Slashdot Mirror


Taxing Sci-Fi Products to Fund NASA?

LordNimon writes "According to an article in the Huntsville (AL) Times, Michael Williams, a Republican candidate for Congress, is proposing a 1% tax on any science fiction- or space-related products (e.g. books, toys, and games) and using that money to fund NASA. At first I thought this guy was crazy, considering the administrative nightmare of determining which products should be taxed. But then I realized something - this tax would make those who are most interested in space the primary source of space development funding. Instead of making everyone pay for NASA, those who care most about it also fund it the most. Maybe if the guy didn't work in a supermarket, he'd be taken more seriously."

41 of 602 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong! by Reziac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I read practically nothing but one sort of SF or another, and I'm not even vaguely interested in the space program. So why should *I* be taxed for it??

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    1. Re:Wrong! by Reziac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Equating an interest in SF with an interest in *FUNDING the space program* is at best specious, and since the article is based on a presumably serious candidate's notions, I have a hard time taking it as "funny".

      Let's turn it around: Geeky stuff should be taxed 1% per year and the funds thus collected should be paid to GeekPAC. Lessee, what to tax.. computers and components, software (let's tax free software by the byte) and interent access all fall under "geeky stuff".

      Oh, so the RIAA buys lots of computers and net access for their office workers, but doesn't appreciate being FORCED to support someone else's special interest group? Too bad.

      And as to starving geeks who can't afford yet another tax? Tough shit. Do without.

      [/sarcasm]

      As to the, um, freethinker who rated my initial comment as "flamebait" -- I wrote nothing but the exact truth. If you've got a convincing argument as to why I should be penalized with a special-interest tax, I want to hear it.

      Tellya what.. when I see Jerry Pournelle again (probably tomorrow, in fact) I'll ask him what HE thinks of such ideas. That oughta be good for a laugh.

      Taxes, once instituted, ALWAYS creep upward. Very much like erosions of civil liberties. Foot in the door, and all that.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:Wrong! by Reziac · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. Frex, what I read (and write) is mainly space opera. It takes place in space, or at least occasionally in space, but it really has nothing to do with space other than as a handy environment in which to set the story.

      George Clayton Johnson (co-author of LOGAN'S RUN) once asked me "What makes your books SF?" And my honest answer was: "Nothing. With a few tweaks, they could just as easily be medieval fantasy." Someday I may even rewrite 'em that way, just to see how it turns out.

      So.. which version gets taxed? the original? only the parts that take place in space? all derivative works (such as a fantasy reworking)??

      It's a dumb idea for a vague tax,and clear evidence that this guy hasn't seen enough of the Real World[tm] to have any business in public office, making decisions that impact other people's lives.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Wrong! by BrianGa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By your logic: "I work for a living and pay income tax, and am not even
      vaguely interested in the welfare program. So why should *I* be taxed for it??"
      Same could be applied for nearly every government program.

    4. Re:Wrong! by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No because that would be stupid

      If whites are the oppressors whites should pay for programs to solve problems THEY have caused.

      Its almost like the RIAAs idea of making IT industry solve their problem of piracy.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    5. Re:Wrong! by Reziac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He's running for public office, and apparently proposed this tax as part of his campaign; as citizens it's our JOB to pass judgment on him (thus electing him or not). If he says dumb things in public, he'll be judged accordingly.

      Think of voting as moderating on a massive scale. ;)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    6. Re:Wrong! by norton_I · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But he isn't taxed "extra" for it. That is the point. As it stands, almost all taxes go into a general fund, which then pays for everything, whether a given taxpayer supports it or not. Then we hire people to decide what things a large chunk of taxpayers want, and pay for those things. While paying taxes is sometimes painful, I think I get a reasonable value for my tax dollars, and I don't resent that that is the price to pay to live in my country.

      I also support the space program. I think in the short term there is a lot of valuble science that we can do in space, and in the long term our destiny lies in the stars. NASA has some problems, but overall I support both manned and unmanned space exploration.

      However, if the government is charging me extra to support the space program, I want tax credits back for the missle defense system, which I think is a useless, worthless waste of money and time that is unlikely to work reliably and less likely to protect against relevent threats in the next 20 years. But that is not a choice I get to make alone. and if in 15 years, and ICBM with a nuclear warhead is shot down by the system (unlikely as it seems to me) lots of people will be glad that military and technology experts much more familiar with threats and countermeasures got to make the decision rather than just one guy.

      Finally, earmarked taxes have been found to be extremely ineffective. Lottery revenue in some states is earmarked for education. On the face of it, this is an effective idea: tax stupid people to fund education to make more smart people. Unfortunately, in practice this tends to make the legeslatures allocate correspondingly less from the general fund to education. Education gets little or no real benefit, but the belief that it is "supporting education" sells lottery tickets.

  2. Strangely, this could be kinda cool by freeweed · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Take 1% of Lucas et al's income from the Star Wars movies over the years.

    Probably end up about 15X NASA's budget :)

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:Strangely, this could be kinda cool by MousePotato · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree. I always thought it would be cool to set up something like movie theaters charging a buck extra and kicking it out to NASA when showing a flick like Apollo 13, Star Wars, ET... I would do that, heck a few bucks that way would make for more scifi/sci history flicks at the box office. $0.25 would be cool on the rentals of this genre too.

      Only problem with this kind of thing is that once it gets started we'll be seeing a condom tax for sex flicks, needy kids tax for disney flicks, church reparations for demonic flicks, stoner tax on jay and silent bob flicks for drug rehab programs... where do you draw the line?

    2. Re:Strangely, this could be kinda cool by quintessent · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, it's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure I like it as a precedent.

      Let's take this a step or two further and see how it could be applied in other areas.

      Taxing copies of 2000 Leagues Under the Sea to fund deep sea research.

      Taxing Rambo movies to fund military programs.

      Taxing copies of the Bible to fund christian charities.

      Taxing snow sports to fund research in Antarctica.

      It's just too contrived. Of course, it doesn't sound like it will get anywhere near Washington anyway.

  3. Well, another idea by usermilk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why not just take a portion of the sales tax used on Science Fiction products and move that towards NASA? Instead of 8.25% sales tax going torwards my state, 7.25% gets to them and 1% gets to NASA?
    This could work for all products, 1% of food taxes (junk food, sodas) can go towards the FDA, 1% of medical taxes can go towards hospitals. I think it would be nice, the State and Gov't still get their taxes and we are sure some of it goes to those who might need it.

    1. Re:Well, another idea by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 3, Funny

      Here's another idea: Instead of having a plethora of specified taxes on various products going to a multitude of different agencies, why not have a unified sales tax. This allows the government to redistribute the money to different organizations as needed, with a minimum amount of hassle. Oh wait, that's already how it works. I think it's fine then.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
  4. Re:Where will it end by meshko · · Score: 3, Insightful

    um... you got it wrong. Public transportation costs should be pushed to people who buy cars/gasoline because cars are bad for society (e.g. polution) and public transportation is very good for everyone. In a society with good public transportation system cars becomes more of a luxury (which it should be) and should be taxed.

    --
    I passed the Turing test.
  5. And going to college got you..... by valdezjuan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This guy has a masters (political science) and a bachelor's (business management) degree. Yet he works at the local supermarket? Unless he owns the place the going to college was not worth it for this guy (even then perhaps not).

    1. Re:And going to college got you..... by Chemical · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How is working at a supermarket an "iregular" job that only a "total nutcase" would take? Because it is "unskilled labor" and doesn't require an education? That may be true, but that does not mean it is idle, easy work that doesn't require some work and dedication. Because it is low paying? Not really. Safeway cashiers make up to like $19/hour. That's not too shabby, and is a lot more than many office workers make. My friend was an assistant manager at Safeway and he was making about $23/hour plus overtime. That's more than I make working on a helpdesk. And I have heard that store managers at large supermarkets can make up to $80k/yr. That's more than many IT jobs pay. Don't think you are all high and mighty because you work in an office doing "skilled work" or whatever.

  6. What a nightmare by tony_gardner · · Score: 4, Funny

    So how will he define science fiction?
    Will LOTR be taxed? (Aliens)
    Will Bond be taxed? (Gismos)
    Would Shrek/Monsters inc/Toy story be taxed?
    Would stories featuring missiles or fighter planes have the space tax?

    I personally favour the idiot tax. All politicians favouring new and innovative taxes will give 50% of their earnings to NASA. That oughta fix it.

    1. Re:What a nightmare by Jester998 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "I personally favour the idiot tax. All politicians favouring new and innovative taxes will give 50% of their earnings to NASA. That oughta fix it."

      I think you should take that one step further with the 'Techlogist Pain and Suffering' tax, where those /certain/ politicians who favour technology bills about which they have NO clue have to give the entire funding for their next 5 political campaigs to the technology sector for all the headaches they cause us. We will also get the right to beat them senseless at every opportunity and at our leisure. And just to set an example, we'll make this bill retroactive until... the DMCA. :)

  7. Yeah! Tax the people who care! by merkel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's a great idea - we should only tax the people who care about NASA for NASA!!

    And while we're at it, we'll pay for police protection with a tax on handguns, alarms and mace (after all, those are the people interested in protection); fire protection with a tax on smoke alarms and extinguishers; cleaning up the environment by taxing granola and birkenstocks; and welfare by taxing Volvos!

    Aside from certain use fees and excise taxes where consumption is generally related to some gov't service (e.g., gasoline consumption is generally related to highway use), the gov't taxes us generally and then allocates the monies according to priorities.

    I don't see a decent rationale for why scifi consumers should fund NASA when the population at large reaps the benefits of the scientific and techological discoveries. It's not just the kids with Jar-Jar dolls who drink Tang...

  8. The sad thing is... by John+Miles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... you're closer to the truth than you probably realize. The budget on Brian de Palma's awful Mission to Mars was US $90 million... more than 75% of the budget of an equally-flawed but substantially better-intended real-life mission.

    When Hollywood drops a bomb, nobody cares. When NASA loses a similar amount of money trying to advance human knowledge, it's practically the end of the world. Congressional inquiries are launched, indignant editorials are published, and modern-day Great Society pundits bemoan the tragic waste of funding that could have gone to their own pet causes.

    This is the unfortunate reality of publicly-funded space exploration. It's perhaps the ultimate embodiment of the "bread and circuses" social phenomenon that attended the fall of Rome. Never mind the urban myths -- think of the money NASA could have saved if they actually had hired Stanley Kubrick to stage the Apollo missions in the Nevada desert. Apparently, that would have been good enough for us.

    --
    Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    1. Re:The sad thing is... by John+Miles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My point, which seems to have escaped some people, is that for better or worse, $100 million is no longer considered much money. We are nickel and diming NASA to death over peanuts.

      For the price of a ticket to see Mission to Mars, the collective base of US taxpayers can finance a real mission, or at least a good try at one. But instead, we choose to complain about "*my* money being wasted" (your words). We as contemporary Americans do not seem to place a significant value on the amounts of money being discussed, until NASA has an accident with it.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  9. Good crack about supermarkets by tester13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because the guy has a stupid idea does not make it cool to take shots at people that work at supermarkets. We do not know what he does in his work capacity. Maybe he is an executive.

    It is sad for me to see it when "educated" people ridicule others for what they do for a living.

    Next time just keep it on topic

  10. Re: Mars should not be a priority by Kintanon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There HAS to be a big project to catch the imagination and attention of the next generation of Space exploration workers. Right now Space is Boring. Computers are hot, no one is growing up wanting to be an astronaut anymore. There needs to be something done to fire the imagination of the world again, we're so embroiled in our petty border squabbles between people of differently shaded skin or slightly modified philosphy that people can't realize that we are all human, we are all at heart the same, and we should all be working together to spread ourselves to the stars. It's possible, it can be done, and it will be done. I'd love to live to see it, and I'm willing to pay to make it happen.

    Kintanon

    --
    Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  11. Enforcement? by tester13 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ok I gotta ask, what happens if I write a book that is not exactly science fiction but sort of "stretches" science a little bit? Is that tax evasion?

    Is Kurzweil's book SciFi?

    What about fantasy genre? Is that taxable, or are the flying dragons taxes exempt?

  12. Beware: Politicians are smarter than slashdotters by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Politicians are scum but they are smarter than the typical slashdotter. A SciFi tax will accomplish nothing. If an extra billion comes in from a SciFi tax then the politicians will reduce traditional NASA funding by a billion so they can spend that money elsewhere. This is an old trick and you should have recognized the pattern, "state lottery income will increase funding for schools", "a slight increase in the gasoline tax will increase highway funding", etc.

    intelligence != common sense
    intelligence != good judgement

  13. Does Huntsville, Alabama ring a bell? by Riktov · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's only the location of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The guy's just trying to funnel taxes to his home district.

    Oh, and he does sound like a freak-o dweeb.

  14. Other great tax ideas by KurdtX · · Score: 3, Funny
    • Taxing air travelers to fund our diplomats, because they're the only ones who would be interested in our diplomacy with other countries
    • Adding a tax based on age to fund health care, because the elderly are more likely to get sick
    • Taxing students to fund the RIAA, because they're the ones most likely to be pirating music
    • Taxing the unemployed to fund Social Security, because they're the ones who would be most interested in it
    • Taxing beurocrats to fund recycling, because they're the only ones who waste paper in the volumes they do
    --

    Kurdt
    I'm not anti-social. Just pro-technology.
  15. Well by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The solution is to fund all government programslike that.

    Why should we be forced to have our money sent to airport companies for a bailout? We spent 20 billion dollars bailing them out!

    You are right, interest should decide how much is spent on where, however we dont have a true democracy, we are a republic and thats going against the nature of the government itself.

    You allow US to decide where the money goes, and most of the people in the government and congress will be out of a job.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Well by Reziac · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What you're proposing is more like a use tax, except that with something that's not precisely tangible (such as the boundaries of SF), you also have to be the thought police to enforce it.

      And what if someone is rabidly interested in the space program, but NEVER has anything to do with SF? I know several folk of that bent. Are they tax evasionists who should be forced to buy SF to support their special interest?

      As to putting most of the gov't out of a job.. hmmmmm!!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:Well by Reziac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That makes much more sense -- same as the current checkbox to give an extra couple bucks to political campaigns. Why not add stuff like "Give $2 to NASA" or "Give $2 to local schools" or the like? that way anyone who wants to can do it, and those who don't, or can't afford it, don't get dinged.

      Ooops, did we mention sense and gov't together? Silly citizens, thinking they have a say in the gov't!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Well by hyrdra · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's not how it works. Checking that box doesn't cause you to get a lower return or increase the taxes you owe. It only affects the statistical percentage of tax allocation in the IRS -- more boxes equals more percentage of money going to the campaign. The $1 is a cap to make sure it doesn't get too large.

      Personally, I would like to see such a thing. Heck, I would like to see something like custom taxes, where you have a base of required stuff to pay, and then you have electives where you can have your say in the balancing of funds. Such a thing would actually encourage people to pay more taxes, because they would be more directly in control of where their money actually goes and what it's used for. This would encourage competition between government programs because they would literally be fighting for their funding. If we (the public) hear about the military buying more of the $500 toilet seats, less people will allocate a lot of money to them. If Medicare is beating up on the elderly again, less money to them. Eventually, they'll fail and be replaced by a new program. And so on the process of evolution...

      Doesn't that sound like a democratic way of taxing?

      --


      "I'll just chip in a bit for RedHat: I actually have that installed on my university machine." - Linus, '95
  16. Stupid is as stupid does by Tony · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's see... we spend $125B a year in corporate welfare. NASA is asking for a little over $15B. Which one is most likely to see cuts?

    The economic benefits of the space program go far beyond Tang and Hubble calendars. The space race is second only to war for causing advances in technology. (Not that it's a race anymore.) Sure, a lot of the funding goes to dog-and-pony type operations, and things that count more towards PR than knowledge; but considering the return rate for the knowledge we *do* glean, why the *HElL* are we so tight with funding?????

    Taxing SF to fund NASA is like taxing full-contact sports to fund war, or taxing Big Wheels to fund roads. Everyone reaps the benefits (except those who die in the war, I guess); everyone should pay. Hell, they didn't ask if I wanted to help fund the S&L bailout; why should they ask short-sighted tight-fisted bastards if they want to fund space research?

    If they want to use opt-in funding, they should do that for everything. I don't want to bail out Enron and Boeing and the airlines; send my money to NASA and university research, instead.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  17. First Amendment? by mikeplokta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I rather doubt that it's constitutional to tax speech based on its content. Coming next, 1000% tax on publications supporting the Democratic party?

  18. Re:Bomb shelter? by sql*kitten · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the rub - the only way to protect the US population is to stop making enemies and to work against poverty and illiteracy all over the world. The guys who get drafted for fundamentalist causes are mainly poor and uneducated orphans from the streets. A standard brainwash takes place, where the organization offers food and shelter, thus getting total emotional control over the victim.

    I disagree. For a start, working against poverty and illiteracy to us is understood to be cultural imperialism by much of the Middle East. In many parts of that region, the only reason that children are taught to read is so that they can read the Qu'ran. The only reason that there isn't universal poverty is oil - Saudi Arabian universities turn out more graduates in Religious Studies than they do engineers, doctors, etc. What I'm trying to say is, there is no way to address illiteracy and poverty - by our standards - without a radical overhaul of the society, but even trying to do that is provocative to terrorists.

    Secondly, the terrorists that would be provoked aren't poor or illiterate. Osama himself is a multi-millionaire who has travelled extensively in the West. Sheik Omar, on trial for the kidnap and murder of Daniel Pearl, was educated at the London School of Economics, one of Europe's most prestigious universities. Osama's second in command was a dentist before becoming an international gangster.

    But you are right to a certain extent, the way for the US to stop making enemies is to stop intervening in other cultures unless it is specifically for the defense of the mainland (or perhaps to help a long-term ally).

  19. uhh by inKubus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why does someone who works in a grocery store have to be a "nutcase" and why isn't it a "normal job"? Plenty of smart people work jobs like that; in fact, I would bet that the managers of those stores probably all have college degrees.

    A store manager is not some shitty job. These people are in charge of hundreds of employees, millions in merchandise and millions in cash. Not to mention an entire giant building which needs electricity, HVAC, the floors and bathrooms need to be clean all the time, plus all of the tools like meat slicers, ovens, freezers, cash registers, accounting, payroll, scheduling, sales, bitchy customers, etc etc. I can go on, but I think you get the point.

    Yes, working at a grocery store is not a regular job. It is much more challenging. So get a life you unwise person.

    --
    Cool! Amazing Toys.
    1. Re:uhh by Ooblek · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I used to work at a grocery store. I moved around to stores in the chain and had the opportunity to experience many people. Many of them had extremely deep personal issues that would allow them to be considered abnormal.

      Many of them were in their mid-30s to early 40s. A lot suffered with alcoholism, most were single or divorced, and I've never seen such politics in any other place that I've worked. The union controlled where people went when promoted, so everyone would bitch about how much they worked and how little others did. Many considered their job right up there with saving the world.

      The job pretty much boiled down to this: you go there, put shit on shelves, put price tags on them, repeat until shift is over. Many of the issues you stated (like payroll) were all handled by computers and the corporate office. All it took was a little bit of data entry. Sure, the people weren't morons, but I wouldn't exactly call it a job where the sky is the limit.

  20. Re:No. by gilroy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Blockquoth the poster:

    And when we do get part of that money, it hardly seems worth highway robbery we face each and every tax period.

    You know, I guess I'm the last of the rubes, and proud of it. I don't feel "robbed" every April 15th. Yes, I'd love it if my tax bill could be (responsibly!) lowered, and yes, I cringe hearing about all the spending misfires and pork projects. But I am still proud to contribute to the "general welfare" of the United Stated. Government serves a noble purpose and government, like other things in this society, costs money. As Justice Holmes says, taxes are the price you pay for civilization. I look at the civilization we have built and I think the price is still low -- a few thousand dollars a year in exchange for personal liberty and the rule of law? A bargain by any measure.

    After millions spent on aid to other countries and welfare, what do we get back from the government that seems satisfying?

    Is this something out of Life of Brian? We get roads, and hospitals, and police protection. And emergency rescue teams and fire stations and national defense. And schools and universities and libraries. And agricultural development and city planning and trade deals. And of course the highest-quality scientific and technological research anywhere, ever, producing and funding such things as the Internet through which you post your screed and through which we suffer to read it.

    A sex scandal now and then. That's it.

    Well, now we get to the main cause of the trouble. If that's what you find "satisfying", then I am absolutely ecstatic that our government disappoints you. See beyond the animal and perhaps you won't be quite so dismissive.
  21. Military stuff, too? by Sinistar2k · · Score: 4, Funny

    While I don't agree with the logic on this, if it were to happen, could we do the same thing for the military?

    Anybody who buys GI Joe's gets taxed. Anything camo. Man, they could have made a mint back in the 70s/80s off sales of "Better dead than red" shirts alone!

    Don't know what money from Spawn figures would go to. Occult organizations?

  22. Why not a Nasa LOTTERY? by mbourgon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's a better idea - howzabout a NASA-sponsored lottery... with the prize being a trip to space? Tickets go for $10. I think that would be a interesting (note that I didn't say fair) way to get money for NASA by people interested in NASA.

    --
    "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  23. I agree and disagree too. by El+Camino+SS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Our society appears to be like Rome, but who exactly is running Rome? The Romans? Check this site out to see who is putting the horses in the Senate.

    www.opensecrets.org

    Yes. I totally agree with you about the world we live in. The rich and powerful will always run the current society, and pass that power on to their heirs... that is ALWAYS going to happen. If you check the website above carefully, you will see who is in charge of the henhouse. But the more the rich control society, the fewer opinions rule, and the more upset everyone becomes. If one person is a king and rules absolutely? Say hello to Mr. War. If you look at ALL wars, they are started by totalitarian regimes or totalitarian rulers.

    I am all too happy to pay taxes too, to live in this society. Call me nuts, but I am very happy that my offspring are not going to have a Kalashnikov against their head for a dissenting opinion.

    But at the same time I do not see taxes as being "the liberator." Like Rome, our society is peaceful because it is "ruled by the rabble," as the Romans would say. All great civilizations share this trait, even the Greeks. Fuck with the people because you're all powerful? We'll hang your ass or stab you out in front of the Senate. Get your ego involved and send our children to war because you have to prove you're a big dog? Then we'll kill you too. Take away our bread, movies, entertainment of choice, or anything we want for ourselves for your religious or personal motives? Say hello to the Guillotine.

    Taxes just levy the government. I have no problem with them, if they actually pay for some service. I would seriously resent giving the coffers of some Emir who spends it on polo ponies, breaking every religious law that put them in power, chasing international models, and then tells us we "need to kill" infidels (but obviously not after they have shagged all the hot infidels).

    Did you know that Saudi Arabia's diplomat to the USA has published poetry that speaks of the glorious suicide bombers on September 11th? Did you know that Saudi Arabia is so backwards that they let 12+ girls burn in a school fire because they didn't let the girls outside without proper coverings? They wouldn't let the fire department in because they might see girls without their "correct" garments on. Little girls screaming and burning alive, but you couldn't save them because of "the big God rules."

    I'm sorry, but I have only one thing to say about a society that praises killing innocents and enforces its dress code with lethal consequences. You can guess what that is.

    Those bastards are our real enemy, not just Osama. We should be taking those bastards out too. Why do I hate Saudi Arabia? One word: king.

    As you can tell, I have a definite opinion about how a king should be treated.

    I don't worry about the taxes so much as I worry about who's in charge.

  24. Lottery revenues by Erbo · · Score: 3, Informative
    Lottery revenue in some states is earmarked for education...Unfortunately, in practice this tends to make the legeslatures allocate correspondingly less from the general fund to education.
    Yep, that's exactly what happened with the California Lottery. This despite repeated pledges by the people that pushed the ballot initiative creating the Lottery that that wouldn't happen.

    Of course, the schools in CA have been fscked for decades now, ever since Proposition 13 passed, which made it damn near impossible to get more property tax revenue for anything.

    In Colorado, Lottery revenues (including, since last summer, Powerball) go towards parks, and actually seem to have done some good. Guess the state wasn't funding parks very much for awhile...

    Eric

    --
    Be who you are...and be it in style!
  25. makes no sense at all.. by darkphyber · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To tax only sci-fi products makes no sense. Sure, the space program is expensive, and desperately needs more funding, (and less of the 'faster, better, cheaper' crap if you ask me) but why should only sci-fi fans have to shoulder the burden of the space program? Everyone from people in IT, agriculture, engineering and many other fields, (not to mention consumers) benefits from the discoveries made in space, and the technology we develop to get there. There are a virtual plethora of technologies we wouldn't have today if it weren't for the pioneering efforts of scientists working for NASA. There's a reason this shouldn't be taken seriously, and it's not because they guy works in a grocery store!