Minnesota Passes First Online Privacy Law
Subotai writes: "Finally a state with a clue. Today, Minnesota passed a law forcing ISPs to notify customers before they sell information about them and tell them how to prevent it." Finally, a nice example of how a bill becomes a law.
Finally a state with a clue.
While this law is cool, I wouldn't say MN has a clue. They are forcing everyone to pay for our new stadium by the imposition of a "sin tax". The tax is in effect on some stuff in Minneapolis now, and will roll out to the whole state by 2004. Tax is $1 on a bottle of beer, around $3.50 on a pack of cigarettes, $5 for a lap dance (I shit you not), and taxes on lingerie and other such things.
While it's true that you don't need to buy these things if you don't want to pay for the stadium, it sucks for those of us who regularly buy these things and could give a rats ass about the stadium.
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
How did you end up living in MN without learning to spell "veto"? I believe it is explicitly taught at the elementary school level onward, as you run across it constantly if you every read anything at all concerning US presidents or US government.
Appologies if you grew up in a different country and haven't ever read anything concerning US government.
Unwieldy for whom? TRANSLATION:
Wait! If you start this sort of legislation, other states may follow suit, and then we'll have to be held accountable for our actions.
Can I bum a sig?
Wow -- that's outrageous! Whatever happened to seperation of church and state, or was that bill of rights thing just bullshit?
As far as my relegion goes -- if it feels good, do it! Would that make me exempt from the sin tax?
Does a case of beer cost an extra $24? How is a keg priced?
In any case, Minnesota, I dig your governer, but your state senate's gotta go.
-Turkey
-Turkey
Bah, all you need is Saturday morning television to know how a bill becomes a law.
I haven't gone to a Twins game in ages, who needs them? The 'sin tax' is really ridiculous. I remember at the beginning of the budget deficit a bunch of radio pundits and editorals called for a 'fat tax' on all the junk food sold, just like there's a tax on cigarettes, beer, etc. A simple, 'fat tax' would have gotten Minnesota--where a huge portion of our taxes go to health care (can you guess how much goes to treating fat-related illnesses!?)--out of the damn budget problem in a obese man's heart beat.
When the MN stadium bill came up a couple years ago, our legislature unceremoniously gave it the boot. In fact, the Twins have struck out on funding seven years in a row. In response, Major League Baseball threatened to eliminate the Twins if we didn't build them a new stadium. Now, congress has approved funding with all the enthusiasm they can muster.
We have a stadium (the famous Busch Stadium) that works, though it could use a renovation.
We have the Metrodome, which was built in 1980. Apparently, large public buildings start getting grubby and have to be completely replaced every couple decades.
Now, the Minnesota Vikings want a new stadium. They want the state to come up with $350 million so the Vikings can have their very own stadium.
The Vikings have a lease to rent the Metrodome through 2011 but "the 64,121-seat Metrodome doesn't provide them enough revenue from concessions, luxury seating and parking."
they missed the most vital requirement needed:
require opt-IN, not opt-out.
my favorite piece of spam is the one that comes only once:
You have been selected for regular weekly mailings of penile enlargement accessory news. If you do not want to receive these announcements, do nothing and this will be the last time we will contact you. In order to receive our penile enlargement newsletters, you must reply to the following address: we-actually-care@scum-suckers.spam
it's still unsolicited, but hey, here's a step in the right direction and it makes businesses much more legitimate in my book. this way, the small number of people who DO want this kind of mail will still get it. anybody else will get a few spams initially and will then fall off spammers' radar.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
I don't know how Minnesota is faring financially, but my home state of Tennessee is broke, really broke. We have no state income tax, and several of the state legislators are trying to change that, but nobody wants it and the chances of a state income tax passing are about the same as the chances of Microsoft open-sourcing Windows. Zip, zero, nada.
So what's the alternate proposal? Sin taxes, of course. "Tax the people who buy cigarettes." "Tax the people who buy beer or liquor." I honestly don't understand why people like me (who smoke and drink) should have to bail the state out of debt. The fact that I smoke and drink does not mean that I have contributed to the state's debt any more than any other individual. Likewise, I should not be held any more responsible for our problems than anyone else. I don't support a state income tax, but if it's that or sin taxes, give me an income tax. At least that's spread equally among all residents.
I'm in Memphis, about 30 minutes from a ton of casinos in Tunica County, Mississippi. There are countless thousands of Tennessee dollars being spent (and lost) in Mississippi casinos every month. That money goes straight to MS. If TN would enact a state lottery, at least some of the casino money would stay in-state, and those who live further away from the casinos for a trip there to be convenient would buy lotto tickets instead, all of which would help to put us in the black... But it'll never happen, because we're in the middle of the bible belt. The Baptists won't let Tennessee have a lottery, because it's a "sin." And they seem to think the only way to bail the state out of debt is to tax "sinners" (aka smokers, drinkers). It bothers me to no end that the religious right feels they have no responsibility and that all the "sinners" should carry the state's financial weight.
Raising taxes for smokers/drinkers and nobody else is just as inappropriate as raising taxes for African-Americans and nobody else, or raising taxes for men only, or raising taxes only for people who own more than 1 acre of land. Just because I smoke Camels and drink Bud doesn't mean I should have to finance the state. Sin taxes are discriminatory.
Some of your state government representatives smoke, and some if not all of them enjoy a drink now and then. If you're living in a state that's considering raising "sin" taxes (since when is it the government's business to tax or regulate "sins" and believe me the government representatives call them "sin taxes" just like anyone else) please write your representatives - both your state legislature and your representatives to US Congress - and explain your distaste. Quote the previous paragraph in your letter.
Please.
Thanks,
Shaun
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
As an ISP in Minnesota, I seriously wonder about the slippery slope of legalese like "joint-venture" which isn't technically a "third-party". Don't get me wrong, I'm a privacy freak, and QWEST deserves worse...
;)
The second part of the bill is frankly not feasible -- from a forced implementation standpoint:
"A second part of the bill follows the lead of other states that have adopted rules to try to control unwanted e-mail. It would require companies sending unsolicited advertisements to include the letters "ADV" in the subject line of e-mails -- "ADV-ADULT" for material of a sexual nature -- to make it easier to filter out."
And what mechanism is in place to:
a. police it?
b. enforce it?
c. litigate it? and at who's expense?
and lets talk jurisdiction here....or lets not
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
"They are forcing everyone to pay for our new stadium by the imposition of a "sin tax". The tax is in effect on some stuff in Minneapolis now, and will roll out to the whole state by 2004. Tax is $1 on a bottle of beer, around $3.50 on a pack of cigarettes, $5 for a lap dance (I shit you not), and taxes on lingerie and other such things."
m l
e s/twins-134532820020403-070427.html
I think you might be mistaken on this issue. If you have sources, please post them. It was my understanding that the state was going to post the Twins franchise bonds to be repayed back through funds from profit earnings from the games. Here is the link; http://www.startribune.com/stories/509/2847986.ht
Then we have the second half of the bill, it is a hospitality tax. Here is another link on the whole proposed bill: http://www.channel4000.com/msp/sports/twins/stori
As you can see, your worries about a "sin tax" are completly unjustifed and plainly wrong.
One more note, I for one firmly believe that Minnesota still is one of the best states to live in. If you disagree, move.
yah, it's a bad deal. is this for the new twins' stadium, which I thought wasn't a done deal yet? or the vikings?
sulli
RTFJ.
Apologies for being a pedantic fuck, but you were the one correcting typos.