Much of today’s debate in American politics centers around the battle to meet budget obligations. Obama would like to raise taxes on the very rich and close some tax loopholes while Republicans insist raising taxes is out of the question. I’d like to suggest some taxes I think both parties can get behind:
A tax on any pictures of cats wearing hats. People wearing live cats as hats will not be taxed and will actually be encouraged with a tax rebate.
If you’re an adult and celebrate your birthday on more than one day, you will not only be taxed, but you will also be blocked from sending me emails.
My wife suggested a tax on anyone with a tattoo on their face or neck, but I reminded her these people had already been indirectly taxed through loss of job opportunities.
Gogo no go.
A tax on any adult who talks with me about their grandparents and uses any terms for Grandma and Grandpa that make me feel awkward such as Gammy, Grandpappy, or Gogo. Although Cool Mo’ Gramps is not only acceptable but awesome.
A tax on calling people ‘dawg’ unless you’re a rapper or a professional athlete or the person’s name is ‘Doug’ and you have a terrible accent. Calling a dog, ‘dawg’, won’t be taxed, but may result in concerned looks behind your back.
A tax on anyone famous for being famous. If your tax form Occupation reads: Kardashian, you’ll owe the government a bunch of money.
A tax on Ultimate Frisbee, not because I dislike Frisbee, but because the type of people who play Ultimate Frisbee never seem to like me, maybe because they’ve never been able to explain the rules in a way that doesn’t make me laugh at all the time they’re wasting.
A tax on any film with the number 3 in the title.
A tax on any politician who answers a complex economic question by referencing the flag, religion, or children in the hopes of veiling complete ignorance of the subject.
A tax on voters who hear the words flag, religion, or children in a politician’s answer and completely forget the question had been about economics because they’re too busy cheering.
Any other tax suggestions?
The Good Greatsby 
ryoko861
October 3, 2011
Tax people who wear spandex. It would probably take care of the deficit alone! And save the rest of us from gagging every time we see someone wearing it!
Also, tax those who insist on calling everyone “dude”.
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
It’s hard to believe the Founding Fathers intended us to have the right to wear spandex.
thelifeofjamie
October 3, 2011
the neck tattooed people- they don’t pay taxes anyway (or do they pay taxes in jail?), calling anyone Dawg (especially Randy Jackson who uses it excessively) should receive a triple tax, and Ultimate Frisbee players are just a really weird crew so I think the organization should be taxed and the players. Weird and cult-like!!!
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
Do people considering neck tattoos have any idea of the lifetime of isolation, loss of job opportunities, and additional police scrutiny that awaits them? And they still go through with it because they absolutely must have a giant spiderweb on their neck?
Joe Knight
October 3, 2011
They also need to tax people who feel the need to ride the bumper of the car in front of them.
Lenore Diane
October 3, 2011
Sorry, my son just came in the room carrying the American flag in one hand and his bible in the other. He said something about god blessing America – we did a happy dance, and now I have returned to my desk.
Suggestions for what? What was the question?
limr
October 3, 2011
I strongly object to the tax on putting hats on cats. Zelda and Mrs.Parker have been looking for work but it’s difficult to hold a job when they have TFADD (Typical Feline Attention Deficit Disorder), so they can’t afford to pay taxes. To tax them would cost the IRS even more money than they would ultimately be able to get out of my girls. Can’t get blood out of a furry stone, after all.
In addition, sir, it would also be discriminatory and a violation of their Civil Rights. You would be punishing them for their lifestyle, which should be none of the government’s business. What two cats do with their hats behind closed doors is nobody’s business and the feds should just stay out of it!
We SHOULD tax dumbasses who think it’s possible to have a conversation at the same time as they are listening to their iPods and texting.
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
I do enjoy seeing pictures of Zelda and Mrs. Parker in hats; might I suggest you neutralize the tax with the tax rebate by occasionally wearing your cats as hats?
Lynne's Post A Day
October 3, 2011
What about pictures of dawgs (oops, that really was a typo) playing poker? Or Jesus or Elvis on black velvet? But can you tax art?
(P.S. It’s me, gardenmad, using one of my multiple personalities.)
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
How can we tax a picture of dogs playing poker? How else are dogs going to learn to play poker if we don’t cover our walls with pictures of the behavior we expect from them?
PCC Advantage
October 3, 2011
A tax on people who constantly tap their brakes while they drive – either stop or don’t. You must make a decision…otherwise, you will be taxed. Heavily. So heavily that it will affect the rest of your life, as well as your children and your children’s children.
Also, tax anyone who makes their dog wear boots in the rain or names their cat Mr. Meowington.
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
Do people really put boots on dogs? I’ve never seen that. It makes me feel bad that I might be missing an opportunity to complain.
joehoover
October 3, 2011
Would you get a tax rebate for not doing those things?
My cat doesn’t like hats she takes after me in that sense, but then I don’t like cleaning myself with my tongue so we’re not that alike.
We asked a team in the park once if I could join their ultimate frisbee game, they looked us up and down and refused.
The Good Greatsby
October 4, 2011
What’s wrong with the Ultimate Frisbee crowd? I just can’t seem to win with them even though they don’t seem that cool.
Glynis Sylvia
October 3, 2011
My son’s calculus teacher says, “The lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math.” Hey, if they’re that bad at it, and they obviously have disposable income, we should tax lottery ticket buyers – not a sin tax, a stupidity tax.
Bridgesburning Chris King
October 4, 2011
I find the whole idea of trying to figure out who to tax..well..taxing….and can only hope the one person exempt is me..cats in hats or not!
jacquelincangro
October 4, 2011
Speaking of cats in hats, there should be an exempt clause for The Cat in the Hat, but not for anyone who wears that costume for Halloween.
nancyfrancis
October 4, 2011
I suggest levying a tax on the use of ‘words’ such as y’all and yus. Not only will in reap serious financial benefits it will also help improve the collective intelligence of the country 😉
pegoleg
October 4, 2011
I believe that word is spelled “yous” and almost invariably is combined with “guys” as in “yous guys”. Sorry – I’m a bit of stickler for gooder English.
Nancy Francis
October 4, 2011
I stand corrected 😉
ifiwerebraveblog
October 4, 2011
I LOVE your blog. I would like to suggest a tax on anyone who types in all caps.
psychodynamom
October 4, 2011
Oh Nancy! Please don’t take away my yall! My people don’t use “you” in the plural. We would be unable to function 😉
Don’t raise taxes on anyone. Just “adjust” the way we distribute bailout & grant money. Receive a grant? Whatever you learn or create during the following 12 months becomes property of the US Govt. Imagine how fab it would be if vaccines, antibiotics, even treatments for cancer and aids were OWNED by Uncle Sam and freely distributed – and by freely, I mean FREEly.
Got a bailout? You cannot report a profit or pay shareholders until you repay the government. Period.
A simple enough start to a huge problem!
Nancy Francis
October 4, 2011
I’m a pushover – you can have your y’all back, as long as you Promise to keep it on your side of the border 😉
Amy
October 4, 2011
Can we tax couples who sit on the same side of a booth in a restaurant? No one is sitting on the opposite side of the booth, but they are both crammed into the same side. These people creep me out. So much so that I wrote a blog post about it. And yes, I’m gonna be tacky and include a link to my blog: http://fixitordeal.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/sorry-i-elbowed-you-in-the-jaw/
joehoover
October 4, 2011
Agreed, but if you’re ever in London a chinese place called Wonky’s actually order you to sit next to each other, god forbid you try and sit opposite. Then they march in another unsuspecting couple and put them opposite you just to increase the awkwardness.
pattisj
October 4, 2011
C’mon, Amy, haven’t you ever been young and/or in love and wanted to be as close to that person as possible? Granted, we don’t do that now that we’re oldlyweds…
Back to taxing–how about blog readers who never comment? Or maybe they could just pay us for entertaining them?
Spectra
October 4, 2011
I am finding your taxation schedule to be highly personal in nature. But I also think the Gov over- taxing me for all of my recreational vices is equally as personal and even unfairly arbitrary. I need all of that liquor. It’s how I mow the lawn. (I don’t actually pour the alcohol in the tank. But getting all pipped up does help motivate my desires to up and suddenly “Vacuum the Lawn”. Or even, weed the carpets. Or wash the trash. And take out the car for Friday curbside collection).
gerknoop
October 4, 2011
LOVE THIS POST!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Lets tax passive aggressives……every time they say yes when they really mean NO….BAM tax!
gojulesgo
October 4, 2011
I stand behind every one of your points except the cats in hats. In fact, I think people who take pictures of cats in a hats should receive a tax break. Then again, I have an entire blog dedicated to guilty pleasures, so it’s probably best if you don’t listen to a word I say. I’ve been planning my dog’s Halloween costume for 4 months.
Tori Nelson
October 4, 2011
Double tax on people who buy calendars of cats in hats and give them to family and friends (all of whom hate cats, hats, and mostly cats wearing hats). Can I send a link of your post to my mom?
John Erickson
October 4, 2011
Careful about that movie title with a “3” tax. Star Trek 3, while not the best, is still pretty good, Star Wars 3 is the best of the prequels (which ain’t sayin’ much), and Beverly Hills Cop 3 was … well …. okay, you got me on that one.
New taxes? Any guy in a business suit driving alone in a minivan. If you’re in a suit, you need a BMW or Lexus. If you stole the wife’s minivan because you’re little sports car is in the shop AGAIN, you deserve to be punished.
Anyone who baby-talks to a dog, weighing more than 5 pounds, in public. Double tax if the dog is being forced to wear clothing. 20 times the tax for ANY dog under 5 pounds, 40 times if wearing clothing. (Rebates to anybody with a dog 80 pounds or over. Bassets are cute, but they ain’t watch dogs!)
100% confiscation of all worldly goods for anyone who has appeared on “Springer”. We GOTTA kill that show off!
spilledinkguy
October 5, 2011
Somewhere a Dr. Seuss cat is hissing…
HoaiPhai
October 10, 2011
How about a tax on gluteal cleavage and/or undergarments visible above the waistband of saggy and baggy “gangsta pants”?