Secrets of the City

I had to read the whole thing just to find out what mattered,

“Kahn’s bill excludes medically necessary procedures, such as facial reconstruction after an accident or burns. It also wouldn’t apply to laser eye surgery. “

Why not? It is a service purchased.

Which reminds me, the Walker Afterhours party Friday featured what had to be the Twin Cities premier plastic surgery disaster showcase. It is worth the price of admission just to see the terrifying faces of the plasticized and the “be-seen” crowd ignoring the art to look around making sure they’re being seen. What a parade of sad sad self importance…it’s awesome!

If you’re so inclined, vote.

The “why not” comment was in regard to elective cosmetic surgery, not medically necessary procedures.

Sure, it ought to be taxed. Point is that I would think that Phyllis Kahn would be a bit more judicious in selecting which bills to sponsor so as not to be marginalized any further. We must give thanks to her constituents for providing us a constant source of, um, uh, entertainment in these trying times.

This one’s dead in committee.

What Minnesota needs is a striped party shirt and hair gel tax. If downtown bars and restaurants die, I’ll be convinced that taxes actually are bad for the economy.

“Kahn’s bill excludes medically necessary procedures . . .”

– - -

If I’m so ugly that I endanger other people’s health . . .

(Kahn shoots her side in the foot this way. This tax isn’t a tax levied on something because doing it has social costs that need to be internalized, like a gas tax. She’s frank about the motive behind this – it’s simply “they can afford it.” Why not, then, simplify everything and just push to raise the top tax rates? Doing something like this is inefficient – it costs money to enforce, it costs money to account for it – raising her extra $7MM would take, like a .002% increase in rates.)

.

I wanted to go to that walker thing and then I realized I’m not the kind of person who goes to that kind of thing and would be sized up and shunned immediately. So I stayed home instead, because what am I if not a reclusive dweeb?

Honestly, I was with PK on the DLS stadium thing and I’m with her on this. It’s totally an elective procedure and except for the noted exceptions has no medical necessity.

I’ve also seen PK in NE Lunds. I didn’t say anything about the chickens, though.

“Why not? It is a service purchased.“

– - -

Here’s the complete list of services that MN taxes right now:

lodging
admission to places of amusement and recreation
parking
laundry and drycleaning
motor vehicle washing, rustproofing, and towing
building cleaning services
detective and security services
pet grooming, care, and boarding
lawn, garden, and tree care, maintenance, and removal
massage (except for medically provided or necessary massage)

Should taxation follow some recognizable rational basis? Or should it be the random product of whim and whimsy, based on which pol gets collared by which lobbyist with great seats to the Vikings? Look at this list above and guess which it’s been so far.

.

This is completely right in principle, though maybe a waste of time in practice. I don’t care, though, Phyllis Kahn rules.

Well we need to raise some more tax revenue SOMEHOW since the governor has a murderous gleam in his eyes for the city.

I might also argue that plastic surgery falls into some combination of: laundry and drycleaning (keeping up your skin like your clothes), pet grooming, care, and boarding (for the trophy wife!), and massage (for, uh, certain types of implants that need that sort of attention)

Sounds good enough to me!

Should taxation follow some recognizable rational basis? Or should it be the random product of whim and whimsy, based on which pol gets collared by which lobbyist with great seats to the Vikings? Look at this list above and guess which it’s been so far.

All of the stuff on your list are luxuries. That’s a pretty good rationale.

“Well we need to raise some more tax revenue SOMEHOW since the governor has a murderous gleam in his eyes for the city.“

– - -

Aren’t you the one who pointed out, quite some time ago, that the city is a net payer of taxes (meaning, more taxes are collected from the city and its residents than the city gets back, because outstate sucks up dollars)?

Wouldn’t that mean that raising taxes would hurt the city more than help it?

.

Kahn is a good argument for term limits. . .
I mean, seriously, with all of the more important things to do, state lawmakers are spending time on this?

Nice try, bobby, but I was talking about state and federal taxes then. Local taxes are spent locally. Better luck next time, though.

Also, what MLH said. Haven’t you guys ever paid Monopoly? Remember the “luxury tax” box that everyone hated to land on?

er, played monopoly. weird typo.

state lawmakers are spending time on this?

She’s fixing a mistake. Certainly principle is worth something, isn’t it? Is there any argument why this should be tax-exempt? If not, it should pass quickly and they can move on to something else.

I’m still struggling to see the connection between homelessness and elective plastic surgery. I work with quite a few formerly homeless people, and none seem to have gotten a face lift recently.

Should taxation follow some recognizable rational basis?

Yes. All luxury services. You could exempt child care, health related ones, etc.

If you get anyone who’s worked with Kahn in a drunk/honest mood they’ll all agree she’s nut-ball crazy. Reasonable, tipsy persons may disagree if she’s harmful or harmless, evil or saintly, but no one in their honest moments disputes the crazy.

“All of the stuff on your list are luxuries. That’s a pretty good rationale.”

– - -

That sort of begs the question, I think. If we already tax high-income people higher – in both dollars, and in rates – than lower-income people, what’s the rationale for also taxing things just because they’re luxuries?

Do we need no more basis than “we want to take their money and spend it as we want it spent”?

.

During a particularly tiresome session, after which many were sick of hearing about a bill Kahn wanted to pass, Greiling said, Kahn came into the chambers with fresh cookies. The bill promptly passed.

“If she was going to argue the facts or bake the cookies, she was going to do what she needed to do,” Greiling said.

Cookies, eh. Wonder what else she grows out there on Nicollet Island?…maybe time for some covert ops.

Sales tax is actually regressive, with high-income people paying less of their total percentage of earnings than poor people.

We tax rich people, and the luxuries they buy, more than poor people, and the luxuries they don’t buy, for the same reason that Willie Sutton robbed banks, because that’s where the money is.

“We tax rich people, and the luxuries they buy, more than poor people, and the luxuries they don’t buy, for the same reason that Willie Sutton robbed banks, because that’s where the money is.“

- – -

I’ll skate right past the easy and obvious “excellent choice for analogy” comment to:

Wouldn’t it a lot more efficient to simply raise the tax rate on “the rich” than to add all of these little luxury taxes? Each little luxury tax costs money to put in place, record, account for, and enforce, and, in this case, it’s unfair in that it allows the beautiful rich to pay lower taxes than the ugly rich, which strikes me as regressive in its own right.

.

So rich, so pretty
The best piece of ass in this whole damn city.
So rich, so pretty.
I like a girl who eats and brings it up.
A sassy little frassy with bulimia.
Her best friend’s a plastic surgeon.
and when her Beemers in the shop she rolls the Benz.
Manis and Pedis on Sundays and WednesdaysMoney from mommy, lovely in
Versace.Costly sprees it’s on at Barneys.And i
love to watch her go thru 50 G’s calmly.She gets
naughty with her pilate’s body.And thinks it’s
really funny when her nose goes bloody.Cuz the blows so
yummy and it keeps her tummy emptyAnd makes her act more
friendly.

So rich, so pretty
The best piece of ass in this whole damn city.
So rich, so pretty.
I like a girl who eats and brings it up.
A sassy little frassy with bulimia.
Her best friend’s a plastic surgeon.
and when her Beemers in the shop she rolls the Benz.
Manis and Pedis on Sundays and WednesdaysMoney from mommy, lovely in
Versace.Costly sprees it’s on at Barneys.And i
love to watch her go thru 50 G’s calmly.She gets
naughty with her pilate’s body.And thinks it’s
really funny when her nose goes bloody.Cuz the blows so
yummy and it keeps her tummy emptyAnd makes her act more
friendly.

I mean, seriously, with all of the more important things to do, state lawmakers are spending time on this?

Heck yeah! Folks are busy guaranteeing access to employee restrooms, banning glass bottles from boats, inspecting new mothers, putting seat belts in shopping carts, banning sex offenders from the inner cities, signing away our authority over much of northeast Minnesota, defining how licensed interior designers apply design theories of human behavior and asthetics, allow unions a chance to outbid private contractors by as much as 10 percent for MnDOT contracts, mandating insurance coverage for maple syrup urine disease…and that’s only from this month.

You know, the “bread and butter” issues.

You make interesting points.

Sounds fine to me. Just so long as we can take their money.

I mean, seriously, with all of the more important things to do, state lawmakers are spending time on this?

Heck yeah! Folks are busy guaranteeing access to employee restrooms, banning glass bottles from boats, inspecting new mothers, putting seat belts in shopping carts, banning sex offenders from the inner cities, signing away our authority over much of northeast Minnesota, defining how licensed interior designers apply design theories of human behavior and asthetics, allow unions a chance to outbid private contractors by as much as 10 percent for MnDOT contracts, mandating insurance coverage for maple syrup urine disease…and that’s only from this month.

You know, the “bread and butter” issues.

I’m going to have to agree with kevin that the state legislature is pretty damned stupid most of the time. Sometimes it kind of reminds you of the massive tome of the EU’s regulations on every little pointless thing.

I’m not sure which amazes me more……the morons who continually vote for that idiot Phyllis Kahn, or the fact that whenever she opens her yap and introduces some legislation, it’s always so insipid, pointless and a total waste of time for the legislature.

She’s a 15 TERM INCUMBENT. that is not a typo, folks.

I should point out the “bread and butter issues” I pointed out earlier were all proposed by DFLers. In addition, there was a testifier last week from the International Dark Sky Association (I did not make that up) who had a chart with pictures of LA taken at night in 1908 and 1988 to illustrate that cities tend to have more lights as their population grows. I swear I am not making any of this up. Not surprisingly, this woman was speaking in support of a Phyllis Kahn bill to reduce ahem, “light pollution”, by shielding all public lighting from shining upwards and mandating certain lightbulbs for cities (at who knows what cost).

And grote, she’s an 18-term incumbent. First elected in 1972. Back then, she might have had a real-life job instead of “legislator” which she lists as her current occupation.

kwatt,

While I conceed that some of this does seem a little silly, the fact of the matter is that legislating is that kind of job. Running a country with 300 million people (or a state with more than 4 million) takes more than 6 laws. These are minor points but most of them aren’t stupid. I’d much rather have her making sure my condo doesn’t have the sun shining in all night than a bunch of republicans prattling over those gosh-derned homosexuals.

FYI, her real-life job before being a legislator was a professor of biophysics. I’m impressed. It would be nice to see more legislators that have experience beyond being a professional politican, crooked businessman, or lawyer – you know, people that have actually contributed something.

This Kahn woman seems meanspirited. People don’t like people who have cosmetic surgery so dammit, lets tax them for it. Because there are homeless people. What does that mean?

If someone selects these type of procedures, it’s no one’s business.

oh no — dflers gone wild!

well… at least they’re not on the capitol steps, denouncing gay people as the devil, though. dflers might be good for a laugh, but their followers don’t scare the bejesus out of me.

repubs are having such a heyday with this ridiculous bill stuff — aren’t dfler staffers paying any attention? why do they keep throwing out this red meat?

I’m doing a story on this for the 10pm tonight. I did a totally unscientific TV news kinda survey of people at the Galleria in Edina. Frankly, I thought they’d all rush to the aid of cosmetic surgery, and protest the idea of a tax. Almost all of the people I asked thought it made sense. For what that’s worth.

I still say it’s this whole issue is just another good argument to get rid of Kahn. And yes, I’ve dealt with her and she IS an evil, crazy nut-ball.
And I hope one of those DeLaSalle footballs crashes through her picture window.
Can’t Minneapolitans elect someone else? Someone a little less pointy-headed?

Rant-o-Prediction: Phyllis will hold office until she dies.

(And considering her organic diet and exercise regime, I’d say that’s a ways off. She’s one healthy kookball.)

In other news: I love you, bobby_b.

I don’t see a problem with the tax, but I agree we have bigger fish to fry. Which leads me to believe there’s some other motive regarding where that tax money goes.

It would only raise about 7-9 million bucks. Not mcuh really.

As a general rule, Minnesota doesn’t have a sales tax on “necessities”, ergo it is not a regressive tax on the poor. Elective plastic surgery definitely doesn’t fall under that category, so it’s fair game.

If the state can tax beer and wine, I see no impediment to taxing nose jobs, collagen implants, and nips and tucks aimed at deceiving the unwary into believing a fifty-five year old is only thirty-eight, forty max. Many of the exclusions in the sales tax were meant to set a floor protecting life’s barest necessities, food, clothing and medical care. Since those legislative judgments were made, the market in luxury goods has expanded beyond anything imagined when the limits were set. Medical services that are a luxury item deserve no more protection than the wine I drink with dinner or the beer that helps me endure miserable effort of my local baseketball team. I think the sales tax law should be re-drafted to tax elective cosmetic surgery, frivolous lawsuits (the judge can decide whether tax is owing when he decides the case), items of clothing costing more than $1,000, lobsters over 5 pounds, bling, manicures and tennis lessons. Cars costing less than $1,000 should be excluded. The legislature seems to have lots of time on its hands to devise lists and fine distinctions. So drawing up a list shouldn’t be too hard for them. I suppose those soon to be legalized scalpers (a Republican-sponsored bill, by the way; the Democrats aren’t the only sponsoring negligible crusades.) should be collecting tax while they’re at it.

Anything performed at a “medspa” should definitely be taxed.

“at least they’re not on the capitol steps, denouncing gay people as the devil”

Where does it say that in the picture?

The legislature seems to have lots of time on its hands to devise lists and fine distinctions.

Does that make it right? How does it affect the people who sew the dresses, clean the tennis courts, prep patients for cosmetic surgery and mine the bling and trap the lobsters? Or does that matter as long as it has the necessary punitive effect on wealthy people?

Rat, since when is it punishing the wealthy to treat their luxuries like ordinary peoples’ luxuries?

As for the people who sew the dresses, mine the bling, prep the patients, etc., they are the people getting left behind by an underfunded education system, rising tuition, inadequate transportation, etc. When I go to the corner grocery store, all the fine distinctions are programed right into the cash register, and most businessmen selling a narrower variety of items know quite well where their products fit in the tax laws. Don’t assume they’re stupid.

“Running a country with 300 million people (or a state with more than 4 million) takes more than 6 laws.”

– - -

This is a scary line in a thread about state government. State government doesn’t “run” the state. It runs governmental functions. I understand that some would like those governmental functions to eventually subsume private functions, but, well, one, that’s what the pilitical wars are all about, and, two, they ain’t over yet.

.

Rat, since when is it punishing the wealthy to treat their luxuries like ordinary peoples’ luxuries?

Let’s talk actual punishment,

Would you be in favor of income-based traffic violation fines? Say a rich man or woman got caught speeding, they should pay a larger fine than someone who makes less money?

Some parts of the world have that requirement.

As for the people who sew the dresses, mine the bling, prep the patients, etc., they are the people getting left behind by an underfunded education system, rising tuition, inadequate transportation, etc.

So when they lose their job, because you’ve taxed the products they’ve produced too highly, what happens then? They get better education and public transportation?

There’s precedent for that, too. Luxury boats were taxed pretty high at one point, so people stopped buying them. Who do you think got hurt?

Why, Rat … you’re turning into a republican.

In hell.

Rat, your economics is merely anecdotal and suspect. Did you read the Strib articles a few Sundays ago about higher tax states having better growth in recent years than states that reduced the tax burden? And we’re only talking the sales tax rate here, not a confiscatory luxury tax. To get back to the original question, how many plastic surgeons do you think will end up unemployed because of sales tax? Most businesses, even incompetent ones, survive paying sales tax, and the ones that don’t fail because of their incompetence, not the sales tax.

As a general rule, Minnesota doesn’t have a sales tax on “necessities”, ergo it is not a regressive tax on the poor. Elective plastic surgery definitely doesn’t fall under that category, so it’s fair game.

But but … how will the poor people ever become beautiful so they can be the stars of a reality TV show and then make it big as a C-list minor celebrity? You are denying them the american dream of rising above their born station in life via being the star of a televised circus!

ranty, you’re beautiful
what’s that sadness in your eyes?
ranty, you’re beautiful
I want to place my elbows upon your thighs

ranty, I think I love you
I think I love you
what’s that sadness in your eyes?

The best, most effective tax systems collect from the broadest array of transactions possible at as low a rate possible. Thats it, in its entirety. If you want a good, fair system thats how you make it function. So theres nothing wrong really with extending the general state sales tax to plastic surgery if it hasnt been levied there before (as well as other items that get special treatment under the sales tax now). If youre going to have a sales tax, tax everything at low rates.

The idea of essentials and non essentials is squishy – which is one reason you dont want apparatchiks like Phyllis Kahn making those determinations. As a practical matter, shes correct in this instance, but not because shes following sound, economic reasoning. Unfortunately this entire episode is so cliché. Phyllis belongs to a political movement that embraces mythologies about some classes having too much $ to spend on frivolities while others suffer. This could be a good discussion about tax policy, but unfortunately its just another round in the DFLs ongoing war to dekulakize Minnesota.

Plastic Surgery is for inner as well as outer beauty