Skip to main content

Dewey Beach: screwing over cleaning ladies justifies screwing over musicians and business owners

A thought to begin:  Dewey Beach club owners and the musicians who play in them already pay their own way.

The clubs purchase business licenses, pay property taxes, and generate massive amounts of revenue for the town in terms of the tens of thousands of tourists who flock to the bars all summer, spending their money in hotels, rentals, restaurants, shops, etc.

Hell, the bar owners even pony up their own money (without being required by any law to do so) to pay for extra police on high-density weekends like Memorial Day.

Now, however, Dewey Beach has decided to impose a $109 annual business license on all musicians payed to play within the town limits.

Of course the town wants revenue; all towns want revenue.  And the idea of taxing people who don't live there--as most musicians don't--is far more attractive than taxing the people who might actually vote you out of office.

But it's the rationale that is just . . . sick.
Hanson: screw 'em all! 

Dewey Beach Mayor Diane Hanson brought up the issue with town council in recent months, and members soon approved the plan. Hanson says having artists pay for a business license is a matter of fairness.
“My cleaning lady, who makes far less than some of these bands do, pays $109. So why shouldn’t they pay their fair share?” asks Hanson, who owns rental properties in town.
“Do you really think it’s fair that [The Fabulous] Greaseband makes thousands of dollars working in Dewey for the summer and a cleaning lady who barely scrapes a living has to pay? That’s the bottom line. What’s fair is fair,” she says.
"What's fair is fair?"

Of all the idiotic, self-serving statements I have read this morning (I'd say this week, but I read a lot of idiotic self-serving statements) this is the winner.

Think about what Mayor Hansen has said:
We over-charge our domestic help [when we don't pay them in cash under the table], so it is only fair that we over-charge musicians.
Why does your cleaning lady "barely scrape a living," Mayor?  Probably because, as her employer you don't pay her shit, and then as the town mayor you take out a hefty chunk of what she does get.

Ironically, most business owners or the talent agencies who book the musicians will be paying the licensing fees for the musicians, and this will in turn be passed on to their patrons.

But the bar owners know exactly what's happening here--a shake-down:
“There is no question that there is a very organized minority of people in town who want Dewey Beach to operate the way they see,” says Jim Bauerle, the co-owner of Ruddertowne who has also decided to pay the fees for his bands. “What you see now is people who rented their properties for 25 or 30 years [and] now want to use them in their retirement and want the town to act the way they want. That’s the core issue.” 

Comments

kavips said…
Seriously.. why are they taking $109 out of a cleaning lady? That is absolutely uncouth..
Tyler Nixon said…
To rapacious bloodsucking municipal politicians and their clueless minions everyone's in the "1%".
Anonymous said…
I wonder if her cleaning lady is adocumented alien? Be kinda funny if she were employing illegal aliens and putting herself out there to make a point
Dana Garrett said…
Maybe I missed something? Is this like a city income tax? If I do periodic work in Wilmington as a self employed person, I am supposed to pay income tax just like everyone else who works there full time.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...