Lawmaker Tackles Tampon Tax

[What Would Jesus Do?]

There should be no sales tax on Tube Socks, those poor teenage boys are suffering by paying this tax.


Really folks, if this is what we are now arguing about in America we have it pretty good.

Are you suggesting we should settle for the current level of "good"?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I like your stuff but too far here. You've entered the looney zone.

"Equally" may not have been the right word, but his point is correct.

We shouldn't - and often don't - tax basic needs. The question is whether tampons and such should be counted as a basic need (for those who actually need them). Seems to me the answer should be "yes."

There may be other things like that where society has advanced to the point where it makes sense to count a former luxury as a basic need. Who knows, maybe basic cell phones will be in that category some day. Sure, we could all go back to land lines - if we have one - or to writing letters. But seriously...? Is communication a basic need?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Can you give us an example?

Because this isn't pandering to women.

Bull of course it is. I don't see anyone demanding the take the sales tax off of shaving cream.

If you want to expand the list of items without sales tax and include pads, I'm all for it. But making the list be food and pads is pandering to women.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

"Basically we are being taxed for being women," Garcia said in announcing the bill. "This is a step in the right direction to fix this gender injustice. Women have no choice but to buy these products, so the economic effect is only felt by woman [sic] and women of color are particularly hard hit by this tax. You can't just ignore your period, it's not like you can just ignore the constant flow."

Anyone else think it was odd they just kind of threw this out there? Do the coloreds have more challenging "feminine issues" that I don't know about?

That's because this idea was brought to you courtesy of SJWs. It isn't weird at all one you understand the mind of an SJW. In the mind of an SJW everything in this world was created to victimize anyone who isn't a white straight "cis" male.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Bull of course it is. I don't see anyone demanding the take the sales tax off of shaving cream.

If you want to expand the list of items without sales tax and include pads, I'm all for it. But making the list be food and pads is pandering to women.

Not taxing something people need is pandering?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Men, on average, are larger than women and require more calories to sustain them. Eating is not optional. We require food just as much as women require tampons. We didn't ask to be larger. It's just how it is. Nature selected it that way over tens of thousands of years. So now we're stuck paying higher food bills than women. It's unjust. I'm going to write a letter to my congressperson and he'd damn well better do something about it.

Funny how you have you pay higher car insurance rate

Not taxing something people need is pandering?

It sure is when you are only doing it for one gender. There are lots of other needs that we pay sales tax on. Why is it that specifically and only pads gets exempt? If they want to drop the tax on pads in a package along with say all hygiene related items then I'm all for that. But specifying pads while keeping sales tax on every other hygiene related item is SJW pandering to one of their so call victim groups.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Not taxing something people need is pandering?

It sure is when you are only doing it for one gender.

Do we charge the tax when men buy tampons?

 

[TJ8869]

Do we charge the tax when men buy tampons?

I guess you weren't paying attention. According to Assemblymember Garcia, the tax only affects women. Every word of her press release comes across as pandering to women.

“Basically we are being taxed for being women. This is a step in the right direction to fix this gender injustice. Women have no choice but to buy these products, so the economic effect is only felt by woman and women of color are particularly hard hit by this tax."

Assemblymember Ling Ling Chang added, "Our government is imposing a charge exclusively on women by forcing them to pay extra for the ‘privilege’ of a health necessity. And for many low-income communities it is difficult to access hygiene products. This form of regulatory discrimination should end.”

Regulatory discrimination. Taxed for being a woman. Imposing a charge exclusively on women.

That's textbook pandering, Zogby.

 

[TJ8869]

Quite honestly I have no issue with making tampons tax-exempt. It matters not a whit to me. Tax them, don't tax them, whatever. I couldn't care less. What I do object to is the overwrought drama displayed by Garcia and Chang. And I have serious concerns about their horrible math skills.

Can we at least all agree that the claim that women pay on average about $7 a month in tampon sales tax is completely absurd? I suspect there's not a single woman in this country who pays $7 a month in tampon sales tax unless she's the house mom at a brothel.

Garcia makes two claims that are utterly incompatible - 1) women pay an average of $7 a month in sales tax on feminine hygiene products, and 2) the state of California collects $20 million a year in sales tax on feminine hygiene products.

Here's how moronic those claims are: if the average woman pays $84 a year in taxes and the state is collecting $20 million then that means there are only about 238,100 women in California paying tampon sales tax.

Say what?

The female population of California is about 17 million. Of those, roughly 10 million are in that 40 year age range twixt puberty and menopause. If California has 10 million bleeders and they each pay $84 a year in sales tax then California should be raking in about $840 million a year. That's a damn sight higher than $20 million.

Maybe that's why California's finances are such a mess. They have assemblypersons who can't handle even basic mathematics.