouldn’t you prefer that we can control this, guide him, educate him, support him to understand the process and ultimately end up satisfying his needs in a secure, licensed place where his happiness and growth as a person is the most important thing,” asked a social worker speaking on the condition of anonymity. “Refusing to offer him this service would be a violation of his human rights.”

Eventually, government officials want to empower disabled adults to create their own wellness plans in which they will be allotted “personal budgets,” the brochure notes. Opponents of the taxpayer-funded sexual fantasy fulfillment program are already outraged and vow to make citizens aware of the government’s rampant abuse of their hard-earned money.

“Many taxpayers will be appalled and offended that money intended for social care has been used in this way,” said Matthew Elliot, chief executive of The Taxpayers’ Alliance. “It’s essential that where public funds are involved, there are the sort of checks and balances in place that prevent money being wasted in this way.”

Contrary to Elliot’s concerns and those of anyone with morals and values aware of this twisted program, the British government insists Putting People First is chock full of “values” critical to ensuring the disabled lead and maintain “purposeful lives.”

“Ensuring older people, people with chronic conditions, disabled people and people with mental health problems have the best possible quality of life and the equality of independent living is fundamental to a socially just society,” the brochure’s “Values” section reads.

Do you believe that providing prostitutes, lap dances and sexually-themed resort vacations to disabled adults is “fundamental to a socially just society,” especially when these ‘services’ are being paid for with taxpayer money? Share your thoughts below.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Win $10M from Big Government Democrats!

Bumper sticker reads: Caution - This Vehicle Makes Frequent Stops

Bumper sticker reads: Caution - This Vehicle Makes Frequent Stops

Attention all science geeks, grease monkeys, inventors and anyone interested in taking home part of a $10 million jackpot, courtesy of big government Senate Democrats gambling with your tax dollars. If you can create a battery to power an electric car for 500 miles or more without recharging, you could be a winner!

Incorporated in Senate Democrats’ proposed Clean Energy Jobs and Oil Accountability Act of 2010 is the “Batteries for Tomorrow Prize.” (See Sec. 2122) The contest will award “cash prizes” to a lucky winners who “advance the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of a 500-mile vehicle battery.”

Put on your thinking caps, because the Senate is expected to consider the energy bill when it returns from recess on Sept. 10 and a vote could happen shortly thereafter.

Before you get your hopes up for cashing-in on the Senate Democrats’ generous redistribution of taxpayers’ wealth — for a good cause, of course — there are a few stipulations that deserve careful consideration:

  • You’ll be competing against “private companies” that most likely will include the government-funded automotive engineers at Government Motors (GM).
  • Batteries must be “of a size that would not be cost-prohibitive or create space constraints, if mass-produced.” Basically, government-selected contest judges can create any criteria and excuse to not award you for your ingenuity, especially if your competitor at GM would make for a better poster boy (or girl) for propaganda purposes than you.
  • Batteries must be “cost-effective (measured in cost per kilowatt hour), if mass-produced.”
  • “The Secretary, in consultation with the Committee, shall establish any additional battery specifications that the Secretary and the Committee determine to be necessary.” Just a few potential curveballs to consider before, during and after the competition commences.
  • “An entity providing private funds for the Prize may not participate in the competition for the Prize.” Hmm. That just means if GM, Ford and Chrysler don’t fund the grand prize, they and their engineers can compete with unlimited financial resources to fund their research and design efforts.
  • “The Secretary, in consultation with the Committee, shall establish a technical review committee composed of non-Federal officers to review data submitted by Prize entrants under this section and determine whether the data meets the prize specifica- tions described in subsection (b).” Who better to ‘fairly’ judge this contest than current and former automotive executives and engineers from GM, Ford and Chrysler? Wink-wink. Nod-nod.
  • And, here’s the kicker. Subject to the availability of funds to carry out this section, the amount of the Prize shall be $10,000,000.” After all of your efforts and expenses that went towards securing your fair share of the $10 million prize, there’s a possibility you’ll never receive a dime of it. We’re just wondering when this information will be announced to independent contest entrants — before, during or after they’ve made hefty investments of their own time, money and resources to help big government build a better electric car battery.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Congress Pigs Out While Taxpayers Struggle to Feed Their Families

$10,673 spent at barbecue restaurants! Oink!

$10,673 spent at barbecue restaurants! Oink!

While Americans are struggling to put food on the table for their families, Members of Congress and their staffers are blowing tax dollars on fine dining and fast food. According to a new report from a government watchdog group, the House consumed $2.6 million worth of food and beverages in a recent nine-month period.

Democrats and Republicans are both guilty of gluttony, the Sunlight Foundation’s House Expenditure Reports Database reveals. $298,734 was spent on food and beverages by the Democratic Party’s largest offices (the Democratic Caucus, the Office of the Majority Leader and the Office of the Majority Whip) and $202,927 was spent on food and beverages by the Republican Party’s largest offices (the Republican Conference, the Office of the Minority Leader and the Office of the Minority Whip), AOL News reports.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) office managed to tear through $83,341 over the nine-month period. That amount is not included in the overall tab for the Democratic Party’s largest offices noted above.

Congressional Pages, the youngsters who lead Capitol tours and perform grunt work, enjoyed $140,027 worth of ‘free’ food, thanks to congressionally-charged-taxpayer-funded debit cards that are issued for use in cafeterias.

The report also shows Members of Congress’ fondness for a trendy new restaurant in town. $63,016 of your hard-earned money went towards wining and dining starving congressmen at Wolfgang Puck’s restaurant, The Source. And, you know it’s a budget-busting restaurant when the menu doesn’t have prices on entree selections.

Keeping the House buzzing all day long, $84,794 was spent on “coffee-centric companies.” AOL News notes that “7,743 pounds of coffee beans (at $10.95 each) could be bought with that much money” while “348,468 cups of coffee (about 45 8-ounce cups per pound) could be brewed from that many beans.”

And, congressional water coolers are, apparently, just for talking around. $604K was spent on bottled water.

What was President Obama saying about “fat cat bankers” on Wall Street and how taxpayers have a right to be fuming mad at them?

“They’re still puzzled why is it that people are mad at the banks. Well, let’s see,” President Obama said on Dec. 13, 2009. “You guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it’s gone through in — in decades, and you guys caused the problem. And we’ve got 10% unemployment.”

The unemployment rate is still hovering around 10% and now we get wind that Members of Congress are pigging-out on fast food and fine dining while countless citizens are struggling to find money to feed their own families, let alone, themselves. Perhaps President Obama should take a peek down the road and crackdown on the porky politicians charged with responsibly administering tax dollars during an economic recession.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine