Slashdot Mirror
Tax-Free PC's in Pennsylvania
tennisc writes "Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge proposes giving consumers two tax holidays on the purchase of new PC's. Wow! I hope all states take up the challenge!" Most of my friends in Philadelphia head down to Delaware to buy a computer, since there's no sales tax there, and it's only a 40-minute drive. This is still cool, though.
Now all those Amish can set up the Beowulf cluster of their dreams.
this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
I think that the article is a bit vague...
--
I live in West Chester, PA; south west of Philadelphia. I am about 20 minutes from Delaware so I usually head there for big equipment. This saves me the drive. /.ers forget that the Internet population is a VERY tiny percent of the US population, let alone the world. Heck, lots of people do not have cable, let alone Internet access. Technology shouldn't be for the haves and not the have nots; it should be for everyone. Isn't that what Open Source is all about?
I don't understand why he doesn't go all year. Granted, PA would lose a lot of money from the lost taxes. I think that it would gain more, though.
Getting people to buy their computers in PA rather then "down south" will help the economy in the Philadelphia area. You can't imagine how many Philadelphians head to little D for big ticket items.
Making it eaiser and less expensive for people to get computers is a good thing. Sometimes we
There is no reason that we do not have a $50 computer. I used to have a 386 that did everything I needed: games, programming, office apps, internet (such as it was at the time). These days, people might pay you $50 to haul a bunch of those systems as scrap. There are uses for these systems. Properly set up with good code, you can do a lot with these machines. So if a 386 can do that much, think about what $50.00 of computing power should be! And you thought that those $500 PCs where cheap...
-- soldack
Perhaps you would if were someone who wants a PC but does not have the time, inclination, or ability to build it from parts. Computers should not be just for geeks; they should be for all to use. Computers should not be cheap only for geeks; they should be inexpensive for all. Give power to the people and let's see where they go with it.
-- soldack
Judging from the content of his speech as well as his inability to insert a period in his run-on sentence, I assume he is only an "employee" and not an owner. As an employee, he likely doesn't get a percentage of sales or a bonus because of sales, and therefore it makes no difference whether he is busy selling peecees or just twiddling his thumbs -- either way, he's getting his normal hourly salary. Apart from having his company go belly-up from lack of revenue, there's no real reason why he should unselfishly care about the vollume of sales processed, especially if the company is running on a bare-bones staff as it is (as many such retailers are). His post is entirely valid, except for that little matter of punctuation.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
You are totally correct. Sales tax is kind of like someone making you pay for a service twice. In fact, that is exactly what it is. I don't understand why many businesses are able to provide similar services in some areas as the government without using all sorts of strange double payments. I just wish I had one tax (I really wish that I that didn't have any taxes...one can dream can't he? ;-) ) that I could figure out with pen and paper in about 2 minutes. What did I make? X. What do I owe? Y% * X. That's all. No loop holes, tax brackets, marriage penalties, limits or anything like that. Just one simple bill. I can handle that. Tax code? The tax code should be an Algebra 1 problem. That's all.
-- soldack
This proposal, while mostly laudable, won't stop another type of flight to Delaware. I speak of laws of incorporation.
Look at Delaware. Look at how many corporations are incorporated in Delaware. Notice anything? There are lots. Why is Dupont incorporated in Delaware? It certainly isn't because Delaware is rich in petroleum.
The reason is Delaware, as a small state, can afford to have fewer or less restrictive laws on subjects like these, because what would have an insignificant economic effect on the economy of a larger state like Texas or even Pennsylvania would have a quite significant effect in Delaware. If one of the requirements for incorporating is to produce several hundred jobs in the local state, then that is actually a meaningful contribution to Delaware's economy.
States like Pennsylvania can't compete with states like Delaware (just as Massachusetts can't compete with New Hampshire) on the subject of taxes. Being a small state means requiring much less tax revenue, which means it can get away with fewer taxes (of course). Whereas Pennsylvania might temporarily boost revenues or boost economic activity by temporarily lowering or eliminating taxes on items like PCs, Delaware can do so on a permanent basis without many reprocussions. This is inevitable.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
I live in Chester County; according to his site ESR currently lives in Malvern, about 15-20 minutes from where I live. There are tons of tech jobs out here. Our market is one of the top five in the US. I am getting ready to look for a new job and with all the possibilities job hunting becomes fun. Philadelphia is trying to attract more technology companies. So is Pittsburg.
Who would have thought that Penn's Woods would become a technology haven?
-- soldack
perhaps if gov. ridge offered this only saying, "we're losing money to delaware because everyone in eastern pennsylvania is buying their computers there," or, "if you mail-order a computer, there is no tax. this is to give local businesses a chance at that business," i wouldn't complain. but, the article clearly states, "The tax-free holidays will give families who cannot normally afford the $1,800 average cost of a computer and related equipment to purchase them without having to pay the state's 6 percent sales tax." there is no mention of the opportunity at buying lower cost machines because, of course, this isn't the market ridge is aiming to help. and, the 6% becomes more negligible at $300 ($18).
if ridge were really interested in helping to give families that couldn't afford the computer a chance, perhaps he would say for two weeks the tax collected on computer sales would be alloted to families that can't afford, but are interested in buying. or maybe, for two weeks, the tax collected on computer sales will go to putting new computers in inner-city (or under-privileged) schools.
*sigh*
matt from pittsburgh, pa
Why must you left wing types always polarize issues as the "rich" and the "poor". You fail to realize that there are a whole lot more shades in between. In any case, %6 is %6. The "rich" that you speak about are hardly going to get up in arms paying 240 dollars on a 4000 dollar machine, particularly when you consider that those individuals likely to buy a high end machine, and pay a premium for the latest and greatest are likely to have significantly more disposable income than the "poor". You might question the governor's thought process here, but it's unfair to banter about those kind of words.
Furthermore, I tire of all this crap about "computers in the classroom". When most of these inner city kids can't even read and write half decently, why are you worrying about whether or not they have computers? What about getting decent teachers first? Merely throwing money at the issue is not going to solve it. If anything, it distracts from the real problem.
For example, I am a student at Penn State and our computer science program accepts only 100 students per year.
:) at said University and I have to agree with you. He has only done one thing I am aware of and thats give a scholarship to tech degree students who promise to work in PA for x number of years.
:)
I'm a part time student, full time staff member (remember that degree audit you just got in the mail, I ran the mainframe job that printed it
As for PSU's computer program, I used to be in it, but the general cluelesness of the faculty (at a commonwealth campus), plus the "we have no actual direction" changes in the program drove me out of it. I've since been hired for jobs that CSE grads have been turned down for
Finkployd
If you don't, you are guilty of tax fraud and will go to jail.
Hold on a sec... there is a difference between "can go to jail" and "will go to jail". It's unlikely that the state government will send you to jail over a mail order computer game from Loki that you didn't pay them sales tax on. I suppose if you did something to piss off a person in power (that wasn't illegal) and they were looking for something to throw you in jail over, they might turn something like this up, but that's the only circumstance I can see anyone being jailed over something like this for.
--
linuxisgood:~$ man woman
Restating the obvious since nineteen aught five.
I still have my Chester County Interlink account. I have had it for over five years. It is a great freenet and has some great people associated with it. A great gift to Chester County from ESR. Thanks!
As for the drivers Mr. Anon E. Mus, they are going very well. You are now looked at a post from the co-creator of one of the fastest FibreChannel card/driver around!
-- soldack
Normally I do not like to make sweeping generalizations. However, when I hear people utter loaded phrases (e.g., "governor ridge once again tries to give a tax break to the rich while keeping up pretences...") like that, I will give them a little taste of their own medicine. In other words, when someone resorts to that kind of language they are classifying themselves. If he merely disagreed with the Ridge's actions I would not attack him.
So sue me, I use colloquial language on slashdot. *Gasp*. Speaking of black pots, "alot", eh?
Certainly you wouldn't try and argue the results of public education in urban settings (though not exclusively urban) isn't a problem at all. Would you? You might debate the cause of the problem, but not the existence of the problem itself.
As it happens to be, I know a few school administrators and teachers in a few large cities, namely, Seattle, Philadelphia, and LA. Most all would, and have, agreed with me. Furthermore, look at the damn statistics. The problem is self-evident to virtually anyone that knows what an education is, and is remotely familiar with the system. In addition, the teachers themselves have suprisingly mediocre test scores.
Do I believe in Free Teachers? No. But I ask you this: Why is it that Catholic schools do a better job, under just about any measure, with significantly less money per head, in the same neighboorhoods, with essentially the same group of students? They pay their teachers less. They don't have a zillion and one adminstrators and counselors running around eating up resources. They don't have these impossible unions to deal with--so they're free from having to mandate things like teaching degrees (not to be confused with a real college education).
To be perfectly honest, I spent most of my childhood in private school (though not all). I can tell you with absolute certainty that these teachers got paid far less than any public school teacher. This is true at all the private schools too, even the most "elite" (e.g., Andover, Exeter, Lakeside, Episcopal Academy, etc.). Yet these private schools generally attract and retain higher quality faculty. They don't require silly teaching degrees. Instead, they have teachers with mostly meaningful 4 year degrees at good schools. It's not about the money. In addition, it is a little known fact that most of these schools actually spend just (sometimes slightly more) as much per student than public schools.
At one particular private school that I attended, we had worse facilities than many public schools, and certainly fewer computers. In addition, we also had less money per head (it was a growing school, without these secondary sources of financing that many schools enjoy). Guess what? We did every bit as well as the "elite" schools when it came down to it--certainly far better than the public schools. Many alumni are also working in the high tech sector and software industries. Call me old fashion, but I believe that a student who is educated traditionally (without any emphasis on computers) is far better equipped for the "information age" than these students at schools that pay a great deal of attention to these latest technologies, while neglecting the fundamentals. One reason for this is that, as we all know well, technology changes every day. You'll never be able to teach students the exact system that they'll be using 10+ years later. Instead, you should try to equip them with the tools to learn, like the ability to read a manual, the ability to think critically, the ability to teach yourself, etc.
Over the years, I've come to the conclusion that money is not the answer for the public school system's ailments. You might try to argue that these private schools simply have more "professional" parents. It does not explain the success of the kids on scholarships at private schools. Nor does that explain the Catholic schools, even though their success isn't quite on par with the private (non-parochial) schools--it is still worlds better than public schools (to avert any flames, this does not include many of these wealthy suburban public schools). I've seen too much money wasted (In fact, I've already heard a few about wasted computer money from my friends at these schools). My concern is less my own wallet, than it is simply the fact that in worrying about computers excessively they inevitably get that much further from a solution.
Are you going to tell me that the entire public school system has to be mediocre on the aggregate, merely because they can't be selective? What about Europe (though I do realize they're less "forgiving" in many ways than American education, atleast if you want to follow a particular path)? Japan? You'd have to ignore their success. What about American public schools of yesterday? Why are our averages slipping? I don't buy that our children are just getting dumber. Nor do I believe Americans to be any dumber other nations.
In regards to private schools, most are not nearly as selective as is widely percieved. Granted, many private schools are somewhat selective, atleast when it comes to remedial students. To write it off their success to the natural intelligence of the students is a mistake. Furthermore, it would be difficult to claim that the private schools have a lock on "intelligent" students--or even most of them. Quite the contrary infact, when it comes to "natural intelligence", the best at private schools are no better than the best at public school. Also, there are selective public schools. The charter schools are selective, yet they've only had limited success.
On the other hand, I do think the fact that public schools have to find seats for all students is a contributing factor. But it is not a sufficient excuse. It is the way the public schools react to these children that compounds the problem. If a kid is acting up, you kick him out of the class. You do what you need to do, but it's not fair to allow a couple bad eggs to drag the entire class. I realize that the teachers and the adminstration have their hands tied to some degree, but that is part of the problem.
I personally feel that cause of the majority of the "bad" / "dumb" children is more the result of developmental problems (nuture, not nature) than it is genetic problems. Furthermore, I think that schools have a hell of a lot more say about this than they're given credit. If you allow students to fall hopelessly behind and graduate them perpetually, regardless of their learning the material or not, they're going to be hopelessly behind come 10th grade (I believe maybe even permanently). I believe most of these kids can be sufficiently educated before they reach that point though. Again, I'd refer you to most of Western Europe, Japan, and even those few good public schools in American suburbia (though you can argue their parents are "better" influences).
In any case, the public schools have many different problems to contend with. I do not believe more funding is a solution to these problems. Likewise, if these children can't handle even the most basic of an education, I don't see how anyone can reasonably expect them to be productive with computers. I'm not an "expert", for whatever that is worth, but I know this much to be true....
And just because someone duck walks and quotes the Mein Kampf doesn't mean they're necessarily Nazis either; that doesn't mean they deserve much better.
;)
Anyhow, in regards to education, I agree with you that standards are slipping across the board, and that it is unacceptable. However, the slippage that you see at private schools and good suburban schools is of a vastly different nature (and cause) than what is typified in most inner-city public schools. The source of the problem in private school is more a slow perversion from what an education is considered to be; instead of an outright loss of control (like many public schools). Most students graduating from private school have a decent shot at getting into a good college. They atleast conform to certain CURRENT social expectations (e.g., acceptable reading, writing, etc), that allow them to land professional jobs.
Having been to numerous private schools (I've made a few moves), and being very familiar with many more, I can tell you that you're overstating the problem at private schools. First off, most children at private school don't have that kind of money, not to where even 5% of the parents are making significant donations. While I have seen a few cases of private schools extending slack to students of particularly wealthy students who donate, there is normally some sob story (BS) to accompany it, and it's relatively rare. I would not say it is a systemic problem by any means.
In addition, i'd be the first to tell you that private school students are not exceptionally smart (on average, "genetically"). However, I will say that students' intelligence is essentially distributed the same way it is in the public schools. What sets these students apart from public school is not innate intelligence, it is their education system, and their approach to it. The approach i'm referring to is a certain desire to succeed, atleast within that particular framework (e.g., getting an A, for whatever that means). In other words, they're "upwardly mobile" or "professionally oriented".
Most inner city (yes, yes, I know) public schools have problems through and through. From teaching, to administration, to discipline, etc. Thus when I hear Clinton get up on a podium, and tell us that we need computers in the class room or the inner city (etc.) children are going to get "left behind", I get a little bit annoyed. These same kids already are being left behind, throwing computers at them isn't going to make them read and write any better. Unfortunately, until they acquire these basic skills, computers are entirely besides the point.
Anyhow, that caffeine is wearing off, pardon me if I'm somewhat incoherant/non-linear sounding at this hour. Good night
PS:
I live just outside Philly,
Where are these "closing" Catholic schools? In any case, their dollar/student ratio is much lower than public school. The Catholic schools can't merely raise tuition such that their dollar / head ratio could even approach that of public school.
What do you expect at a small private liberal arts school in suburbia? I'm partially kidding. Still, I hardly think they're particularly representative of the "average" or "better" private school student. Even if 90% of such schools are private school students. =)
While PA isn't exactly the most high tech or startup friendly state, your statements are simply wrong. Besides the pharamsuetical industry, there are many biotech firms here. I happen to work for one, though, like many, it is incorporated in DE.
It is a shame that high speed access isn't more affordable. This is more due to regulation than anything else. However, having been involved with a number of high-tech startups (e.g., not Dot-Coms) I can tell you that high speed net access is a not a significant issue for most.
That being said PA (particularly Philly) has lots of problems, but Net Access ain't top on the list. Tax issues? yes. Attracting/retaining quality employees? Yes. The general apathy/no-can-do attititude? Yes. Problems attracting capital? Yes. Inefficient/troublesome state and city governments? Yes. Old boys club type attitude? Yes. In order to compete with the West Coast (e.g., Seattle, Silicon Valley, etc), PA is going to need to tackle these issues first.
It always intrigues me, these state governments, if they want jobs and tax revenue from tech companies, then why not MAKE THE STATE BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT FRIENDLY TO (BIO|COMPUTER)TECH STARTUPS?
Western New York has always frustrated me.. There's a corridor between Buffalo and Rochester which could be a serious tech contender if someone in state government could remove their head from their posterior and clean the feces out of their sensory regions long enough to take notice... You've got UB (the SUNY flagship university, and that is _not_ damning with faint praise..), RPI, Kodak, Xerox IIRC, a reasonably decent infrastructure, low rents and high vacancy, a nice place to live (if you like winter sports
Your Working Boy,