Old Drum

Commentary on Warrensburg, Johnson County and Missouri issues from a Libertarian perspective. View my earlier commentary at www.olddrum.net.

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Wal-Mart tax approved

In case you missed it, the Circuit Court approved the Wal-Mart tax (see previous posts) to benefit the Hawthorne development. Wisely, the local judges didn't hear the petition; it was passed on to one of the other judges, from Cass County. She didn't have much of a choice in the matter, since the TDD complied with all the requirements of the assinine and unjust law that allows it (can you tell I'm ticked?).

Here's what it means - if you go to Wal-Mart to get that hangover cure on January 1st, you'll pay an extra 1/2 cent tax on everything you buy. Comparing this to other sales taxes:
You'll pay more for Hawthorne than you pay for Warrensburg parks.
You'll pay the same for Hawthorne as you pay for law enforcement.
You'll pay the same for Hawthorne as you pay for county roads
You'll pay the same for Hawthorne as you pay for the county general fund.
You'll pay the same for Hawthorne as you pay for Warrensburg debt service on the fire stations and community center.
You'll pay 4 times as much for Hawthorne as you pay for wildlife conservation.
You'll pay 5 times as much for Hawthorne as you pay for State Parks and conservation.

You got to vote for all of the above taxes; you didn't get to vote on the Wal-Mart tax.

2006 is an elections year. Let's make the candidates state their position on stealing from taxpayers to benefit private business and let's make them tell us what they are going to do to prevent it!

In Liberty


  • At Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:57:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I suggest you don't have to shop at Wal-Mart and don't use any of the improvements within Hawthorne when they are complete. Do you have any idea how public, I repeat public infrastructure is paid for? Taxes and/or user fees.

  • At Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:26:00 PM, Blogger Bill Wayne said…

    Mr Anonymous - I intend to minimize my Wal-Mart purchases and to avoid the new retail development as a matter of principal. Meanwhile, I haven't seen other developers getting their infrastructure paid for by taxing customers at their neighbor's establishments. If it's public, the city should issue the bonds after a vote by the public, not a cabal of developers seeking a benefit. A TDD is just a sneaky means of bypassing the strictures of the Hancock Amendment.

    By the way, Mr. Anonymous, do you have a stake in the development? Why not identify yourself?


Post a Comment

<< Home