Posted on 05/21/2009 1:49:20 PM PDT by NYer
The reason, of course, is to make sure the consumer forgets about just how much sales tax (17.5% in the UK) The Man is taking...
Pathetic that a once great nation is reduced to arguing the great philosophical issue of “what is a potato chip”. No wonder the west is vulnerable to attacks of all sorts.
Ketchup is a vegetable!
Hype/sizzle.
Sleazy cowards in Parliament don't want people to realize how heavy their tax burden is, eh?
That last 25% is the love that holds the Pringle together.
Yes but obviously the manufacturer doesnt want to have that sales tax slapped on their product, as that will make it more expensive and therefore less attractive to customers. Therefore they will sell less of them and therefore they will make less profit from them.
“Crisps” are what the Brits call “chips”.
I am not sure that we are in any place to criticize the Brits on that particular angle, seeing as our Supreme Court has ruled on such things as whether a tomato is a vegetable or a fruit (it decided the tomato was a vegetable for purposes of imposing taxes):
The single question in this case is whether tomatoes, considered as provisions, are to be classed as 'vegetables' or as 'fruit,' within the meaning of the tariff act of 1883.
The only witnesses called at the trial testified that neither 'vegetables' nor 'fruit' had any special meaning in trade or commerce different from that given in the dictionaries, and that they had the same meaning in trade to-day that they had in March, 1883.
The passages cited from the dictionaries define the word 'fruit' as the seed of plaints, or that part of plaints which contains the seed, and especially the juicy, pulpy products of certain plants, covering and containing the seed. These definitions have no tendency to show that tomatoes are 'fruit,' as distinguished from 'vegetables,' in common speech, or within the meaning of the tariff act.
There being no evidence that the words 'fruit' and 'vegetables' have acquired any special meaning in trade or commerce, they must receive their ordinary meaning. Of that [149 U.S. 304, 307] meaning the court is bound to take judicial notice, as it does in regard to all words in our own tongue; and upon such a question dictionaries are admitted, not as evidence, but only as aids to the memory and understanding of the court. Brown v. Piper, 91 U.S. 37 , 42; Jones v. U. S ., 137 U.S. 202, 216 , 11 S. Sup. Ct. Rep. 80; Nelson v. Cushing, 2 Cush. 519, 532, 533; Page v. Fawcet, 1 Leon. 242; Tayl. Ev. (8th Ed.) 16, 21.
Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans, and peas. But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery, and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish, or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as dessert.
The attempt to class tomatoes as fruit is not unlike a recent attempt to class beans as seeds, of which Mr. Justice Bradley, speaking for this court, said: 'We do not see why they should be classified as seeds, any more than walnuts should be so classified. Both are seeds, in the language of botany or natural history, but not in commerce nor in common parlance. On the other hand in speaking generally of provisions, beans may well be included under the term 'vegetables.' As an article of food on our tables, whether baked or boiled, or forming the basis of soup, they are used as a vegetable, as well when ripe as when green. This is the principal use to which they are put. Beyond the common knowledge which we have on this subject, very little evidence is necessary, or can be produced.' Robertson v. Salomon, 130 U.S. 412, 414 , 9 S. Sup. Ct. Rep. 559.
Judgment affirmed.
NIX v. HEDDEN, 149 U.S. 304 (1893)
What a bunch of f’ing idiots. If it is a chip (a flake; a slice; A small broken or cut off piece) from a potato, then it is a potato chip. Pringles are not potato chips. Anybody, like me, who loves potato chips knows that. If anything, they are a potato chip substitute. They’re not bad, but in no way do they have those desirable features that only real potato chips have.
It should be separated out so the peasants can know just how much their government overlords are stealing from them.
If im buying something I just want to know how much I have to hand over. I dont want an intimate breakdown of how much of the cost is tax, how much is the retail outlets “cut” (a very proportion incidentally) how much is due to distribution (an even higher proportion) or whatever. I mean, if you buy something they don’t tell you how much import duty is on it.
For the record, many items do have the sales tax declared in the UK. Especially higher value items.
You must be a very happy peasant.
May your chains rest lightly upon you.
As opposed to an unhappy one?
You’re in chains as much as me. You just don’t realise it.
You're the one who is in denial, my friend.
Not so. I know I’m being ripped off.
You already said you don't care.
I said I didn’t want a breakdown on every packet. That’s not quite the same thing.
Why am I attracted to the opposite sex? This drives me mad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.