Sex Tax

Chewbacca | 6 March 2002 | Chewbacca

[Chewbacca]

Do to the brilliance of State and Federal officials who believe that adding a tax to something increases revenue and decreases use at the same time I have a proposal.

They tax tabacco to encourage smokers to quit and increase revenue for the State.

They tax alcohol to encourage drinkers to quit and increase revenue for the State.

If under this same "Liberal" logic then shouldn't increasing taxes on condoms therefore increase revenue and decrease sex and incedents of pregnancy.

Not too far fetched I would think.

Thought anyone?

[week 71]

I did not have a taxable relationship with that woman, Monica Lewinsky

It takes alot to get me to laugh out loud, but your quip did it...cheers

[xm177e2]

You NEED tobacco to smoke. You NEED alcohol to get drunk. You don't NEED condoms to have sex.

[2grit]

Does that mean you'd be paying with a rubber check? Sorry, couldn't resist.

[Chewbacca]

You don't need to buy tabacco to smoke either.
Not hard to grow your own.
You don't need to buy alcohol to drink.
Not that hard to make beer or wine in your basement or garage. It's called moonshine in some areas.
I also agree you don't need a condom to have sex, but you need one if you want to think you are having "safe" sex.
Of course you could put higher taxes on birth control pills, spermacides, etc.

[Buckeroo]

Let's see, now...... there are about 280,000,000 folks living in America. Assuming that women and men equally divide the poulation base, thus 140,000,000 million couples this leaves us with a "potential untapped LOVE tax base."

Since the federal government now owes 6,000,000,000,000 (6 trillion dollars) we can strip this debt away by taxing sexual activity. Most couples have sex twice a month (on average). With these simple numbers, we can now find the tax value of having sex to get us out of debt.

6,000,000,000,000/140,000,000//24 equals 1800 US dollars per love session. But all of this is just another cheap date to the government.

[xm177e2]

I also agree you don't need a condom to have sex, but you need one if you want to think you are having "safe" sex.
Of course you could put higher taxes on birth control pills, spermacides, etc.

Putting higher taxes on condoms might reduce slightly the amount of non-marital sex. But it would increase dramatically the amount of unprotected non-marital sex, which means more abortions and more single mothers. It's a stupid idea. It's a really, really stupid idea. I can't convey with words just how stupid it is.

[bubbafree]

whaddaya, some kinda artsy-fartsy Volvo owner?

[gorush]

What? Are you trying to put me in the poor house?!

[tsomer]

So what-the-hells-amatter with my volvo? It works just fine after its been fixed a few times. I'm planning to hitch a plow this spring, before I take off the snow tires.

As to the topic of this thread: let's not loose sight of the fact that these matters can be taken in hand... Self-reliance is key.