@Tsing Tao , while you're gathering those quotes, I wanted to take the time to say that you should realize that everyone will not agree with you, all the time, no matter how passionate you are about a topic, about the meaning of "tax" vs. "fee," for example. Sometimes, we have to simply agree to disagree, and move on. It'll be ok. But I look forward to responding on the topic of this thread, once you post those quotes. Thanks.
@Tsing Tao , no rush, take as much time as you need to find those quotes. But I am curious whether you have some sort of ETA? Thanks.
Sure. First, the very title of the thread "Trump's Base and Welfare" implies this has something to do with one or the other. It is neither related to Trump's base or Welfare. It is a fee imposed on retailers. Then there was "Trump's base may not like this. Elections are around the corner. Will this one get mysteriously moon-walked too." Again, you imply Trump is attacking either the poor or his base and that he will "moon walk" back on this once he realizes what you think you know. Then there is this, which pretty much makes it come across as "war on the poor": " The retailers will likely raise prices; so the poor will pay for this proposed tax--not the rich." The poor won't pay it, because retailers won't raise prices from it. And it's not a tax. Again. My comment: A tax makes it seem like it is being thrust upon the public. This is not. Your response: "We all are the public." That kinda makes it seem like you claimed it was a tax on all of us. Actually, that's exactly what you're claiming. Not at all. Just noting that you are beating a hasty retreat when presented with contrary evidence to your claim.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Sometimes someone posts something that I go "hmmm, that makes sense. I guess I can see your point." or "fair enough". Can't argue when someone shows a logical answer that makes sense. But you have to have a factual argument. This is the flaw in your posting in this particular thread.
I apologize for the delay. Unfortunately, as much as I wish I could attend to your requests the moment you post them, real world issues sometimes take priority. I'm sure you understand. It was only an hour between your question and my answer. But I do appreciate how attentive you suddenly appear to our conversation. I shall endeavor to show the same appreciation. Feel free to private message me and I'll get an email that you are expecting a response imminently. That might cut down on your waiting in case you are impatient. No guarantees though.
@userque , no rush, take as much time as you need to find those quotes. But I am curious whether you have some sort of ETA? Thanks.
Correct, I didn't clarify. I meant to suggest that the fee will ultimately be passed to customers, and that the majority of welfare recipients are Trump supports. Close. I think he'll moon walk it due to pressure from Republican representatives. Just like he did with the Mexico tariff, due to the same pressure. Correct. Just like credit card fees to retailers don't affect prices. All retailers simply eat all fees ... as long as it's called a fee, and not called a tax. [sarcasm] We disagree. For some reason, here, you didn't quote me using the quote feature, if you had, one could link back to the original post and read the whole response, in context. And no, that's not what I'm claiming. No, my retreat wasn't hasty. I responded, including screenshots. @Tsing Tao , there comes a point where you simply have to agree to disagree. Some may consider debates about the difference between "tax" and "fee" as not worthy of hours of debate. I made some arguments. You made some too. In the end, we will either agree or disagree. You point out there is a difference between the words. And there is, technically. I point out that law makers can use either term willy-nilly in some cases. And that this is one of those cases. If you disagree, that's fine with me. I don't have to win every debate. In my mind, whether it's called a tax, or a fee, is irrelevant.
Thanks. The fee will be very difficult to pass to consumers due to the ultra competitive nature of the food retail industry (something I have worked in for decades - so I'm rather well versed in this area). I also disagree that the majority of welfare recipients are Trump supporters. The majority of SNAP recipients are minorities, and they overwhelmingly vote democrat. Of those that are white, a good percentage of them vote democrat as well, if the polls are to be believed. Very possible. Credit card fees are built into food retailers and have been for a long, long time. This new fee cannot be easily passed on - again, due to the ultra competitive landscape of the grocery, mass and drug channel environment. Passing on this fee to the consumer would result in the SNAP consumer going elsewhere for groceries (the SNAP consumers are some of the most savvy consumers regarding price - for obvious reasons). Again, this is something I have an understanding of as I have personally sat in hundreds of hours of Consumer Insights Studies with grocery shoppers, many of them on SNAP. I figured one would know one's own text. Apologies. A screenshot with a dictionary definition showing synonyms was your proof. You still haven't answered: Would you consider this fee also a "tithe"? Can't argue with anything here. Agreed, law makers use these terms to suit their interests, and that is precisely what you were doing when you posted the thread with the intent to make this look like Trump was Taxing the Poor. My intention was to dispel this absurdity and point out what the fee is designed to do, and will likely do based on real world experience.