| Re: California bicycle recycling bill follow up
By recycling, do they mean recycled into a useable bicycle, or simply
recycled to a scrap metal collector? The words of David O'Donnell
make it seem the former. Which is even crazier than charging the tax in
the first place.
I guess it's not really a waste of *every* taxpayer's money, since the
only people who would be paying this tax are bicycle buyers. But for
*those* taxpayers/bicycle buyers, it would be a complete waste of
money.
The article is skimpy on details. It sounds more like a deposit than a
straight tax, since some of the money is refunded when the bike is
recycled. I suppose this may be the only (admittedly weak)
justification for the tax, a incentive to keep bikes from being
abandoned on the streets?
I know Calif needs the revenue, but if that's the case, why not just
make it a tax going into general revenue, and not wasting money to
subsidise a "recycling" program? Not only does this proposal seem to be
additional tax on bicycle consumers, it just creates another bureacracy
to administrate itself. Government for the sake of government.
|