FREEP THIS POLL: A bill is being passed around capitol hill, $3,500 in tax cuts for pet owners.

KGUN9.com ^ | 10-14-2009 | KGUN9.com

[AZ .44 MAG]

A bill is being passed around capitol hill, $3,500 in tax cuts for pet owners. Is this a good idea? Yes No Undecided

[AZ .44 MAG]

I am never normally opposed to tax cuts no matter when or where, but this is insane. I would much prefer they cut the taxes the veterinarian pays. Then he could lower or keep down costs and fees. I have a bunch of pet cockatiels and a typical vet. visit costs $120 or more.

They would raise taxes on the veterinarians to pay for this tax cut. In a libtard's eyes pet care is good, veterinarian income is bad.

I agree with you that a tax cut is almost never to be opposed. I'm not sure this is insane though. It fits in with the Left's trend of cheapening human life by equating it with animals. You know: Save the whales but abort the babies.

[DoughtyOne]

I think you may be on to something there. ;-)

[KarlInOhio]

I really hope this is legislative satire, where the purpose of the legislation is to make fun of all the other targeted tax deductions and credits. The problem is that too many of our elected officials wouldn't see it as a joke and actually pass it.

[vetvetdoug]

Who is sponsoring this bill?

Not me, but this Congress if full of Liberal left leaning gun grabbing dishonest Republican hating queer loving tax and spend Democrats.

[marstegreg]

Thank you for clearing that up for me!

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

“I agree with you that a tax cut is almost never to be opposed.”

I respectfully disagree. Tax cuts should be across the board. Congress needs to get out of the bussiness of picking and choosing where it is acceptable to spend our money.

[CaliforniaCon]

I’m at $3,000 this year for my sickly dog from a shelter but it’s MY expense, not someone else’s — and no way would I support tax dollars for such things.

She’s the boss here, though, so may wish to cast a different vote ;)

[AZ .44 MAG]

Unfortunately it's not satire. From the article:

New bill proposes tax cuts for pet owners

The bill is not anticipated to pass at this time, but it's been brought to the table by a Michigan congressman, animal rights group laud his efforts to promote pet ownership and care.

"We think this is as much a health care bill as any," said Nancy Perry, Vice President of government affairs at the Humane Society.

The bill even has a cute acronym; the HAPPY act, specifically 'Humanity And Pets Partnered through the Years"

Odd they don't name the congressman, don't you think?

[Salvation]

 

Thank you for participating in our poll. Here are the results so far.

Yes	22%
No	76%
Undecided	2%

[Salvation]

I hope you are joking, considering the abortions done each day in the U. S. and the lack of support for a natural family.

[freekitty]

Sounds like a great bill for pet owners; however I wouldn’t pass it. The bills are Congress critters pass are never what they say they are. They slip in stuff and if passed they can add more stuff for their personal agendas.

Don’t let them pass anything. We have way to many laws of personal agendas on the books now.

[Salvation]

Where does he land on protecting baibies from abortion?

[AZ .44 MAG]

I respectfully disagree. Tax cuts should be across the board. Congress needs to get out of the bussiness of picking and choosing where it is acceptable to spend our money.

I don't think we disagree at all. I would only oppose tax cuts for things like turning in your neighbor for having guns or human smuggling operations or other idiotic things. I'm not even opposed to this tax cut. I just think it's dumb to push this instead of other beneficial cuts that would help the economy. Like income tax cuts or reducing the burdens on business.

[MilspecRob]

What is it, something in the water in DC that makes politicos go insane.

[bunster]

Wow, so many adjectives in one sentence — but they lined up nicely!! Further proof we don’t need funny pages any longer — between this “bill” and Michelle using our tax dollars to blame obesity on those nasty vending machine operators — we’ll just keep walking around shaking our heads for 3 more years.

[dynachrome]

Does this include Michael Vick's pitbulls? Heck, it is only taxpayer money. Plenty more where that came from/sarc

FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)

[blackie]

No!!

[humble and shy]

you took the words right out of my mouth.

[AZ .44 MAG]

Does this include Michael Vick's pitbulls?

Would it include Michael Vick?

[adorno]

Okay, now we’re getting ridiculous up there in Washington, but.. a question: at what age will a cat or a dog be considered “of age” and therefore not qualified to be a “dependent” anymore? Yeah, I know, a ridiculous question.

But, as long as they don’t raise taxes to pay for the lost government revenue from the “giveaways”, I probably wouldn’t mind taking the $3500. It would be my money coming back to me and I could spend it as I see fit and not necessarily on the dog or cat. That $3500 could stimulate my side of the equation in the overall scheme of the economy.

My daughter, a veterinarian, would be very appreciative as well, since perhaps more people would be “stimulated” to adopt some animals and maybe even take them to the vet once in a while. .