No one likes taxes, that much we know.
So if you're raging against a particular issue, it's best to call any exchange of money a "tax" to hammer home your point about how awful and terrible and unfair the collection of that money is. Case in point:
Union dues are a tax.
They are a tax one must often pay for the privilege of working, just as a tax is something one must pay for the privilege of doing business.
Taxes are imposed by the government (and in theory) are necessary to pay for the daily operations of the government. Dues are required by a union to pay for the alleged benefits of representation.
We can all see what we get for our taxes: garbage pickup, police/military protection, mail delivery, etc. But what is it exactly that union members get for their “work tax” (dues)?
That article comes from the Detroit Free Press but was written by a dude with the Center for Worker Freedom, an Americans for Tax Reform offshoot that hates unions just as much as ATR hates taxes.
Thankfully none of you will ever have to worry about the "unfair" "tax" associated with unionization because let's be real, that would never happen.
Now, let's discuss. Valid point or more incendiary bait from our friends at ATR?
[K]ey Republicans have not responded positively to signals that President Obama will push for some tax increases in his deficit-reduction plan to be laid out this week. David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser, indicated Sunday that the president would reiterate his call to raise taxes on households making $250,000 and above and also signal a desire to look at other provisions in the tax code that wealthier taxpayers use to their advantage. In his fiscal 2012 budget, released in February, the president called for allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for income above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples at the end of next year. That statement came roughly two months after a compromise with congressional Republicans had extended current tax rates for the richest taxpayers for two years. [