Paying for a constitutional Right

After paying 100.00 for a Carry Class. I dropped off my application for my carry permit at the Stearns Co. Sheriff’s office and had to pay another 100.00 for a processing fee. Its a sad day when it cost you 200.00 every 5 years to obtain something that is granted to you in the US constitution. Every day more and more of our rights or freedoms are being taken away from us ( or we are forced to pay to keep them ). I already pay taxes for the operation of that Sheriff’s office and I still need to pay a extra Fee ( Might as well be called a tax ) for them to process my application. Don’t even get me started on taxes these days. Everyone thinks about and knows about their Income taxes, but most don’t even know about or think about all the other taxes they pay. Sales tax, fuel tax, property tax, estate tax, Just to name a few of them. We have federal taxes, state taxes, county taxes, city taxes, Ect. I even saw something called a Fire tax added to my home insurance policy. I’d go fishing to relax a little, but its to cold this weekend to go without a big Ice house with a flashing light/strobe – With all these taxes that I pay I cant afford one of them. END OF RANT !!!

They should tax the use of strobes and flagpoles.

We did just get one of the largest federal income tax decreases in recent years.

FWIW – the renewal fee drops to $75. Class cost should be in the $50-$75 range on the renewal too.

-J.

biggill wrote:

They should tax the use of strobes and flagpoles.

I’m sure that tax is sitting on some bill someplace as we speak

Jon Jordan wrote:

We did just get one of the largest federal income tax decreases in recent years.

FWIW – the renewal fee drops to $75. Class cost should be in the $50-$75 range on the renewal too.

-J.

Here I was told the Renewal class is the same class as the original class – Including the range test. I also believe that the renewal processing here in Stearns County is the same cost as the original. What’s funny is that one county here the cost is 75.00 and another one is only 65.00. I do believe that 100.00 is the highest amount that they can charge The cost is up to each county sheriff’s office I’m told.

I like the inheritance tax…nothing like the government double taxing! Makes no sense.

ClownColor wrote:

I like the inheritance tax…nothing like the government double taxing! Makes no sense.

Speaking about double taxing – What about car sales. The original owner gets taxed on the full value of the car. Each sale after that also gets taxed on the amount of the sale. Its possible that by the time a car stops being sold the total tax amount is 2-3 times the original tax amount – Now that’s double taxation at its finest.

Fight back with your vote!

Find candidates that are actually interested in helping the average American and not those looking to help the ultra rich.

Unless you are feeling all that wealth trickling down from the tax cuts for the wealthy and the large corporations, in which case you are probably flush with cash!! After all, all these large corporations are using those tax cuts to invest in their people and workers! Or, you know, laying people off and buying back stock:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gm-bought-back-10-billion-in-stock-since-2015-double-what-job-cuts-will-save/

Some quotes from here:
https://www.thebalance.com/income-inequality-in-america-3306190

Between 1979 and 2007, household income increased 275 percent for the wealthiest 1 percent of households. It rose 65 percent for the top fifth. The bottom fifth only increased 18 percent. That’s true even after “wealth redistribution” which entails subtracting all taxes and adding all income from Social Security, welfare, and other payments.

And in case you are wondering about that source, this is a great site for checking whether the ‘news’ you are reading is biased.

The Balance

It’s a game, politicians are adept at pitting left vs. right, red vs. blue, white vs. black, guns vs. no-guns, immigration vs. anti-immigration, it’s all a well-orchestrated game of distraction.

If everyone would realize it’s the rich vs. the poor, we’d probably have a chance of making life better for the 99.9% of Americans who don’t bring home millions of dollars every year. Instead, thousands are working unpaid while the country yells back and forth at each other about whether a $6 billion chain link fence is a worthwhile solution to a made up problem.

Wow, between this and the other double fishing lines thread things are getting deep for a Friday. Must be the cold weather

philtickelson wrote:

Fight back with your vote!

Find candidates that are actually interested in helping the average American and not those looking to help the ultra rich.

Unless you are feeling all that wealth trickling down from the tax cuts for the wealthy and the large corporations, in which case you are probably flush with cash!! After all, all these large corporations are using those tax cuts to invest in their people and workers! Or, you know, laying people off and buying back stock:

I have far less of a problem with the upper 10% paying 60% of the total tax $’s paid than I do with the bottom 40% paying 0 Taxes

lindyrig79 wrote:

Wow, between this and the other double fishing lines thread things are getting deep for a Friday. Must be the cold weather

Cold weather and the blood moon coming up

lindyrig79 wrote:

Wow, between this and the other double fishing lines thread things are getting deep for a Friday. Must be the cold weather

Yep. If the Temps were warmer outside I’d be out fishing and no where near where I could post something.

fishthumper wrote:

I have far less of a problem with the upper 10% paying 60% of the total tax $’s paid than I do with the bottom 40% paying 0 Taxes

Can you re-phrase this, I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying. Are you saying bottom 40% should pay more taxes? Like, they should use some of their negative net worth to give the government more money?

It’s also possible you are saying that you think the upper 10% should be taxed more and you don’t have much of a problem with the bottom 40%. I’m just not sure.

Phil I’d love to grab a beer or go fishing with you some time to learn how you’ve arrived at some of your beliefs.

Imagine how much you spend in 5 years on fishing. Makes that $200 to carry a firearm seem like couch change….

Thumper Dakota and Washington Counties charge $75 for both new and renew. Not sure why Stearns is so high. Still need the cert each time.

I’ve been offering the class for $65.00 (new or renew) with a min of 10 people signed up. Only other cost is if we have to use a range and there’s a range fee. Most cases we are shooting in someone’s backyard.

I scratch my head a lot over this. In WI I could carry NOT concealed without any permit (tax), but if I want to conceal it, I would have to pay. Less calls to 911 if people can’t see it…isn’t that a savings??

BigWerm wrote:

Phil I’d love to grab a beer or go fishing with you some time to learn how you’ve arrived at some of your beliefs.

Which ones :)? Because I don’t talk about the Vikings on the first date!

I mean I post a lot on here so it’s probably a lot of stuff, but most of the stuff I posted here is pretty much tax facts and the such isn’t it?

I mean, I can post some way out there stuff if you want, but I don’t think I’m there in this thread!

philtickelson wrote:

Which ones :)?

Haha I thought an offer for beer or fishing would be better than digging in here.

fishthumper wrote:

I’m sure that tax is sitting on some bill someplace as we speak <img

I think I saw one, bearcat was a co-author.

philtickelson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>fishthumper wrote:</div>
I have far less of a problem with the upper 10% paying 60% of the total tax $’s paid than I do with the bottom 40% paying 0 Taxes

Can you re-phrase this, I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying. Are you saying bottom 40% should pay more taxes? Like, they should use some of their negative net worth to give the government more money?

It’s also possible you are saying that you think the upper 10% should be taxed more and you don’t have much of a problem with the bottom 40%. I’m just not sure.

I’m saying that I’d like to see the bottom 40% paying something – Given that the bottom 40% are probably receiving the most from tax $’s as it is. I get really tired hearing how the rich are not paying their share. You take away peoples drive to better themselves by continuing to tax the crap out of them and they will stop owning businesses and this will lead to them stop employing people and then them start paying less tax $ and where do you think this will all end up?

Ryan Wilson wrote:

Imagine how much you spend in 5 years on fishing. Makes that $200 to carry a firearm seem like couch change….

Fishing is something I chose to do and not a constitutional right given to me in the constitution – Big difference

Look on the bright side. Some people payed with their lives for those Constitutional rights.

fishthumper wrote:

Fishing is something I chose to do and not a constitutional right given to me in the constitution – Big difference

Actually, in Minnesota it IS your Constitutional Right to hunt and fish.

https://ballotpedia.org/Minnesota_Hunting_and_Fishing_Heritage,_Amendment_3_(1998)

A right that can never be infringed upon by the likes of PETA and the Sieara Club.

-J.

philtickelson wrote:

Can you re-phrase this, I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying. Are you saying bottom 40% should pay more taxes? Like, they should use some of their negative net worth to give the government more money?

Are you saying that to get to a 0 Tax that you have to have a Negative net worth? your tax amount is based on each years income – deductions each year. It is possible to have a net worth and still pay 0 $ in taxes in a given year. If I make the decision to only have the # of children that I can afford – Why should I have to pay to have my more of my income go towards those that decide to have more than they can afford? If I have 1 child and someone else has 10 – Who gets more use out of the tax money that goes for education? yet the person who has 10 children pays far less tax money towards the benefit of education – I hope this makes some sense to you

Jon Jordan wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>fishthumper wrote:</div>
….and not a constitutional right

Actually, in Minnesota it IS your Constitutional Right to hunt and fish.

https://ballotpedia.org/Minnesota_Hunting_and_Fishing_Heritage,_Amendment_3_(1998)

A right that can never be infringed upon by the likes of PETA and the Seara Club.

-J.

although I have nothing against it – To me a state amended constitution carries far less weight than one of the founding 10 federal constitutional rights. There are literally 1000’s of state amended constitutions and still only the 10 original founding ones on which this country was created based on.

fishthumper wrote:

although I have nothing against it – To me a state amended constitution carries far less weight than one of the founding 10 federal constitutional rights. There are literally 1000’s of state amended constitutions and still only the 10 original founding ones on which this country was created based on.

I don’t disagree with you in principle, but you should probably revisit the Constitution, Bill of Rights (which are the first 10 of 27 amendments to the Constitution) if you want to sound like you know what you are talking about.

tegg wrote:

Look on the bright side. Some people payed with their lives for those Constitutional rights.

And God bless them for it – That is why those of us that are alive need to do all that we can to honor them for their loss, by fighting to keep those rights that they died defending

It’s just another stealth tax, like the countless other “fees” out there for government services.

We have over-promised and under-funded almost every aspect of government and the services the government is supposed to provide and all while every politician was pledging never to “raise taxes”. Layer after layer of unfunded mandates pass at every level of government.

Everyone is so fixated on their income tax rate staying low that almost nobody noticed the overall tax burden creeping up and up and up through stealth taxes.

In order to actually pay for the government obligations we have now, taxes at every brackt needed to be at least double what they are now, and this is going back 25-30 years. Over promising and under funding. It has become the American way.

Grouse

fishthumper wrote:

I’m saying that I’d like to see the bottom 40% paying something – Given that the bottom 40% are probably receiving the most from tax $’s as it is. I get really tired hearing how the rich are not paying their share.

You said it in your first post, those poor people ARE paying taxes.

Sales tax, fuel tax, property tax, estate tax, Just to name a few of them.

Take someone who makes $25,000 a year, that person pays the same amount of taxes on that money as a milionaire does on their first $25,000 earned. They are also taxed on all those goods at the same rate the rich are.

I’m asking again, what will they do to pay these extra taxes? Use their maxed out credit cards? Their savings accounts with $0 balance?

You take away peoples drive to better themselves by continuing to tax the crap out of them and they will stop owning businesses and this will lead to them stop employing people and then them start paying less tax $ and where do you think this will all end up?

I just posted a link about GM laying off employees and shutting down plants and buying up their own stock instead. Leading to higher share prices and more money for their investors/executives. This is after a tax break, not a tax increase. Those CEOs are really stimulating the economy aren’t they! Wealth doesn’t trickle down, that’s not how it works, it’s never worked that way.

Taxing the poor more will literally just lead to a bunch of even more poor people, who can’t afford to pay their taxes, or rent, buy food, health care, or educate their children, etc.

If you are suggesting that raising taxes for ultra high earners will make them want to not be as rich, that’s just silly. That’s like when people say that “I’ll make less money if I get a raise or work overtime because of tax brackets.” A myth that, may I remind you, politicians continue to play dumb about to rile up their constituents.

Is there a different class of poor people I haven’t seen? By definition, these people don’t have any money, how can you tighten the vice on them any more than it already is?

Maybe you should quit your job to taste that sweet, sweet $0 income tax gravy train. All aboard!!!

Again, it’s the greatest hoodwink in US history. The ultra rich convincing everyone that it’s poor people that are hurting the economy by not paying enough taxes, or immigrants stealing their jobs, or whatever else. “trust us this time, if I don’t have to pay as much taxes on my $1 billion, I will totally invest that money back into my businesses and the economy”
*stashes all that money in off-shore accounts*

Hmmmmm. Tax the snot out of the rich, Punish someone for running a successful business…..Question… when is the last time you seen anyone poor hire someone to go to work?????