Comments on: Pole Taxes Not “Genius”

By: The STRIPPER TAX? | pundit from another planet

The STRIPPER TAX? | pundit from another planet — Mon, 27 May 2013 22:51:18 +0000

[…] “Pole Taxes Not ‘Genius,’” you point out it’s the dancers, not the clubs, who are financially penalized by the tax. […]

By: Tax That Stripper - Forbes

Tax That Stripper - Forbes — Wed, 15 May 2013 15:18:07 +0000

[…] “Pole Taxes Not ‘Genius,’” you point out it’s the dancers, not the clubs, who are financially penalized by the tax. […]

By: Week In Links–March 22

Week In Links–March 22 — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 21:34:08 +0000

[…] The Houston disease of stripper tax is spreading to Las Vegas. Rather than go over how offensive the implications of this are one more time, I’ll refer you to Bubbles’ brilliant piece, Pole Tax Not Genius. […]

By: @StripperTweets on Rep. Bill Zedler’s Stripper Certification Bill | FrontBurner

Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:10:42 +0000

[…] food handlers’ permit.” Since she has written smartly in the past about the “pole tax” and would be directly affected by the proposed bill, I contacted my internet acquaintance […]

By: Just Me

Just Me — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:11:06 +0000

Dancers, if you do declare for taxes, you can now declare a little less, since they’re getting it at the door anyway. If you don’t declare for taxes, congratulations, this means you are no longer in the 47% that Mitt Romney talks shit about.

By: That Was the Week That Was (#27) « The Honest Courtesan

That Was the Week That Was (#27) « The Honest Courtesan — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 18:16:44 +0000

[…] Bubbles Burbujas on the problems with “pole taxes”: …Connecting funding for victims of sexual assault to strip clubs is the primary reason I don’t like these taxes. It is absolutely offensive to have the government tell us that we—or, rather, our customers—are responsible for rape and domestic violence, and that we should be taxed specifically for that purpose…While strip clubs are certainly a luxury expense…There is…no guarantee that the taxes will be collected from patrons since the tax is on the clubs, not the customers. This means there’s a good chance that the fees dancers pay to work will go up to cover the club’s tax bill…Tracy Clark-Flory wrote about the latest round of state pole taxes at Salon, and spoke with anthropologist Judith Lynne Hanna…[who has criticized] the faulty “secondary effects” studies that blames strip clubs for increasing crime and breaks it down for the propaganda it is. I wrote about the myth of secondary effects here after the Texas Supreme Court’s decision came down, and it’s good they’re being exposed for the shoddy research they are… […]

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:55:07 +0000

Late to this, but part of the problem with “sin taxes” is that there’s nothing stopping lawmakers from altering what the tax specifically funds down the road. As an example, cigarette taxes have gone from funding anti-smoking/public health campaigns to becoming a stopgap in state budgets, meaning smokers are being forced to pay a disproportional share for basic services compared to other groups. Even if lawmakers keep their word (right…), Matthew Jude Brown nailed it on the head – these taxes oftentimes just free up money to go elsewhere. Absent of the law requiring certain funding benchmarks, it means government entities can use the money elsewhere, meaning it no longer benefits the original program as their money stays the same. All of this is on a service that to an extent has inelastic demand.

It’s a political poison pill at its worst: not only do people who oppose this seem like they’re “pro-strip club” – a heavily stigmatized label – but that they’re against the funding of rape kits. My question however is this: do “pole taxes” only apply to straight clubs, or do gay clubs have to pony up too?

By: Kelly

Kelly — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:37:01 +0000

I read about this in my local paper ages ago – and all I thought was “Good, it’ll keep the cheapskates out – I can’t stand a lousey tipper!”

By: perlhaqr

perlhaqr — Tue, 03 Jul 2012 04:41:02 +0000

One does wonder how offended the people who support this tax would be by a “$5 per order tax” going to subsidese diabetes care at all the fast food restaurants in town.

And if you think that’s impossible, clearly you haven’t heard any news out of NYC in the last month. :/

By: Matthew Jude Brown

Matthew Jude Brown — Tue, 03 Jul 2012 01:14:01 +0000

I’m not sure they see it that way, though — while in public they’ll of course say they hope the tax reduces the “sinful” behavior, in private they are taxing urges that don’t go away easily no matter how punitive the tax regime, and imposing those taxes on people they think (often correctly) the public isn’t going to feel sorry for.

I betcha the “pole tax” effectively is taken out of strippers’ tips, too. They’re not taking extra money out of the customer’s hands, they’re transferring some more of the money the customers are willing to pay into government hands.

It’s also not really going to the causes they say it’s going to, because the government already pays for those things. It simply frees up other money to go elsewhere; I suspect the supposed good causes these taxes are supposed to fund don’t actually end up with any more government money than they did previously.

If they do, it’s because whoever’s running the system in question has political pull and is getting their quid pro quo.