Slashdot Mirror
Wisconsin Governor Proposing Tax On Downloads
Christopher Reimer writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the Wisconsin's governor is proposing a tax for downloads. From the article: 'Wisconsin's Democratic governor thinks it's not fair that tangible items get taxed while downloads, like music, ebooks, software, etc., go completely untaxed. So, he proposes to rectify the situation by having Wisconsin's 5% state sales tax apply to Internet downloads.'"
Now p2p users can be charged with tax evasion!
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
I think we should try to avoid the democrat vs. republican debate and just accept that the government is thinking about taxing the internet.
Discuss.
I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
That should be real easy to enforce.
Is this really an important and pressing matter for the governor to concern himself with? Shouldn't he be more focused on.....I don't know, making more cheese? >_>
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
Web pages and any download for that matter. Would you have to pay a 5% tax to read your email?
haha good luck getting that one passed.
pay through paypal.. if it's not tangible, they don't need to know your real address!
"Persistence is annoying success." - ghee22 11:28:1999 - 10:53:PM
Frist Paust!
IANAL, but I thought this might violate the Internet Tax Freedom Act of 1998 (which was renewed in 2003)......
However, this comes straight from the federal law -
SEC. 1101. MORATORIUM.
(b) Preservation of State and Local Taxing Authority.-- Except as provided in this section, nothing in this title shall be construed to modify, impair, or supersede, or authorize the modification, impairment, or superseding of, any State or local law pertaining to taxation that is otherwise permissible by or under the Constitution of the United States or other Federal law and in effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
The funny thing is, the whole law is VOLUNTARY! Although I don't think it'll matter if they really want to get the money....If it comes to pass, they'll probably make a provision to make it mandatory
-thewldisntenuff
My MythTV HowTo
Users will have to pay tax each time they visit a webpage on a subscription based website? Visiting a page does involve downloading, of course.
Article summary is wrong and intended to cause a flamewar.
Wouldn't it be hare to figure out what state the downloaded files were comming from? I was under the impression that states could only tax items purchased which originated in their state, is this true?
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
I wonder how he intends to enforce such a tax, considering any time your computer recieves data, it could be considered a 'download'.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
if he wants to have tax on bying items such as music. Not fair if he wants to tax bandwidth.
Freedom or George Bush
Tax none of it. That would be fair.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
hackers destroyed the governors computer.
Having lived here all but 1.5 years of my life, I can say this certainly doesn't surprise me. We know we're one of the most taxed populations in the union. We know our state government is corrupt and unethical. In a state that is almost entirely M$ dominated, it shouldn't be surprising the population is ignorant about the nature of the Internet. I'd be surprised if people put up a fight here about it.
Let the State Tax what it wants. It isn't a national law and the people of the state elected these official into office. The people of the state, therefore, think it is a good idea so let that state's people voluntarily pay extra tax to the local government. Taxing downloads will further whittle down the power of the federal government that regulates interstate commerce. If the federal government steps in and says the tax isn't part of the ratification the state accepted then the state could impose a (stupid) use tax. The could also implement a law like the ebay license that eff.org is all over forcing internet users to obtain license to download.
I bet the long run, the result in any of the situations isn't what you would like them to be.
Aside from the fact that any tangible item purchased on the internet is subject to sales tax of some sort, this new proposed law doesn't make alot of sense.
From the article: "That's right: it's voluntary. In a country that can trace its origins in part to a dispute about taxes, does this man really think that people are going to voluntarily pay a tax? And what makes it even funnier is that he thinks people in Wisconsin are going to voluntarily pay."
This new tax on downloaded items would be completely voluntary. How many slashdotters are going to lineup to pay more taxes for items that they already receive for free. Next!
Much to the chagrin of the RIAA and MPAA I can't remember the last time I payed to download something
And, Governor, that sucking noise you hear, are Internet jobs running out of the state!
Linux O Muerte!
I can't remember the last time I *paid* for a download, so I'm not too worried. I think I can handle them taking 5% of my $0.00 payments.
What this country needs is a tax on taxes. You should be compelled to pay a 5% tax on your total tax bill.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
As a cheesehead, I am so embarrassed...
...I can truthfully say, I'm slightly scared by this, but at the same time, I have no idea how they'll enforce this. I caught this little gem in the article:
There would be no Internet sales tax police, however, because compliance would be on the honor system
Right.
Take off every sig. For great justice.
Taxing open-source sortware would violate the GPL
I was going to move to Wisconsin but now I've changed my mind!
If I give something away for FREE in Wisconsin does it get taxed? And for what reason should something be taxed on this basis? What does the Wisconsin state government do to support the e-commerce system?
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
I want that guy thrown off!
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
Why should internet sales be exempt from sales tax?
Just because there's no purely physical end product, that's no reason for it to be exempt of sales tax.
All power to him, I say.
"Nothing can shake my belief that this world is the fruit of a dark god whose shadow I extend." - Emil Michel Cioran
Can you take interstate commerce? They have a case for all those Wisconsin based web businesses... Are there any Wisconsin based download services?
Aston Games
To be blunt, how the fuck does he thing this idea is going to work?
This is a great idea. Governments have been losing out for centuries on knowledge. Taxing downloads is the first step towards the inevitable future of taxing people for each independent thought that enters their mind.
[insert lame joke here]
while software = 0 AND ebooks = 0 AND music = 0 then
tax = 0
end
This is the funniest news I've seen in awhile. You can _choose_ to pay tax on internet downloads.
On a much brighter note, it's proably the only way this sort of tax could even feasibly be implimented.
You know....why do we even try? Tangible, or not...it doesn't matter. Taxing downloads is like taxing air. This is pretty ludicrous. Leave it to politicians though....they'll try to tax underpants next. I'm sure Gnome Lobbyists wll object.
Help me, help you. - Jerry McGuire
Okay, so this is obviously dumb, but I'll go one better. It's also probably unjustifiable and unconstitutional.
The general justification put forth for sales tax is that it's a tax on doing business in the state and using the existing infrastructure of that state so to do. The internet doesn't really do that.
Also, there's a good argument to be made that the Negative Commerce Clause prohibits this kind of action by a state or local government. In essence, Congress gets to regulate interstate commerce, not Wisconsin.
adam b.
The Wisconsin government could theoretically shut down the local computer store, but it does not have the power to shut down out-of-state websites.
If I lived in Wisconson, I would only be even willing to discuss the matter if it only applied to online stores located in Wisconson, not online customers. If someone drives over to where I live, they pay my local and state sales taxes when they buy stuff at a shop located in my community.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
...does he propose to collect it?
Let me guess - by monitoring everyones downloads!
This is about as smart as having a tax on receiving mail (including Junk mail).
Jon
I'm wondering what their defintion of downloading will be, in some senses EVERYTHING coming through your internet connection is downlaoded, should probably RTFA but then where would the ignorant sensationalism come from?
deAngelo
I'm so sick of hearing about the democrat vs. republican debate. This has to do with over-taxing governments, not politics. Mod parent insightful!
I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
That means I get a refund for uploads, right?
FLR
not that I'm saying that this is good, but he does have a point, it is a logical extension of the sales tax.
Great, now who is going to support the democrats if they alienate the slashdot crowd? Judging by the politics coverage, we seem to be about the only hotbed of support left (no pun intended).
Is it just me, or does it seem like the party cuts its own throat almost every three months?
Not to mention the govenor is a dumb ass, does he actually think this will go through and help Wisconsin how? I have a feeling that the tax revenue would be lost by tech companies fleeing to Minnesoata, Michigan, or Illinois (whichever is closer).
And I propose that in WI they make the tax for downloading an article in /. to be at least 8%, so that the money collected can go to preventing duplicate headlines, saving BSD, and building a functional beowulf cluster of tax grubbing moron politicians.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
There would be no Internet sales tax police, however, because compliance would be on the honor system.
In what way would the honor system work? Stores allow customers to pay the tax or not based on their personal preference? Or stores decide whether or not to collect the tax??
I can see it now... "SALE! DON'T PAY THE TAX!"
And we ain't got no money left, aren't we just communists?
Vote Quimby!
So, um, what's 5% of $0?
Cause I dunno about you, but that's what I spend on *my* downloads.
(In all seriousness, this idea is just a tax grab and is incredibly stupid for numerous reasons.)
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
What does he consider downloading? When I 'surf the web' aren't I downloading hundreds of images and text files? Will we all have to have little meters attached to our computers? Or will we have to report back how much we downloaded to the DRS(Download Revenue Service)? Is this guy trying to kill the internet?
I could see something like, if pull off any file that is over 100k the you pay. How long before large files are getting broken up into 99k gzip'ed files?
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Another great idea from the state who thinks is a good idea to shoot cats.
They BOTH suck!
Tax on downloads just doesn't seem that realistic -_-
It's messed that some states are starting to tax merchandise bought online but this is is outright absurd. I wonder what if you're paying for an anti-virus solution and you have to continually download new definitions or some other form of update/upgrade for previously paid for software? Is he saying that you have to pay for *all* downloads or just downloads you're supposed to pay for? what if they downloads are homed, created and purchased from aonther state? That is just stupid!
But, y'know, it probably sounds good to AARP members who can't use a computer - yeah! Tax those no-goodniks using the internet superhighway to do god only knows what! So he'd rather go ahead and push it through and just not enforce it than trash it altogether.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
there is expected to be a sharp upturn in the number of mail drop customers in Northern Illinois.
In the UK, we pay VAT on downloaded "goods" (I'm to taxpert, but I guess they'd be classed as taxable luxury services or something --- at least, Woolworths are running an offer where they pay the VAT on downloads). The tax is paid by the retailer and normally passed on to the consumer.
According to TFA, this is a tax on purchases, not downloads. So if it's free, keep on clicking.
This would only apply to things you pay for...
It won't include free websites, e-mail, free software downloads, etc... just the software you download and pay for.
Plus, this will only affect you if you live in Wisconsin, since states cannot tax interstate commerce.
as a massive effort is undertaken to circumvent the new taxation system.
The summary seems to suggest that all downloads would be subject to tax, like on a per MB basis but it's not that at all.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/mar05/307622.as p
Also, I wonder what costs are accrued to the states involved in internet transactions of this kind that warrant a tax on the transaction. Let's say that sales tax is charged to account for the costs to society of mechanisms of commerce in general. It seems like a download of an e-book incurs fewer such costs, if any.
I guess it's redundant to say that Wisconsin just wants in on that sweet iTunes action.
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
A little-noticed provision of the Democratic governor's proposed state budget would extend the sales tax to those Internet transactions, officials said Monday. There would be no Internet sales tax police, however, because compliance would be on the honor system.
Voluntary tax sounds similar to a voluntary catheter insertion.
I'm a big tall mofo.
Proxy services labeled as tax evasion tools, branded unconstitutional, and shutdown. Serverless proxies like Tor and I2P take off, become new targets from the government alongside of BitTorrent, Kazaa, etc.
Thank you for loading this page to view the comments. Please send $1.00 to the Wisconsin Tax office for your GET request, which now applies under the new downloading law.
Thank You.
-The Wisconsin "We make the laws, you pay for them" Government
In a way, it makes sense. Downloadable items are goods if they're purchased, and so it makes logical sense to charge sales tax regardless of whether something is actual or virtual.
I'd love to witness the mental gymnastics required to tax something purchased within Everquest though.
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
The way I can see it, I think that one day or another, the Internet WILL be taxed as it becomes more of our way of life, just like everything else in our way of life is pretty much taxed.
Oh, and at least the US doesn't have a federal service tax. Yay for 14% tax on all sales where I live! (BC, Canada) I wouldn't want to know how much havoc this would run with the Internet junkies here.
When you need great justice, take off every zig.
This reminds me of the great cheese-tax proposal of 1892. If the people didn't go for that then, they sure won't go for Internet tax now. Dairy Farmers United!
In all seriousness though, is this not just another use-tax case? How do they expect enforce that when states already have a hard time taxing physical goods bought over the Internet?
How do you place a tax on something that is free (oo.org anyone)??? Point being that it would be really hard to determine what is being downloaded (especially if you use encryption) in order to tax it.
Not gonna be feasable without breaking a few laws to do it (intercepting communications that have a reasonable assumption of privacy without a warrent ???? maybe) Circumventing encryption (dcma i think) or I could just be full of shite
Stop signs are only Suggestions
As a cheezer myself, there ain't no way I'm paying more tax to this gov't.
While the while "voluntary" part of the bill seems to be quite silly, it is an insideous attempt to give an "internet tax" a legal foothold.
It is difficult to implement a mandatory tax from scratch. It is much easier to take an existing "voluntary" tax and make it mandatory.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
One way they could find a way to stick it to the man would be to impose an additional State Tax to people who are subscribed to an ISP. They could just charge 5% extra to your bill from your ISP, and call it a "flat download fee."
But as far as expecting people to PAY FREELY a download tax - this guy should be laughed out of office.
It's a voluntary tax. Yeah, this is a brilliant idea.
ahh, wisconsin. where men are men, and sheep are scared
You get a funny, but it would solve a lot of problems. It would also move the internet from a "free for all", to an "on demand" system. Use it more? Pay more. Use it less? Pay less. Be incredibly wasteful with your resources? Pay out the nose. It might even cut down on a lot of "Me too" posts on the internet. And indirectly cut down on the amount of spam as well.
I'm wondering how they'll keep track of this. I just read how New Jersey residents were sent back tax bills for online cigarette purchases. So I could see, if this passed, downloaders getting back tax bills for ignoring the new sales tax.
What happens when a Wisconsin resident has an out of state friend purchase mp3's, software, etc. and then just emails them (or mail them on a CD)? How could you possibly keep track of all of the shareware authors? Does this governor think he'll be attracting IT jobs? I'm guessing he's one of the folks that still thinks the US government is going to add a charge for emails to save the USPS.
I hope this line of thinking doesn't spread to other states. This seems like a creative way to ruin legal mp3 downloads in that state.
Tech News, Reviews and Tutorials
the guv'nor must be thinking 'hmmm, these people *voluntarily* pay a tax to Microsoft, and get very little in return--i'd like to get in on that racket!
Great idea FOR ME TO POOP ON!
I am a DC resident and I sell my software online, both through an ESD and more directly. I asked the DC finance people about whether I need to charge sales tax to DC residents for the downloads, and they said "Yes." Since I was under the impression the sales tax didn't apply to intangible goods, I asked them for the legal basis for that claim, and, strangely, never heard back from them.
Anyway, just to be safe, I just don't sell directly to DC residents. If I find that a DC resident tried to buy my software directly (strangely, it hasn't happened yet), I will just refund him his money and tell him he's got the software for free. This way, I don't need to navigate the DC beaurocracy, and the losses will be minimal.
I actually am a republican, and I would have said the same thing had it been a republican. Everyone knows that democrats are tax and spenders, I just didn't want it to be a part of the important discussion of how serious this internet tax is.
I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
For those of you who think otherwise, most states already require you pay sales tax for items purchased over the internet. This is actually called a "use tax" because you pay it directly to the state. However, I've never heard of one individual actually paying a use tax. Wisconsin's governor is simply proposing that this use tax also extend to downloads. Now, personally I think it's a dumb idea and will never work, because what do you define as a download then? /. tax?
Why not tax talking?
What about taxing downloading between two computers on a LAN?
What is considered "downloading"? Technically one router on the internet is downloading data from another router, all the time. Is that going to be taxed?
I thought you were taxed for online purchases from in-state businesses already, regardless of what it is.
sup
Kiss my Wisconsin ASS!! Seems our state isn't doing too well as it is with our high unemployment rate and other economic factors and you want to come along and tax us hard working farmers. You should rot in hell for this. Start working on get my neighbors jobs and training and stop worrying about trying to take more money from the working man.
most music and software downloaders already pay a tax...in Canada we call it the Microsoft tax.
Taxes on physical goods pay for state cost of services to provide those goods (roads, cleaning pollution from manufacture, law enforcement so those goods are not stolen, etc, etc) .
So, what state infrastructure does a internet download tax cover? It's an honest question I'm trying to think through. Maybe phone lines, but then what if you have a satellite download?
Help anyone? As I understand it, the government is not in it to make a profit, but to pay for the costs of services that can not be tied to any one individual...
Let's see, automated downloads of Mozilla nightly build, $0. jEdit application download, $0. jEdit plugin installation, 12 time $0 equals $0. Download Skype client for evaluation purposes, $0.
Subtotal, $0. Tax, 5% of $0 equals $0.
Amount contributed to state coffers, $0.
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
--
Evan "Maybe I missed a new editor popping up, darn 'reading by RSS' habit"
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Having RTFA and the FA which the FA referred to, I still can't really figure this out. 5% of free is still free, so who cares? Let them charge a 5000% tax it makes them feel better...
...tax of a download costing $0.00 comes out to... $0.00. Sounds fair enough.
It's _also_ stupid because it's obvious double taxation:
1) You pay a company for broadband, and you pay the gov't taxes for that
2) You pay the gov't for the only use of broadband
'Creative' taxes are dumb. This coming from a state (MN) where the governor is all about 'creative' taxing.
From the article:
A little-noticed provision of the Democratic governor's proposed state budget would extend the sales tax to those Internet transactions, officials said Monday.
Wouldn't it mean that they intend to tax commercial transactions? i.e., downloads related to products sold, not p2p? To know, we would have to check the exact wording used in the government's document...
If it is this, it may not be enforceable, but it may not be absurd either... I believe another issue here could be dual taxing...
I'm not so sure the person who wrote the linked article really got the point...
tsia
Display some adaptability.
So how does he propose to tax Linux? After all, Linux is a free download...oh no wait, I forgot the $699 licensing fee.
Interesting that Wisconsin's neighbor, Minnesota, is the home state of Digital River, one of the largest eTailers of digital download software, which also owns Regnow and Regsoft
There is little chance this dude is gonna get re elected this time around...He has managed to piss of a large percentage of the state and this will put the final nail in the coffin....He is a frigging MS sellout anyhow..
Tangible items versus Intangibles!?!?!?!?!?! Hey Gov, Life AIN'T fair! Deal with it. Seriously, where do these stupid money-grubbing politicians come from?
I wonder if they will let me pay with all those marijuana tax stamps I bought.
what does it cost the state for me download software from say europe and if I live in wisconsin - nothing
I pay for the access and computers - there is no cost to the state - why charge taxes?
Stores charge taxes because they actually take up
land. There is no capital investment by the state that they have to make up for by charging taxes.
So I really don't understand why any local city or state should do this. It will just create more dollars for lawyers in sueing people and procsecution for tax evation. Oh - now I get it - nevermind.
I live in Washington state, and I paid tax on iTunes and MSN Music purchases. That was billed directly by the vendor, too.
seems to me you can only apply the tax to something with a monnetery value
depends what you download I guess itunes you can hit that with sales tax but the big legal and free linux distro they can tax 5% of nothing.
guess when election time comes he will be out of a job
political suicide i think its called
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
there are a couple of problems. One of them stems from the idea legistater in the US has that it can control the global Internet. The second is the idea that a state's residents need to be taxdc on every kind of purchase no matter where it comes from. Next thing you know you'll have to assess taxes paid on things you bought on vacation in (insert a place you don't live here). States (and federal for that matter) need to work on streamlining their expenses rather that finding more revenue.
Power to the Penguin!
I doubt this will ever get passed because the reality is one governor doesn't make the laws. It requires their state legislator which hopefully has a bit more brains. Then again if it is passed at least its not in a state that I live in. Also its worth mentioning that the reason this stuff isn't taxed most likely has something to do with the products being routines on a computer system and not actual physical objects... Maybe they need to think up some rules and procedures to decide what constitutes a taxable item.
This is the way you get taxation on the net though. "It's just a voluntary tax so it affects very few and you really could skip it." Pretty soon, they pass a law saying it is now not-voluntary. (No problem, how would they ever know...) Then a law comes which says if you do business in the state of WI you must collect sales tax on any sales. Then another law comes which requires any merchant doing business in WI over the net to submit records of those who purchased products/downloads,etc. This is what is happening in a few state with regard to taxation on the sale of cigarettes. What was happening is that citizens were not paying the local state tax on cigarettes and now are facing large bills in the thousands on PAST purchases.
Quality Hosting e3 Servers
Go check your bill for broadband or dial up...there are taxes and fees on the internet.
This lazy sloppy government greed!
Governments raise money to spend on roads, schools, and police with taxes. The money comes from somewhere; if you want those things you've got to pay for them. You may well be spending too much for what you're getting, but that's a separate issue.
The question here is, what do you tax? It's easiest to raise money by taking a piece of the money every time it moves. Tax the money when it gets paid to you. Tax them money when you pay for something.
You can also tax the stuff that doesn't move, like the property taxes on your house. Or you can "tax" for use: toll roads, for exampe. But nobody wants to pay for police on an as-needed basis, and we like the idea that everybody is guaranteed an education, even if they can't afford to pay for it.
The article is suggesting that there are sales happening that aren't being taxes. Most states already try to collect taxes on physical objects, even if they're sold over the Internet, though the rules vary from state to state. They're trying to both increase revenue and be fair. The states really hate it when people buy stuff over the Internet, because that means that the money is being sent to another state; not only do they lose tax revenue but it means in-state businesses suffer.
If you believe that they can tax stuff when it's sold, why not tax nontangible items? They already tax services; in most states you pay tax when the guy fixes your refrigerator.
It doesn't sound like an "internet" tax to me. They're just trying to make sure that the Internet isn't any different a place to make sales than local stores are.
5% state sales tax apply to Internet downloads.
So 5% of free is what again?So he wants to tax downloadables? Fine, then shift the cost to untaxed fees. For iTunes, make it 1 cent for the song, plus 99 cents for an (untaxable) delivery fee.
Try again, gov.
"You're never ready, just less unprepared."
States shouldn't try a radical move like this. This is something that really needs to be done nationally during the overhaul of the tax code when considering the possibility of a country-wide sales tax.
None of the examples you give are priveleges granted by the government. People have certain unalienable rights which Government ostensibly exists in order to preserve and protect, and if necessary extend to those less fortunate.
Not to reply to my own submission, but why the hell are you guys arguing in my post when all I did was point out from the article that this tax is voluntary?
That's just cheesy.
Make love, not reality television.
What a fagot. I hope other Democrats aren't as stupid as he is.
Its a sales tax, meaning that some form of sale had to have occurred.
There is another sort of sale which is also generally exempt. Catalog sales are unusally untaxable unless the vendor has a physical branch in the state. Why should internet downloads be treated diffently.
Of couse one can argue that they are actually being treated the same, many states also expect their citizens to volunatrly report and pay sales tax on catalog items as well. It doesn't work so well since there is really no way to enforce the tax.
That is really my problem with all such proposals. On one hand I think an internet tax could be somewhat good for the community, there is no better way to get govement support then to give them a piece of the action. I supect DCMA and the like would have come out diffently if the govemental pocketbook had been weighted the same way the public interst was.
On the other hand passing an unenforcable law is simply foolish. Every law that can be ignored with impunity throws all others in to suspicion. One also wonders how we could possibly need a law to govern something that cannot even be tracked.
Prehaps insted of downloaded sales they should simply consider a small tax on datastreams in general. It would at least be trackable, and might result in WI encouraging file swapping to get those taxes up (kidding!)
"This year's $170 million package includes proposals to levy sales taxes on software that is purchased on the Internet instead of bought on a computer disk"
a rt icles/2005/03/02/romney_rethinking_new_powers_for_ tax_aide?pg=2
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/
Yes, YANAL. Stop trying to sound like one.
Step 1: Read latest slashdot article - $.50.
Step 2: Post comments about how lame article is - $.50.
Step 3: Refresh to see comment posted - $.50.
Step 4: Post another comment flaming whoever modded you down - $.50.
Step 5: Refresh to see flame posted - $.50.
Step 6: Realize that you just spent $2.50 to make your opinion heard - $0.
Step 7: Whine aloud about free speech implications. - $0.
Step 8: Move to another state. Priceless.
I was in the park the other day wondering why frisbees get bigger and bigger the closer they get - and then it hit me.
and in effect on the date of enactment of this Act
I read this clause as protecting any state or local law pertaining to taxation that is
A) Otherwise permissible by or under the Constitution or other Federal Law
AND
B) In effect on the date of enactment of [the ITFA].
Ergo, new state and local laws taxing the internet are not necessarily protected.
But, IANAL either (surprise surprise).
...text messages too. You know, text messages from cell phones that costs 25 cents.
By the way, I think it's a bad idea. Communication/information, since it's intangible, shouldn't be taxed.
That is all. -j, who is constructive with his comments.
If it were a Republican, it would have been "Evil Republican Wants to Tax Internet Downloads", but since it's a Democrat that is proposing this moronic bit of legislation,Slashdotters now say, "well the party doesn't really matter, let's just think of it as the Government wanting to tax downloads".
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
The problem with these moronic politicians is they have no real concept of how the internet works. They can't tax a freaking download, it isn't their bandwidth, it's not their equipment, etc. It makes sense to pay taxes to live here. It doesn't make sense to pay a toll on something they have no real control over.
Hrmm!
One, two, (one, two, three, four!)
Let me tell you how it will be;
There's one for you, nineteen for me.
'Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman.
Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don't take it all.
'Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman.
(if you drive a car, car;) - I'll tax the street;
(if you try to sit, sit;) - I'll tax your seat;
(if you get too cold, cold;) - I'll tax the heat;
(if you take a walk, walk;) - I'll tax your feet.
Taxman!
'Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman.
Don't ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson)
If you don't want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath)
'Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman.
Now my advice for those who die, (taxman)
Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman)
'Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman.
And you're working for no one but me.
Taxman!
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
Tax on free Linux distro: Zero dollars.
Tax on books from Project Gutenberg: Zero dollars.
Tax on freeware programs: Zero dollars.
Tax on files downloaded from p2p networks: Zero dollars.
Telling the governor of Wisconsin to kiss my ass: Priceless.
Insert witty sig here.
I buy a CD on iTunes. I live in Wisconsin. Therefore, I am depriving the state of tax revenue. It's fair that the state ask for the same sales tax it would otherwise...I really don't get these moratoria, all the do is deprive states of tax revenue they could use for good...
Gosh, is that man insane? The Internet belongs to nobody and everybody, and he's going to tax it?
I thought in Holland we the politicians were out of their minds, but this.....
How in the world can you track that? It doesn't take much to "off-shore" one's identity to a neighboring state or other silly e-tax evading tactics. If they want revenue, they should tax stupidity. I suppose their state government is a tax shelter for that.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
It's not fair that taxes are applied to a CD, but not applied to an iTunes download. Solution:
Repeal the tax on the CD and cut government spending.
A similar technique will solve all other cases of taxation that aren't fair.
A real money maker that one is...
Feeling giped that the 1-900 lady wouldnt perform FS on him, Senator potatoe proposed a tax on phone calls and illegal prostitution.
Thanks a lot.... jackasses!
Heh, I wonder how the state's going to keep track of how many downloads were done, what site, etc.?
I hope people like that Wisconsin governor won't ever propose something even remotely similar to that stupid proposal...
Hey, Indiana's in debt, but we haven't and won't propose a tax on internet downloads...
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Bugs are good for building character in the user.
Having seen how poorly worded most Internet-related legislation is, how will they define "downloads?"
The article doesn't say, and obviously it is intended to apply to music files, but what does that include? How would it differntiate between per-download pricing and those sites that offer unlimited downloads w/ a monthly subscription?
And taking another example, I do genealogy research as a hobby and occasionaly rely on some pay-sites for things like Census records and other historical documents. Would I be taxed for those as well?
The fact that it is "voluntary" and there is no enforcement mechanism make the law toothless, but I would be interested to know if the actual proposal addresses any of these issues.
So now i have to pay tax on my porn?
I'm from Wisconsin, and this issue makes me angry! Governor Doyle is the classic tax-and-spend liberal, and he claims to be fiscally responsible (he has a tax "freeze" proposal that he's currently hawking), but yet he turns right around and proposes new taxes on things!
:)
He is desperately searching for others sources of revenue, since the legislation in our state (controlled by the Republicans, but not enough to override a veto) is forcing him to address ways of lowering the taxpayer's burden. Unless, of course, Doyle doesn't want to get re-elected.
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
They're called GST and CRTC. I don't know in the USA, but for all telecommunications, be it cell phone, phoneline, cable, dish, CB, smoke signals, except for dial-up internet, we pay 6$ on the bill for the right to use electronic communications.
printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
-- myself
Only Democrats.
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Bugs are good for building character in the user.
Let's get a petition together to impose a 100% state income tax on any governors in office
Two words: flat tax. Stop picking this item and that item and keep it simple...
One man's Funny is another man's Offtopic.
If a majority of downloads originate from outside Wisconsin, then wouldn't this tax would be unconstitutional?
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Translation: "Slashdot is perfectly okay with bashing Republicans at every possible opportunity and modding down conservative posts. But in this case, it's a Democrat being stupid, so let's suddenly be non-political and not bash Democrats."
Geez....why can't the legislatures see we're freaking taxed ENOUGH.
You're a wage earner. You will never be taxed enough. Each dollar that the government seizes is one that it can spend on buying votes rather than you spending it on your "selfish whims" (you know, like feeding your family). Votes are for sale, and the means to buy them are government programs. Votes are the key to power. If you're a politician, then why don't you take someone's money and buy some? If the victim isn't going to vote for you anyway, then you've got nothing to lose!
Both Democrats and Republicans play this hideous game. The ultimate long-term goal is to move 100% of the tax burden to a minority of citizens. That way, every tax increase will be immune from voter resistance. One side will be able to say to 51% of the electorate, "Vote for the other guy and he'll make you pay taxes!"
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
How can a grown man, let alone one with the wherewithal to get elected to the highest post in the state, be childish enough to worry about what is "fair?" Anyone old enough to wipe their own behind should know that life isn't fair. Anyone who doesn't understand this fact by the time they're grown shouldn't be put in charge of anything, let alone a state's executive branch.
Is the democratic party in Wisconsin that pathetic, or is it just that this guy is a total nimrod?
The purpose of taxation is to support the government and to allow it to provide the services that it either must provide, or is better at providing than the private sector would be.
Taxation is not and should never be an experiment in "social justice," which is exactly what arguments about fairness make this proposal look like. Taxation hurts the economy because it devalues people's money. So while taxation is a necessary evil, it should be kept to a minimum. The best way to do this it to limit what the government does so as to limit the resources it requires. Arbitrarily seeking out new sources of tax revenue for the sake of taxation itself if foolish and destructive.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
That the only time politicians are worried about fairness in taxation is when somebody isn't getting taxed? I could just as easily say, "it's not fair that people get taxed on tangible goods but not on intangible goods. Therefore I propose we get rid of the unfair tax on tangible goods." That is just as fair, right?
He doesn't give a damn about "fair". He just wants the state government to get another slice of pie.
On the other hand, I suppose the states have to pretty weary of unfunded mandates (e.g. No Child Gets Ahead) from Los Federales, so I can (almost) understand.
Lets see 5% of $0.00 is .....
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
If they're not putting the DMCA into effect (it was passed under Clinton), they're suggesting taxing the internet.
Anything to cater to special interests to get more votes. Anyone see Bill Clinton hanging out with Bush, Sr. all the time now? It's a ploy to make Hillary Clinton seem more centrist by associating Bush with Clinton. It won't work, but it's amusing nonetheless.
Under the Kyoto Accord, he's going to charge everyone 5 cents every time they fart.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
If you live in the state that's the same as the store you're buying from don't you pay already? In Washington I believe I pay tax when I buy from amazon.com.
Also, if it does end up being that you pay the tax for the state the store is in, do people from OR (or other states w/o sales tax) get that tax refunded??
I've already posted about this on a posting at my site.
Essentially, this is nothing more than publicly stating what is already the law in most states
Host somewhere else...
Unfortunately, most of the centrists and non-extremists now occupy the Republican party. The Iraq war polarized the political field and turned a lot of people in the Democratic party into reactionary extremists. So we get comments like "Taliban wing" or "I hate Republicans" (that one's care of Dean).
I'm shocked they're trying to run Hillary in '08. Bill is seen as centrist, but Hillary is very polarizing and seen as hard-left, no matter how much she tries to change that image.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I see anti-Republican and anti-Bush posts modded up ALL THE TIME. Someone criticizes Democrats, and instant -1.
When Democrats are being viewed in a negative way... its "Oh, please, lets be bipartisan".
But when a Republican does something? Look out! Its the liberal lyrical lynch-mob of slashdot goons spewing hate.
Just condemn the Democrat in this article and "move on".
OK, say I download a 1MB file. 5% of 1MB is 51.2KB. So I have to pay about 52KB in tax. Now, how do I pay it? Do I upload 52KB of data somewhere, or do I have to download an extra 52KB of data, presumably to increase my bandwidth cost? I'm assuming this 52KB has to be pure random bits, otherwise it wouldn't really be a full 52KB "worth" of data, and you don't want to cheat the IRS.
I'll have this figured out eventually...
Are we really going to start taxing information?
Tax the Internet. Yeah, that'll work. Let's hear it for liberals.
Yeah! Better to be a repugnican, lie relentlessly to the people, start bogus wars that kills tens of thousands of innocent people and bomb the fuck out of everything in the name of oil, tax the poor out of existence, give more wealth to the rich and squander the future.
By the way, dumb-ass, where do you think the BILLIONS of dollars are coming form to finance this unjust war and enrich the arms manufacturers?- your taxes dumbass.
I can't believe that brainless knuckle dragging morons like you exist. Then again, in breeding seems to be all the rage among your kind.
Imagine trying to track every download, of every person, for a whole state. As it is, the Recording Industry Ass. of America can't really get a handle on what they consider to be illegal downloading, and they have a lot more power than that state. Really, this is a hopeless cause, if you ask me.
Windows has detected an undetectable error.
Stacie Rosenzweig's take on The Vast Dairy State Conspiracy
Journal-Sentinal
This guy, too.
-- haaz.
I hope the parent is moderated up as far as possible, but I am depressed to think that someone thinks of it as funny.
You are conveniently omitting the costs of the Greater Middle East Initiatives (i.e. wars), as is the budget proposed by Bush. Federal spending is not frozen; "defense" spending is skyrocketing.
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
I think alot of the world's problems would be solved if everyone was taxed 100% on everything.
(Flamebait...maybe, Peronal Opinion...Definatly) /.)
That's the most rediculous thing I have read as of yet. (And I read a lot of
All I have to say is that I'm glad I'm Canadian.
Tax the internet for downloads?
"You downloaded a gig of (music,movies,porn,etc), time to pay up on your taxes?"
What's next?
If the purchase price is $0, the tax is zero
Wrong, oh optimistic one! The state government could easily follow the RIAA's lead and assess 5% of full market value for sharing music files. The only exempt downloads would be ones that are offered for free.
Like any digital compensation piggyback (taxes, filters, hosting responsibilities), this is ignorance in print.
When the simplified view of "two computers talking" is the picture of someone's internet, it seems easy and this shite arises. But proxies, caches, distributed content are the mainstay. AOL, Earthlink both cache content. Most commercial pages are a built in some part of linked content. Vendors that sell have HQ , hosting, order processing and customer services all in different locations, and often in different countries. Who's going to regulate that? If you squeeze it, it goes to puppet offices in tax haven zones, like online casinos.
Adding to this that digitial information is impossible to fully categorize. For public-at-large transactions, we have standards, but as the FBI found out, to sniff out packets that are encrypted in several layers (or watermarked) is a big endeavor, and has no guarantees.
Digital information can be tracked, sure. So if the medium is public and needs sort sort of "market share" for effectiveness, you can trace participants. Hence the [MP|RI]AA nonsense. But for simply swapping music online through clubs or private protocols, the door is wide open. Host your music in unshown,encrypted TIFF layers, for a starting concept. The game is still afoot, to me.
Remember folks, the information wants to be free. So like water, the longer it exists in that format, the more it's going to leak/spill out to places it wasn't originally intended. So the credit information streaming out to eastern europe each week later is more a matter of time than security, IMO. Of course, we know that's what security is measured in anyway.
But you are the choir. How do we get WI politicos to read this thread?
I will happily give the state 5% of the price of my next apt-get dist-upgrade. Shoot, I'll be generous and make it 10% or even 20%.
Both Democrats and Republicans play this hideous game. The ultimate long-term goal is to move 100% of the tax burden to a minority of citizens. That way, every tax increase will be immune from voter resistance. One side will be able to say to 51% of the electorate, "Vote for the other guy and he'll make you pay taxes!"
1% of the population already pays 33% of federal income taxes. Any across-the-board tax cut is met with cries of "33% of the tax cut goes to the richest 1%! Evil tax cuts for the wealthy!". What a system.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
It is not a tax on downloads. It is a tax on purchases that are downloaded. It is no different than the states trying to collect a sales tax for online purchases.
If Wisconsin is proposing to tax online downloads, then the state is recognizing all downloads as legitimate activities, right? The government doesn't go around taxing drug dealers for the drugs they sell, does it?
GA used to ahve an intangible tax. Its principal target was stock portfolios. You were taxed on the value of your savings.
I never, ever, paid a penny of it. Damned if I was going to pay on my savings as well as on interest and doubly-taxed dividends.
Eventually he tax was repealed. So many people refused to pay, the state government simply gave up on trying to collect it.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
That "art park" in Chicago, which was built with aproximately 50% PRIVATE money, is now a world-class atraction for residents and tourists alike, Most of the "publicaly financed" portion was paid for with bonds against future revenues on the new parking garage that was built underneath the park.
Make people write a check so they can see how much they are actually taxed. Everything will then fall into place.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
hmmm....let's see now.
.0825 sales tax rate = $0
$0 paid multiplied by
Should I cut a check for that amount to my state's comptrollers office?
Wisconsin is the armpit of the technology world, I know... I live here! Why would we be the first ones to pick this up? I think it's time to write my representative... I'll send it via cow-mail so he actually reads it.
-----
Make Love not [Browser] War!
Oh, yes, I can see how it's a fairness issue. It has nothing to do with a state budget issue. It's completely about fairness.
Say, we should find the highest sales tax in the country and raise the rest of the country's sales tax to that level too. It's only fair.
I agree with this. However, when Bush proposes any small cuts those effected by the cuts squeal like a stuck pig, no matter how modest the cut.
The problem is all of us, collectively. We don't want our pet program cut. We want all the others cut. So when we all get together, it's "don't cut mine if I don't cut yours."
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
The article does not mention that the Governor of Wisconsin has been asked to resign over those latest statements he had made. He certainly does not understand as much about technology as he should.
I wonder if this governor realized that when you browse the internet you download the pictures, text and whatever advertisement (or virii for that matter) you happen to stumble onto. Did this governor understand how the internet works? If that passes, that will have to be submitted to the dumb laws websites, but of course Wisconsin viewers will have to pay taxes to see that.
[!] No, I can't see my comments. They are not worthy of +3 moderation.
I should mention that the richest 1% in 2001 made 17% of all income. So their "fair share" would be 17%, not 33%.
A system in which the majority says "we'll tax that minority more but not impose the same tax on ourselves" is quite simply immoral.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
"Wisconsin's Democratic governor thinks it's not fair that tangible items get taxed while downloads, like music, ebooks, software, etc., go completely untaxed."
Typical Democrat logic: It's not fair that only some people are getting reamed out (by us) with broom handles, so let's make sure to shove broom handles up into everybody else. Then everything will be fair.
No wonder the party logo is a jackass.
Besides, taxing interstate transactions is illegal under the "Commerce Clause" of the US Constitution (3) so it'll most likely be placed in within the State "use tax" category which has been very difficult in the past to enforce.
Putting aside the fairness issue taxing ultra low dollar electronic purchases IMO just isn't worth it.
(While many states currently do require a State issued drug tax stamp, because of marijuana's current status as illegal under prohibition few people actually purchase them. The "drug tax stamp" law is most commonly used to add the extra charge of tax evasion to a drug dealer and squeeze him for a little extra money and jail time.)
1. Marijuana prohibition facts
2. Thinking about Drug Legalization
3. Interstate Taxation and the Commerce Clause
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
And my FREE software downloads would cost: 0 x 0.05 = 0 and purchases of MICROSOFT downloads: $$$ x 0.05 = $$$
Paying sales tax on every icon, for example. And as each story and reply is arguably a seperate copyrighted "book"...
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
always Democrats pulling this stuff? I mean really what are they gonna do out a box on your connection that monitors everything so some NEW goverment department can decide whats a taxable download and whats not?
Are theyu going after out of state mail order companies as well? What if I get some of my ISP services from out of state?
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
you're asking "When was the last time that the 'Republicans' topic or the 'Democrats' topic was at the front page?", they you can do a search for it.
If you're asking "When was the last time I saw it.", then I can't help you without the history files from your browser.
BTW. Where's my cellphone?
can i tax them for: viewing my website can i tax them for: looking at my popups? can i tax them for: downloading my email from their server? can i tax them for: sending me an email? can i tax them for: reading my words on slashdot? can i tax them for: receiving my bits of bytes of information directly at their server? can i tax them for: their voip traffic going across my network? shit, i'd be rich if i could! look out bill here i come!
You still have a Legislature that has to approve his budget for the year - you can't dump all the blame off on him.
A legislature which happens to be completely controlled by a republican party which, due to circumstances of the moment, follow and support every single decision of the bush administration without question.
How convenient.
Also, it's false that anyone who voted for Bush supports "don't tax and spend (and spend and spend and spend)" - people vote (or not vote) for candidates for any variety of reasons.
If unconditionally re-electing someone who demonstrates fiscal irresponsibility is not support for fiscal irresponsibility, then what is?
It doesn't matter if that was the individual voter's "swing issue". They voted for it.
I am continually perplexed by the extent to which people defending the Bush administration jump through bizarre hoops to prevent anyone taking any sort of blame or even responsibility for that administration's actions. If the president is not responsible for the budget when he has complete sway over congress, who is? If the people who voted that president into power knowing full well what he would do with it are not responsible for or "supporting" him, what do those words even mean?
There was one specific time at which the president's desk had on it a plaque saying "the buck stops here". The Bush Administration and its defenders, despite having no credible opposition or oversight for their actions either in congress or the media and a complete control of the agenda of the Republican party, seem to disclaim either that the buck at any point passed through their hands or even that they have a clear idea what, if they saw it, the buck would look like.
I'd agree George W. Bush himself is of course not personally responsible for any of this, since it seems to me most of the time frankly that almost none of the decisions in this administration are made or possibly even entirely understood by him, but the fact is it is his job to oversee and take responsibility for the members of his administration and the legislation he signs into being. He's the president of the united states of america. If he isn't doing this he isn't doing his job.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Thanks largley to tax-sheltered government bonds - the kind of income that Bush's tax cuts had no effect on. You see, when politicians talk about tax increases, they usually mean tax increases for you, not them. They can afford to hire expensive tax attorneys who are familiar with tax law minutiae and can then advise them where to stash their mountains of cash so the IRS can't touch most of it. Eliminate income tax and create a consumption tax. That is the only way to make every person pay their fair share. The more you consume, the more tax you pay.
From drudgereport.com:
Heinz Kerry Paid Lower Tax Rate Than Most Taxpayers
Mon Oct 18 2004 10:20:34 ET
The Kerry campaign finally released Teresa Heinz Kerry's 2003 tax return, or rather two pages of it, late last Friday, the WALL STREET JOURNAL details.
"We think she ought to release the rest of her return, since her wealth was crucial to salvaging her husband's struggling campaign during the Democratic primaries in 2003."
"But even this minimal disclosure deserves more attention in light of John Kerry's pledge to raise tax rates. In 2003, Mrs. Kerry -- or Teresa Heinz, as she declared herself on her IRS 1040 form -- earned $5.07 million, hardly a surprising income for someone estimated to be worth nearly $1 billion.
"The news is that $2.78 million of that income came in the form of tax- exempt interest from what the Kerry campaign's press release attributed to investments in 'state, municipal and public entity bonds.' What the campaign didn't say is that these are the kind of investments that rich people can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to steer their money into."
On her "remaining 'taxable' income of $2.29 million, Mrs. Kerry paid $627,150 in taxes, for an overall average federal tax rate of only 12.4% on her $5.07 million in total income." This "puts Mrs. Kerry's tax rate at well below that of other filers in her super-rich neighborhood. But it also means she is paying a lower average rate than nearly all middle- class taxpayers paid in 2001, the last year for which the IRS has published the data.
The top 50% of all federal filers contributed 96.1% of all federal income taxes in 2001, and they paid an average income-tax rate of 15.9%. That's 3.5-percentage points more than Mrs. Kerry paid in 2003." At the "very least, Mrs. Kerry's tax returns are a screaming illustration of the need for reform to make the tax code simpler and fairer. But they also show that Senator Kerry's proposed tax increases are much more about a revenue grab than they are about tax justice."
That you do not live in the EU. They would see your taxes and wonder what you are complaining about.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Were one of the most highly taxed states already. It's definately time to move. South Carolina is nice this time of year.
It is still very, very addictive and the gateway to other hard drugs like crack and heroin with just one "hit". Do you really think the US needs a nation of drug addicts? Look at the disaster marijuana created in the Netherlands. Soft marijuana laws have created crack and heroin junkies everywhere, large amounts of prostitution, the spread of HIV and an epidemic of robberies. And it causes thousands of cases of lung cancer every year worldwide. Get the facts before making a suggestion that would enslave our children to this menace.
All those nice little "fees" and taxes on your phone and utility bills can and do add a nice chunk to the total amount you pay every month.
Just imagine a Packers fan with a block of foam shaped like a wedge of Cheese on his head, freezing his ass off drinking a Lienenkugle and prattling on and on about how bad people from Chicago drive.
Now add this to his whining:
"Damn FIBs, they prolly started the Intranet down there, didn't they? Well, we shouldn't encourage more FIB bullshit from coming into our state. Let's tax the shit out of it and get back to watching football!"
That was probably how their governor got his bright idea. Pay it no mind.
for the Iraq war!
Free Firefox news reader.
Ok this has to be the most dumbest law to ever come out of the cheese state. For one thing that I see the problem would be who would pay the tax that ISP or the user? The second this that I see its not seen as a fair use item in any fee on the net. I also see that the law is too broad and has too much of broad topic with possibilities of violating fair business practice causing a drop in the economy. All I can say is Dumbass.
If this is such a hot news item, why does Apple already collect tax from me for every song I download (well, excluding the free pepsi ones at least)? They charged me for the audiobook I got as well. Maybe this is, lets make a law, that says we can officially do what we already do, just to be safe?
Votes are the key to power. If you're a politician, then why don't you take someone's money and buy some?
Congradulations, you've discovered the reason democracies over history eventually fail; the proletariat discover they can vote themselves "free" benefits from the public coffers and get into a greedy spiral until the system explodes.
Colorado's legislature is not permitted to spend more than it earns - except in times of emergency. It still doesn't keep them from running a deficit, but when the bad times hit after the dot com bubble - they were more fortunate than states like Kalifornia.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
The way most downloads you have to pay for work, you technically haven't bought a product. You've bought a service. Downloaded songs? You don't own your copy - you own the right to play the copy that you have stored but don't own. Software? You don't own the software, you just bought the right to use the copy of it you downloaded but don't own.
You should never, ever pay a "sales tax" on a DRMed download becuase you haven't actually really bought a product - you've bought a service, and those don't get taxed as sales tax.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Then its a service fee to access their servers, not a "payment for goods".
No sig for you!!
It's technically just a bunch of 1's and 0's. It's not really a book or a song. :-)
he can have 5% of 0 anytime he wants. whoever heard of paying for WAR3Z?
'Nuff Said
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Sounds like how Internet cigarette purchase taxes were handled in New York. It was supposed to be on the honor system, and then one day the state and city got a hold of the sales records.
This lays the groundwork for that state's citizens to get royally screwed in the future! The frog is in the cold water and someone has just lit the match.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I love that thinking: it is unfair that tangible items get taxed, ergo we should tax intangible items FOR FAIRNESS. Why not abandon tangible goods taxes? Isn't that equally fair?
To be honest, I'm in favour of consumption taxes and I think they can be higher than they are and ought be universal but only on condition that income tax be eliminated for all time! Think of the benefits: no more confusing income tax laws, no more tax evasion (you consume, you pay).
True, prices will rise to compensate and there will be trade effects but all of those can be corrected for through various measures. For example, savings will be larger. Its easier, its fairer and more efficient. It is also easier to implement general fairness. Essentialls can be taxed at a lower rate than luxuries. Instead of discriminating based on income, you diferentiate based on purchase preferences and needs. Income tax was supposedly a temporary (wartime) measure. Its long term implications were never properly evaluated and it is the wrong way for governments to go about collecting revenue.
I'm not really sure about Wisconsin, but I don't think it's anywhere near being an important part of the growing Internet culture/business/what-have-you. Doesn't this seem like exactly what the state doesn't need? Discouraging citizens from purchasing online products with a tax on the downloads and encouraging them to find ways to not pay for the Internet and its many bounties? What's worse is that the Governor is telling them that it's logical to tax "intangible" items the same way tangible items. Should there be a tax on ideas and principles when they are exchanged? What about words? If I sit on the corner of the street, playing my beat-up old guitar for passers-by, who kindly toss me a few quarters, should they be taxed for listening to my music? No, wait... I've got it! Air is tangible, isn't it? Hmm....
Yeah, he not only cut welfare, he cut EVERYTHING. Shrunk the size of government overall. The whole "Republicans believe in smaller government and less spending" thing we learn in high school is ridiculous when you look at the last three Republican presidents vs. Clinton.
Republicans may call Democrats "tax and spend" but Republicans are simply "spend and spend".
New York State and New York City are both attempting to collect so-called "usage" taxes on cigarettes.
They are not sales taxes per se because they may be charged on items (in this case cigarettes) purchased abroad, out of state and out of the city. Their law is written to cover a tax on the ownership and use of the cigarettes in city or State jurisdiction and they are suing on that basis in order to collect "unpaid usage fees."
The idea behind "no tax on the Internet" within the US Congress was to try to encourage growth and business as well as to try to attract Internet companies to build in the US, hiring American workers and basing the "brick and mortar" and "employee" part of the Internet at home.
Obviously this State system of taxation -- even on the "honor system" -- threatens this premise. It would, therefore, be just for Internet companies to leave that State (which may require that they collect revenues for the State) and, perhaps, cease from doing any business within that State (as cigarette sales websites are considering for New York State and City). I can imagine the public outcry were that to happen.
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
Sales taxes I believe are actually called sales and use taxes. So if you live in Maryland, buy a car in Delaware because they don't have sales taxes, you are supposed to pay taxes on that car in Maryland because that is where it will be used. I must admit I don't truly understand the whole thing, but there are a whole variety of rules. For instance, I don't think you have to pay taxes in your home state if you paid more taxes in the state you bought it in. However, if you paid less taxes in the state you bought it in than you would have paid in your home state, I think you are supposed to make up the difference to your home state. I never realized how complicated the whole matter was until a coworker and I got into a discussion about Sales and Use taxes a couple of years ago.
Please do. I'd say the same but as a non-American I'd be grilled alive for suggesting it. UK isn't a lot better tho...
-- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
Considering we download everything, text, images, messages, hell i cant post here without downloading atleast 2 things nor is it possible for me to even view this article without downloading something. Dumbest thing I ever heard.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How would you calulate the tax for 5% of say a Slackware download? It's free so 0*.05=0. I guess you could calculate it from what it would have been if you had purchased it, but if that's the case I would just buy the boxed set.
I know what the Internet is, what the hell is this Interweb business?!
the Electoral College serves a purpose... so that popular vote isn't the be-all and end-all. It's a safety net to protect against the passing political passions of the people.
Popularity voting can be a dangerous thing.
Not to say the EC can't use some revamping, but it's a bit hasty to say it shouldn't be there altogether.
"No fair, you changed the outcome by measuring it!" - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth
They brought down Al Capone and other criminals on tax evasion. If they assign a value to illegally downloaded tv shows and mp3's you could suddenly find yourself with a multi-thousand dollar tax bill due for those "free" downloads.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I believe sales tax is really a "Sales and Use" tax. Meaning that you are supposed to pay taxes in the state you use the item you are purchasing. For instance, I believe if you are a Maryland resident and purchase a car in Delaware because they have no sales tax, you are required to play taxes on the car in Maryland because that is where you USE it. Now I believe there are other stipulations too, like if you paid more sales tax in the state you bought it in then you would have paid in your home state, you don't have to pay taxes to your home state.
Reading through most of the posts, it's clear to me that most of you didn't read the article:
FTA: "That's right: it's voluntary. In a country that can trace its origins in part to a dispute about taxes, does this man really think that people are going to voluntarily pay a tax?"
C'mon, this is pure FUD marketing from a politician looking to get some cheap publicity. With the exception of lottery tickets, no one in their right mind pays a voluntary tax. And I guess it worked too...a lot of lemmings read the summary (which is deceiving), posted a comment, and others moderated their comments up.
Move along people. Nothing to see here.
Ruby on Rails Screencast
Oh and liberals and democrats are NOT the same thing .
Oh wait, one more thing. This administration (which is extremely right wing) has spent more money than any other in the history of this country. In fact we have BILLIONS unaccounted for in Iraq alone. Now who is throwing money at a problem? Please think before you spew outdated cliches.
Time makes more converts than reason
Reminds me of Mullah Nasruddin!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
OK no problems, he only needs to be in each residence to mmonitorate all the downloads did by all americans, and outside people of america like me. But he will taxe download or upload or both ??? If someone upload a file for me and he is outside the state ??? thi is taxeable ??
Please tell me, dear Americans, where do you get these guys from?
Jebus - 9/11 was like 4 years ago, and over 100,000 people have died since then on American freeways, yet you are worried about some random group of guys who killed 3k?
When are you finally going to take down the duct tape and plastic sheets and start living again? Or are you still on Code Orange/Yellow/Puce?
Yeah, right.
Whoa there cowboy. I never said you couldn't be angry at republicans - I just wanted to make sure that George W. didn't get ALL of your anger wasted on him. There are plenty of assholes to focus on at the moment.
:]
Also, you're making the assumption that it was an unconditional vote for him. The fact is, people are NOT going to be able to vote for ANYONE who believes in and will do everything they want them to do but themselves. So they have to pick someone. For a lot of people, the feeling of "safety" or "morality" is more important than the current economic situation. Personally, I find it a VERY bad choice, but there is a huge difference between "I guess I'll sacrifice the fiscal wellbeing of our country for the illusion of safety" and "GOOD! Cutting taxes and increasing spending is a WONDERFUL idea!" That's the point I was trying to make.
Many people have commented that it is unlikely that there will be an open source product, and even if there was one they would not trust it, since it's "not fun" to develop tax software.
... unless you get paid for it.
This is exactly the reason why open source can never be a full replacement for commercial software: not everything is fun. It might not as enjoyable to fix bugs, code some stupid feature that a few idiots demand, etc.
my god...
is it me, or are politicians addicted to taxation?
I thought my internet addiciton was bad; this is freaking ridiculous...
There are three truths: my truth, your truth, and the truth. - Chinese proverb
...and I propose a tax on stupid ideas. especially for politicians.
Total tax is closer to 60% when you include things such as fuel, food, clothes.. etc..
Its really sick what is being done to us, and not enough people care to stop it. And if you speak to your 'representatives', they dont listen, and just increase the rates.. or shuffle it around so its harder to notice.
This is sort of garbage is why this country was created in the first place.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Geez....why can't the legislatures see we're freaking taxed ENOUGH. My paycheck is near 30%+ taxed with Fed, State, Medicare and fucking SS that I'll never get back fully.
Well, a 400 billion budget deficit says otherwise. Rein in spending before reducing taxes.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Oh, sure. I was being sarcastic for fun mostly. I know that a lot of these types of services vary from place to place. But to continue the spirit of debate...
For one thing, everyone who has trash pick-up pays the same, unlike property tax where people with more expensive houses pay more.
One could argue that those with more trash ought to pay more. A flat rate is not always the most just. Here, we have a mix. Basic pickup is included in city services. But if you have large or hazardous items, you have to either pay the city or take it to a private place yourself.
In some areas, trash pickup is not done by the local government at all. When I lived in Knoxville, TN, we had a choice of two private companies to pick up our trash, or we could choose none and take it to the dump ourselves.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, but even though you're paying a private company, do you think all those private payments really cover the cost of dealing with trash? I would hazard a guess that such companies are paid subsidies, contracted, or given serious tax breaks by local governments to handle this kind of stuff. In that case, you're still paying for part of the basics of "dealing with trash" through your taxes, just indirectly. The city/county/etc. does eliminate the volatility of having to deal with the business part of it, though.
But, I'll be happy to defer to someone who knows more...
This guy is living proof that the DNC's symbol truly is a JACKASS...
Cheany in '08!!!
LOL... OK... Even I can't say THAT with a straight face!
The number 1 problem of working in a cubicle - 23 power cords, 1 outlet...
1% of the population already pays 33% of federal income taxes.
But social security taxes, which fall solely on the first ~$90K of income, are used in large part for general government expenditures. So not including FICA at all in your statistics is lying with them.
Moreover, don't tell me the rich don't get better service, government contracts, favorable rules (DMCA, Sonny Bono, farm subsidies, giveaway mining right rates, Price-Anderson, ad infinitum), etc.
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Wisconsin passes "purchased download tax"... Other states follow example... Federal government decides to get a cut... IRS installs tracking software on all computers to ensure voluntary taxes are paid... Internet privacy and freedom become a thing of the past...
People, in general, are too stupid to realize that voting for X or Y is going to save or cost them money in taxes. Look at all the poor people voting republican despite the fact that their tax burden is going up because of it.
Now, what politicians actually do is give money to their campaign (and pro-them PACs and 572s) contributors, who then give them the money they need to stay in office.
It's an inherent flaw in democracy. Unless you can think of a better solution, suck it up and pay your taxes, whiner.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
I hope that both Democratic and Republican Slashdotters are against this.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Utah already has a similar tax in effect. On their tax forms they ask you for the dollar amount you spent out of state to use in Utah so they can tax you on it. This includes items bought over the Internet.
when he finally realises that 10% of free is nothing...
No wonder voter turnout is so low. Folks have figured out that we're screwed no matter which party is in power. Gonna be a difficult time ahead until we develop a viable third party, if at all...
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
The things that are really despicable are the taxes people don't see. When anything is taxed, people feel it, but they are only aware that it's a tax they're feeling when they can see that they're paying the tax.
One thing this country gets right is they show you the sales tax at the cash register. In Europe, many people seem unaware that they are paying the VAT, because it is already added into they prices they pay.
But sales tax in this country is paid in large part by property owners who rent out their property. So the taxes cause higher rent, but people renting don't realize that a good portion of their rent goes to pay for government programs.
Another really bad thing the government does is taxing corporate profits. Making companies less profitable costs us all money, but when it happens we can't see it. They definitely shouldn't tax corporations at all. They should just tax the dividends that cooperations pay to investors. They used to tax it in both places, I can't for the life of me figure out why the cut the dividend tax rather than the corporate profit tax. I guess that taxes on corporate profits are state taxes, so that'd require a constitutional amendment.
Anyway, sales taxes are also bad because they're so regressive (paid mainly by people with less money). I don't know why people are more willing to pay property taxes and sales taxes than income taxes. If any tax was truly fair, it would be an income tax.
Seriously.
How the sales of software or other digital products that can be simply downloaded are different from the sales of tangible goods that get shipped by snail mail? I think he probably has a good point.
Your future has not been totally bought and sold. Your body and your choice of lifestyle may be already be a part of the machine, but you and your children still have a future. If you keep electing people that will throw away your rights, perhaps you deserve nothing. Over 200 years ago a revolt broke out over, what was it? Restrictive government? Tea taxes?! We revolted against the masters over tea taxes! Now we pay every new tax like our fucking duty to this political machine is to keep feeding it. Wake the fuck up people. Companies are making the laws these days. Our government serves only their political contributions and tax revenue while we turn a blind eye to the atrocities they commit daily overseas. We all need to become dissedents. Our fair government has stifled competition and become a monopoly. Don't let the rebulicans and the democrats tell you otherwise, they have been sold. I can't believe people put up with this and that it doesn't outrage them to read crap like this everyday. There's gotta be some other smart people out there that think the same way. Can't we do anything about this. I'm getting older and I feel like my life is just wasting away while I watch my world and the future of our world slowly rot away. Is there hope yet for mankind?
zosxavius photography
Governments (state and local) use the tax base to provide/subsidise/regulate infrastructure that everyone uses (y'know - roads, street lighting, the police...) and (partly because of that infrastructure being in place) the US economy grows faster than places where it isnt (y'know - Zaire, Moldova, Elbonia). That economic growth spurs new forms of entrepreneurial activity (like selling stuff over the web). To keep the virtous cycle going, you've got to tax those new forms of economic activity.
ceci n'est pas un sig
It's all the damn liberals' fault. EVERYTHING is. Haven't you learned anything? Back to Basic American training school wit' ya! Hut hut!
...clean elections. Now, if only I could get my Republican neighbors to understand that a pile of cash != speech.
Tough day? How about a free Mac mini?
...what if you instructed the serving computer to download to another computer out-of-state (an X-Drive for instance), then, simply log-in to it's service and save the file to your desktop? Technically, the transaction in question would have happened outside the state. I'm not sure exactly what the fine print is on this proposed "law" (term used lightly), but I'm sure it's completely assinine and they'd probably jail me for "data-laundering".
Data-Laundering - v. The act of channeling data through an intermediary as to disguise the source of the data. See also: Money-Laundering
-- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
Maybe down in Dane County folks are into the internet... but I just moved to Marathon County in the center of the state from Northern Ontario and it's like going back in time ten years... Everyone has dial up as opposed to NWO where every little backwater seems to have had broadband for at least 5 years if not 8.
Here in Marathon County, we're the only family in my kid's highscool to have broadband.
I am the only person in the IT department (where we work with the IBM AS/400 db2, yadda yadda) who has broadband.
My home connection is faster than my work connection because I share DSL with NO ONE.
A tax on the internet is only going to keep people from adopting technology they should have adopted nearly a decade ago. Even intelligent people who pay 5 cents a minute to talk to their neighbors on the phone hesitate at the cost of broadband even when I explain to them the savings of VoIP.
As far as taxes go, Wisconsin is cheap compared to Ontario -- there it's 15% sales tax. It's also cheaper than Minnesota and Chicago if you were to look across the borders.
"Use tax is the counterpart of sales tax. It must be paid on all taxable items purchased from retailers who do not collect Wisconsin sales tax and all taxable items brought into Wisconsin. It applies to purchases made in foreign countries as well as other states. Use tax only applies when Wisconsin sales tax is not charged."
What's great is you get double taxed for things you buy out-of-state but bring home to use. For example, I drive down to Gurnee Mills just north of Chicago and buy a CD. I pay the 6%+ IL sales tax, then drive home. According to WI law, when I file my taxes, I must pay the 5% use tax on that CD. This proposal by Gov. Doyle is just an extension of the current use tax.
that we don't have a system in which Congress, rather than the president, authorizes spending . . .
.
.
oh, wait . .
well, Damn that Clinton and his Contract With America, anyway . .
hawk
for those outside the US: the Republican Reagan had a Democratic Congress (except for a couple of years in the Senate), while the Democrat Clinton had a Republican Congress (except for his first two years which led to it).
Our budget balanced not because of one party or the other, but because, after the Republican landslide, Clinton switched from calling the plan to balance the budget quickly irresponsible to a plan which it did a year faster. And after the one-upmanship between the two parties knocked another year or so off, falling interest rates knocked yet another year off.
But *shh*. Don't bother these guys (on either side) with the facts. All of the prudent cuts came from their own party, as did the idea of fiscal responsibility, while all the bad cuts and debts came from the other one . . .
Part of being a member of society is giving help to those who need it.
Why is that? Why can't people take care of themselves? Why *must* my hard work go to support others against my will?
Of course, the majority of the population is too self consumed to do it willingly.
People center on greed and selfishness so much, but nobody seems to realize that people work hard for their money, so, of course they want to spend it on themselves. And to make matters worse, you want to give my money to the needy. Well, I live in a ghetto neighborhood chocked full of *needy* folks and you know what? A majority of the needy are shitty people that I don't *want* to help. It enfuriates me to have to support their lazy, consumerist, bullshit ways.
All you liberals out there, listen up. There are a shit ton of people who vote Republican, not because they like GW (I fucking hate that guy), because they are religious right (I'm atheist), or because they like any of the bullshit associated with the Republican party, but because we soooo hate giving money to all the peices of shit out there. We hate giving our money to asshats and screw ups. We hate funding Joe Moron's lifestyle and his family's lifestyle, perpetuating his bullshit ways and dilution of the gene pool. Sound hostile and extreme? You're damn right. I'm sick of these people.
You want to help the needy. Fine. But quit expecting others to go along with your forced redistribution of wealth. I don't work hard and stay out of trouble just so more money ends up in the hands of some meth head down the street.
Ah, but you see the US has already figured out a solution to this problem. Instead of the power resting in the hands of the people, where they can foolishly vote themselves a larger and larger slice of the pie, instead it now rests with corporations and special interests. They provide the money which increasingly allows the elected officials to buy the votes of the population through misleading advertising and other means. This means they no longer actually having to provide beneficial (or otherwise) programs to the public to buy votes, they just trick people into voting for them.
The genius of this plan is that we now only have to trust the corporations to do what is best for the long term benefit of society, and the people can no longer mess it up.
Sorry, I might be a little cynical.
Wisconsin also has use tax:
From http://www.dor.state.wi.us/faqs/ise/usetax.html
1. What is the Wisconsin use tax?
Use tax is the counterpart of sales tax. It must be paid on all taxable items purchased from retailers who do not collect Wisconsin sales tax and all taxable items brought into Wisconsin. It applies to purchases made in foreign countries as well as other states. Use tax only applies when Wisconsin sales tax is not charged.
2. What is taxable?
All goods, services, and merchandise that are taxable under Wisconsin's sales tax law are also subject to the use tax. Use tax applies to, but is not limited to, mail-order catalog and television shopping or auctions, toll-free "800" purchases, Internet auctions, and purchases made over the Internet.
Examples of taxable items include automobiles, appliances, clothing, furniture, jewelry, cameras, VCRs, computers, and computer software. Some taxable services include repair services to your television, motor vehicle, or computer; landscaping services for your home; and reupholstering services for your household furniture.
It seems pretty cut-and-dry to me just from point 1 - if you make a purchase from anyone outside of Wisconsin and don't pay tax on it, you owe tax to the state. I know you probably could argue that you're not getting a tangible object, but if you argue that, you fail to acknowledge that "services" are also non-tangible in many cases - you still paid someone to do something for you and didn't pay tax on it.
What I'm afraid of is proposing a tax on downloads including free stuff - say on a per megabyte scale. Yikes - and I downloaded almost 2 gigs today (all legal - a bunch of large game demos).
I can't say there is anything at all unreasonable about the viewpoints you are expressing here. But I do want to note the alternate viewpoint can, in fact, have a "semblance of rationality", or at least half a page of what appears on the surface to be rational justification :)
:]
:(
Whoa there cowboy
First time I've ever been correctly identified as a Texan on the internet before except via hostmask. Congratulations.
there is a huge difference between "I guess I'll sacrifice the fiscal wellbeing of our country for the illusion of safety" and "GOOD! Cutting taxes and increasing spending is a WONDERFUL idea!" That's the point I was trying to make.
You are right in the sense that there is a difference, at least in America today; but alas I do not really think there should be a difference
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Ohio's govenor rises to second least favorite state politician...
- AMW
Yeah, let's rectify the situation by voting the fucker out of office. Anybody for a recall election?
Liberal translator alert: "spew" = "say something that cannot be easily ignored with convenient namecalling"
"extremely right-wing"? WTF? One sure hallmark of a left-wing president is if he increases domestic spending: GWB has increased domestic spending faster than any president since JFK. He's enacted the largest entitlement program (prescription drugs) since Johnson. He's *never* vetoed a bill, and has shown a marked predilection for increasing the size of the federal government at every possible opportunity.
Please provide me with data to back up your assertion that GWB is "extremely right-wing".
Maybe down in Dane County folks are into the internet
:-)
:-)
Northern edge of Sauk County here. We've got DSL and Cable. That's not to say that most people don't still use dial-up (hard to convince them of the advantages of broadband), but they do "get" the whole Internet thing and do use it regularly. Not to mention that most public libraries provide free computer access to a T1 line.
A few years ago I overheard a dad telling his teenage kid to look up a car's VIN on the Internet before he purchased it. (He wanted to make sure the vehicle hadn't been in any accidents.) Considering that was before I had broadband at home, I realized that the world was-a-changing.
I'm surprised that you're the only one in town with broadband. Still, broadband *is* available and people do use the Internet. It's a little weird the way that people integrate it into their lives yet remain technological savants, but you get used to it.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
You are correct but the money went to fix the problems that Democrats created. Remember Jimmie Carter and Iran? Remember how Carter castrated the CIA? Remember how Clinton cut off the other nut of our intelligence gathering? I guess you don't.
The United States is the first modern Democracy in the history of the world, so what "history" exactly are you talking about?
...to purchase your products. Sorry for the inconvenience, please contact your state legislature and bitch to your govenor. If you violate this, we are not liable.
Ah yes, the wrong hands. That would be Haliburton.
To paraphrase from a hundred years ago about electricity:
Senator: Internet? What use is the Internet?
Inventor: Senator, in 20 years, you'll be taxing it.
Looks like it's only taking about 10. Keep up the pressure on the feds to prevent taxation of Internet, friends!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
And, I hate to say it, but he's even dragged the US into a war.
To sum up:
- Massive expansion of government
- Massive expansion of spending
- Get involved in a war
- Purchase votes via massive increase of social programs
How W differs from Wilson, FDR, or Kennedy/Johnson, I don't know.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
"Soft marijuana laws have created crack and heroin junkies everywhere,"
I would argue that crack and heroin is he drug that caused that.
"large amounts of prostitution,"
are everywhere. There isn't a place in the US that you can't have sex for money.
" the spread of HIV "
The US had a much higher rate of HIV infection among prostitutes then anywhere in Europe.
"an epidemic of robberies."
Legalising Marijuana would drive it's cost down, and thus cause less crime.
Evidence seems to support that people addicted to drugs, espcially harder drugs, casue that problem. The addiction rate for Marijuana is lower then alcohol.
Um, you facts aren't exactly from an unbiased source. I would trust those fact anymore then I would trust the fact out of High Times.
Many people die every year becasue of the war on drugs. Not just people commeting the acts, but innocenyt bystranders. You make Marijuana Legal, and preople no longer make enough money to kill over it.
Finally, I would rather someone build my car with a marijuana hangover then an alcohol hangover. Because there is on such thing as a Marijuana hangover.
FOr the record, I have never tried it, and it always seem disgusting to me.
"And it causes thousands of cases of lung cancer every year worldwide. "
I'd like to see some hard facts, as well as a comparison between lung cancer and tobacco use.
I have my doubts.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Just when people DIDN'T need another reason to illegally download things.
"Repeal the tax on the CD and cut government spending."
on what? hmmm? I hear this all the time, guess what? we have run out of places to cut.
Jesus Christ people, shit cost money. teachers cost money, supplies cost money, safe food cost money, safe air flight costs money, roads cost money.
For Fuck sake, try to understand that basic economics applies to keeping things going and it doesn't come from fucking pixies.
HEres a clue, pork barrelt projects will NEVER BE CUT UNTIL THERE IS NOTHING LEFT, AND THEN THEY PROBABLY STILL WONT BE CUT.
yes I'm screaming at you because your not close enough to hit with the clue train.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Social security is just messed up beyond recognition.
Moreover, don't tell me the rich don't get better service, government contracts, favorable rules (DMCA, Sonny Bono, farm subsidies, giveaway mining right rates, Price-Anderson, ad infinitum), etc.
Sure they do - there's never been a governmental system in mankind's history where the rich didn't get better service from the government, and I expect there never will be. But that's not the point under discussion - the point is to avoid the "tyranny of the majority" in taxation, and end up creating a taxed class and an untaxed class.
Fortunately, I think our system is proof against that, for it's always the demand to "tax the rich" (confusing the rich with high income earners, two groups which overlap less than you'd think), and the "rich" have enough power to keep that from getting out of hand. A system where we, for example, taxed people based on skin color alone would be deadly for the country, but such ideas are thankfully non-starters today.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Sounds like a five year old child...
You see this is why pure capitalism is doomed to crash and burn. It makes NO sense none, nota from any logical perspective to place a high emphasis (and mayhaps a HUGE guilt-trip) on something that has fairly close to zero value: paper and credit.That being said as I understand it this tax is for things where you buy itand then get a option to download it and/or get a physical version sent. This is not a good idea. If the download fails, or any kind of problem acurs in the webpage where is the burden for tax? what recourses do I have to say look this failed 40 times and it worked once? I say stay the hell out.
"..since states cannot tax interstate commerce."
directly. You are still liable to report those purchase to your state frnchise board. and pay taxes on them.
Historically, it's been to difficult to implement a meothod to automatically handle the purchase tax. But if a company can find out what state a purchase has been made from, they coulr report that purchase to your state franchise board;which would in turn send you a bill.
Remember, this bill would be for the same taxes you are liable for today with interstate taxes.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
wouldn't be taxed. But once other states see how much Wisconsin is getting, they may be inclined to implement one.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I lived in wisconsin almost all of my life. I love wisconsin. Ive lived in milwaukee, madison, watertown, occonomowoc, black river falls, and rhinelander a few years ago I moved to minneapolis and all I can say is "OMG I CAN GET A JOB WHERE I GET PAID A REAL WAGE!" Wisconsin has way too many factory jobs. and no real tech industry. The broadband thing is very true about wisconsin. There is none. I think this is because the whole state exept for milwaukee is Charter. I hate Charter. Milwaukee has Time Warner which is decent as far as broadband goes. Also very true about IBM as well. Way too much AS400 platforms for one state. AS400 sucks. Altho also very true about MS here too. I run windows because the software I need to use. But noone knows anything about linux, and a few people in madison use mac stuff... but only because theyre at college and from out of state.
...thanks for that bit of news which made me glad I don't live in such a backward-a$$ state as WI, that wants to completely screw up the internet. Yeah, go ahead an try it! Who would participate? How would it be implemented? Who would bother doing business with anyone or anything in WI anymore? Just plain stupid.
The next remark is false. The previous remark is true.
Go Brewers! :P
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Has everyone completely ignored the whole "double taxation" thing our country's Founders were against? We're getting taxes on INCOME that is being spent and taxed AGAIN. That is double taxation.
Its time for a political uprising.
-- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
"So, he proposes to rectify the situation by having Wisconsin's 5% state sales tax apply to Internet downloads."
:D
Hey, no problem here!
$0 per download x 5% = $0...
Actually I work in Wausau in marathon county and I would say you are entirely full of shit. If you want broadband it is more than available even in the little outlying little towns and the country via wireless as well. Nearly the entire county is serviced by two wireless providers. Hell I live in a little town 35 miles away population 900 and got a 3MB cable connection. Sorry to hear about the AS400 and db2 junk we got state of the art everything and running nearly 400 linux machines.
Got Code?
just like a fucking greedy democrat to propose this!!
People, in general, are too stupid to realize that voting for X or Y is going to save or cost them money in taxes. Look at all the poor people voting republican despite the fact that their tax burden is going up because of it.
I'll agree with "people, in general, are too stupid." It causes all sorts of problems.
The poor people voting Republican are actually lowering their taxes since Bush's tax cuts were across the board. Bush's immense spending programs will actually affect our descendents. Democrats are "tax and spend," while Republicans are "borrow and spend."
Now, what politicians actually do is give money to their campaign (and pro-them PACs and 572s) contributors, who then give them the money they need to stay in office.
Politicians give money to their voters and campaign contributors in all sorts of ways. It's called "pork." For example: check out the Pig Book to see some of governments most egregious examples of using taxpayer-plundered money to buy votes.
It's an inherent flaw in democracy. Unless you can think of a better solution, suck it up and pay your taxes, whiner.
Perhaps you'll be surprised to know that our form of government is a Republic, not a Democracy as many politicians like to lie. And thinking up a better solution is not hard at all: eliminate 90% of the federal government. It's the implementation of that solution that is the hard part. After all, how do you convince someone that receiving plundered money is a bad thing when they're already quite comfortable with their moocher lifestyle? The only way to do that is to win constutents to your point-of-view, and the only way to do that is to, as you put it, "whine." It also helps me to refine my argument to sharpen my steel on posts like yours.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.
- P. J. O'Rourke
Good thinking, idiot. Sometimes politicians strike me a especially 'challenged' in certain tasks, such as thinking, planning, and um, thinking.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4080
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of
America, and to the "Republic" for which it stands....
http://www.mackinac.org/print.asp?ID=3400
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=165
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/repdem.pdf
THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA was NEVER a Democracy. it was never intended to be by the founding fathers.
claiming the Mullah was a terrorist.
Medicine is becoming a difficult field to make money in, for various reasons. I'm sure there are many people out there that would be doctors except for all the hassle and costs
Hahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahaha
Haha
As if we dont' have enough taxes aready, and the government isn't spending it badly enough. Why give them more fuel? If movies/tv start to be sold in a downloadable state, like discussed in previous slashdot articles, then that would kill the business.
If anything, this would encourage piracy, a way to get arround the system, and make lots of criminals. Note: reference prohabition.
The Man and his goosestepping narcs have too much invested in the War on (Some) Drugs. They make money off of harshing our buzz. /dude
I've been accused of and/or arrested for and/or gotten away with most of those things. I, for one, am glad the federal government so accurately represents the people!
Heh. And I'll bet many of the rich would give up those 'benefits' if they weren't taxed so much.
I am John Hurt.
Six years ago, I worked as a database programmer for a company that was contracted to the State of Kansas Department of Revenue off and on for about a year. The laws on the books there would require the payment of state sales taxes on any purchase made in or out of state by a Kansas resident for which no sales tax had otherwise been paid. That law has been on the books for years. When I went to work there, they had just finished a sweep of all the law offices in the state, requiring them to pay sales taxes on software that they had bought out-of-state, whether via downloads or through the mail. The law may have been originally written to cover mail order. It was general enough to cover any purchases made made by a Kansas resident for which state sales tax had not been collected at the time of the transaction. It seemed to me, at the time, that the enforcement of this law had been spotty. The practical problem was that it depended on residents to declare their purchases. Other than having people pay the taxes voluntarily, it wasn't cost-effective to put much effort into identifiying non-payers. With ecommerce growing, the State began to get interested in collecting these taxes. They targeted businesses, but, when I was there, they weren't going after individuals. The State's "declare your purchases or we'll audit you" threat was pretty effective at getting people to respond.
You've supported a government that's run up the national debt without a care in the world. At least Clinton stopped the bleeding.
You've been living high off of national credit card debt. We can't even make the monthly minimums anymore. We have to borrow money to pay for money we already borrowed.
That high-tech world's largest army that's bigger and better than most of the world combined? It costs a lot of money. The war in Iraq? Rebuilding Afghanistan? It all costs money.
Don't try to claim the current regime doesn't have support. Bush got re-elected and Americans have sent more and more Republicans to Congress. Obviously they like their free-spending ways.
We've got 5-6 trillion dollars of debt because baby-boomers never learned to how to stick with a budget. Guess what? It's time to either pay the piper or prepare for a financial meltdown. We can't borrow money forever.
What's the drastic solution?
1. Repeal Bush's tax cuts. (income, inheritance, etc)
2. Eliminate corporate subsidies and loopholes.
3. Remove the income cap on SSI taxes.
4. Jack up taxes in the upper bracket.
5. Get out of Iraq.
That should at least stop us from hemmoraging money and maybe get us somewhere near starting to pay off the debt.
Don't do anything and the dollar will continue to free fall, the Euro will become the new reserve currency and countries will stop lending us money. Life's going to be great when the government defaults on its loans.
I'm sure you're an advocate of "personal responsibility". Time to take some.
If you buy something from California mail order, and are not a California resident, you don't owe California sales tax. You owe the sales tax where you made the purchase (if applicable).
Of course, just because you owe the tax, doesn't mean that many people pay it. Tracking who mail-order recepts is problematic, especially in States like Oregon, which doesn't have any sales tax.
Oh, and by the way, the "no new tax" is a fairly absurd pledge in the face of massive tax cutting that have gone on in the past few years. The dollar wouldn't be in nearly as much trouble if we simply restored taxes to what they were under the Clinton administration.
And you already paid the necessary taxes on your use of the telecommunications infrastructure needed to purchase your "downloads".
'There was one specific time at which the president's desk had on it a plaque saying "the buck stops here".'
Clinton took it when he left the orifice.
Talk to me when you are 10 years out of skool!
That MAY be Half of the problem .. but what about the fact that 30 to 50 percent of the wealth comes to be controlled by the (upper) 3 to 10 percent of the population (eg Rockefeller, Mellon, Carnegie)? Even more wealth becomes controlled by corporate entities which may be "persons" under the law but which are hardly human! Why is welfare for the poor unacceptable but welfare for the rich accepted as (big) business-as-usual? Both forms of welfare tend to squeeze out the real drivers of a healthy economy - the middle class(es). The limit case seems to be a form of feudalism... which may, in the final analysis, be the "ground state" of the social stucture of the human Animal, however depressing the thought might be to human Beings!
5% x 0 = 0
The only answer is really to fix the tax system so businesses pay their fair share.
Businesses would only shift the cost increase due to taxation to retail customers in the form of price hikes. There's no free lunch.
Explain how, again, taxing the people who desire to make MORE MORE MORE money will keep them from trying to get it? Sorry, no. And trickle-down, as you clearly allude to, doesn't work. After a certain point you have enough money to keep your head above water, and enough money to invest to overcome the risks of making even more big money. Meanwhile, you have families that, due to health problems, family issues, language barriers, or otherwise struggle (i.e. like mine). Taxing "equally" is far from "equal".
That's why you should have a flat tax with absolutely no deductions at all. Start with 25% and work your way from there.
A 25 percent flat tax rate would break the backs of poorer people. Here is the percentage of adjusted gross income that people pay in federal income taxes (source, IRS, 2003 figures:
AGI TAX/AGI TI/AGI
(dollars) (percent)(precent)
0 to 15000 2.8 19.2
15000 to 30000 4.3 40.6
30000 to 50000 7.3 58.9
50000 to 100000 10 68.2
100000 to 200000 14.7 75
200000 and up 24.2 87.7
AGI = Adjusted gross income
TI = Taxable income
TAX = federal income tax paid This does not include social security, state tax, sales tax, and property tax. It does not reflect loopholes that allow the reduction of adjusted gross income. These are not marginal tax rates; these numbers are calculated by dividing the total amount of income reported or tax paid in those tax brackets by the number of returns in the same bracket and so they reflect the average incomes and federal income taxes paid by those in those brackets.
Currently, the biggest chunk of money comes from those making over 200K per year. A 25 percent flat rate would move the burden down onto lower income groups with those making 50K to 100K contributing the most absolute dollars and with the poverty level group (
These figures do not include social security which is 7.5% employee contribution or 15% self employed on the first 90K or so of income. The rich pay very little in social security as a percentage but those making less than 50K pay more social security than income tax. If you include social security at 15% (because the employer also pays half and this reduces wages) the federal income tax actualy comes much closer to a flat rate tax with the poor paying about 16 percent and the rich paying about 25 percent of AGI.
The idea of eliminating all deductions and credits has some serious problems. Many deductions exist for a reason. Small businesses that don't file separate returns must be able to credit cost of goods sold and other expenses; otherwise, it would be the equivalent of taxing an employee on their share of their employers gross income rather than on their salaries. Catastrophic health costs need to be deductable. Uncollectable bad debts on which you have already paid taxes need to be deductable; otherwise you are paying taxes on money you never made. Eliminating charitable deductions would have serious repurcussions. Individual income tax deductions actually favor those making less money.
Deductions and tax credits and taxes levied on particular items can actually be a good way of implementing social policy. In many cases it makes much more sense to tax something rather than ban it outright. Asbestos causes cancer but eliminating it entirely can be a real problem in applications that have no viable substitutes; so instead of banning it, you could tax the hell out of it and let the market work to eliminate it where it can be eliminated. Providing deductions for those who donate to non-profits that provide useful social services costs less than the government providing those services. Deductions and tax credits for alternative energy encourage essential spending in those areas and are offset by reduced need to spend money on environmentmental cleanup, health care, and the military.
So the rich appear to pay more taxes than many believe. I think they should pay even more. The rich are able to bully others out of their fair share of income. A progressive tax is a way of partially correcting inequities in our economic system. Should everyone make the same amount? No. But do those who make over 200K per year (this tax bracket averages 1.3 million per year) actually contribute that much more to society than those making less? No. Most of them contribute far less.
One random example of bullying: when you apply for a job, your employer will bully you into r
He couldn't have been further from the truth (well, except that the city is ~90 square miles now). A monopoly on cable services (up yours Charter!), protests at least once a week, and now a capitol building wanting to impose a download tax? Tell me again why I chose to stay in Madison?
IWARS.
People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
A voluntary tax? I guess it would have to be, since it's completely unenforceable! No wonder they say the law is an ass.
How can money be made??
Also legalize and regulate prostitution, and then tax the hell out of it. That will probably increase public health and bring in billions every year.
Now everyone knows how it felt when the U.S. government instituted the income tax for the first time...
Check your history books kids, lifes a bitch.
They never stop taxing.
No doubt about it. You have some real idiots in the USA :)
Where should i dumb 5% of my downloads ? if they really whant tons of binary junk ...
Hmmm...
If I make ten million in a year and pay 4.5 million in taxes, I ONLY have 5.5 million to get by on. I pay another 500,000K per year to live on (nice housing, designer clothes, non state college education, dining, trip to Europe now and again...) and ONLY have 5 million left. Poor me.
If I make 30K per year and pay 6k in taxes, I struggle to get by on 24k per year. I pay 24K per year for a crapy house, a 12 year old car, maybe some junior college student loans, wal-mart clothes and hot-dogs and mac-n-cheese and have little left at the end for investments or (god forbid) retirement.
fuck you.
I don't believe the rich should support the poor or working poor but have you seen cooporate profits over the last 10 years? Jesus, you think the bastards could spring for a raise now and again. And trust me, tax as a function of realized income is different from tax as a function of wealth (doesn't exist), and the wealthy are great at reducing realized income while increasing unrealized wealth. President Bush, the year before he was elected made several million dollars but was able to be in the 28% tax bracket. I made less than 50K that year and was in the 28% tax bracket.
again, fuck you.
.. don't stop leeching when they leave.
They have 'severence pay' that goes on for years afterwards. Look it up some time.
They get it even if they 'fail' to do their duty properly. Wonderful, hey.
The first thing Aus needs to do to pull money in is to cancel all the 'extras' pollies get... DURING AND AFTER service. It's nothing compared to what their salaries are.
It's what we have in Australia.
The Ruling Elite here were 'shocked' when the first returns started coming in for it. Millions more than they expected.
Is there anything these fucking dems won't tax????
Actually there have been democracies for thousands of years, but don't let that stop you from thinking that the world started two-hundred years ago.
Blame that one on the media and the politicians who wish to obfuscate their crimes against the 9th and 10th Amendments.
Specifically, the United States was to be a Republic (as defined in the Constitution) with democratically elected representatives. It's anyone's guess as to why the entire nation thinks we're a democracy as if democracy were a form of government (it's not). Democracy is a method of making a decision. Nothing more, nothing less.
The roots are probably from the 50s and 60s when the media may have wanted to mark a clear delineation between the USA and the Soviet Socialist Republics, or the People's Republic of China. Most major governments are a republic. Just what form of republic and what powers the government purports to hold are defined in their individual charters (or constitutions).
Back to my original point. The United States has a charter. It's called the Constitution. Without the Constitution our democratically elected government is little more than a bully cartel (mafia). Once again I'd like to reiterate that our federal politicians and federal judges violate the 9th and 10th Amendments on nearly a daily basis. In violation of the Constitution, they should no longer legally be entitled to the powers given to them by the Constitution. Of course, rules never stopped anyone--especially not power hungry politicians or corporate executives consumed by greed.
It's interesting that you bring up the Pledge of Allegiance. I said that every day growing up while facing the flag, and I still proudly say it today. It's not my fault that the true Republic for which the flag stands is long since dead.
Honestly... I don't recognize the legitimacy of our current Federal Government except to note that, in real life, might does make right and they have bigger lawyers, bigger guns, and more police than the proper Republic for which the flag stands.
fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
Wow! What a horrible and bitter person!
In addendum...
We hate giving our money to asshats and screw ups.
To execs and CEOs.
We hate funding Joe Moron's lifestyle and his family's lifestyle
Alan Greenspan and his extended corporate family
perpetuating his bullshit ways and dilution of the gene pool.
Absentee landlordism, rent-seeking... and definitely dilution of the gene pool. Have you seen the people on Wall Street lately?
Sound hostile and extreme? You're damn right. I'm sick of these people
Agreed.
fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
Ok let's stand up and fight!
It is time for a Green Bay bit party!
We will descend on the bay and dump all the bits in to it, billions upon billions and we shall turn the bay "?????" what color is a bit?
Maxwell L. Barrett Comp-WE-Mentor Software Trainer
The intelligent rich realize that paying current tax rates is a small price to pay for living in a stable democracy that gave them the opportunity to be rich in the first place. (Whereas if you tax the poor at high rates, they have a big incentive to switch to the underground economy so you don't get the taxes anyway, and promote less reputable enterprises.)
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
yeah, the broadband is there, and I stated that in my post if you had read it, my point is that it's just that it seems people don't seem to feel the need for it.
It doesn't matter that *you* can get 3mb in town if no one else is taking advantage of that great of service. The fact that my kid is seen as some alien because she's the only one of her peers to have broadband access is cause for alarm.
And I don't need your condescension regarding the db2... it's cool, especially when hooked up with the db2e and J2ME. I will however accept the condescension regarding the Linux. For now we only have one Linux box, for the DB2E sync server... but slowly we will get out of the quagmire of Windows... this however seems to be the norm in the states where most people can get a Masters in CS without even touching Linux or UNIX.
Anyways, glad to here your out there somewhere in Marathon County, look forward to running into you some time.
This nutjob Dem wants to tax TP!?!?!??! -
d a/sfl-0310toiletpaper,0,2301086.story?coll=sfla-ho me-headlines
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflori
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
I really feel your Mac pain. I love my Mac. Most people around here think it is just for artists who are too stupid to code. The OS is exactly the opposite, but you know, these people are like donkeys; stubborn as hell, and nothing like donkeys, in that they are very judgmental. Of course, here I am, casting judgment, so you know; hipocracy :-)
Due to youth or general cluelessness, I have yet to find such a method. Could you enlighten me, or at least give me some ideas/places to look?
-Yndrd1984
My understanding is that the EU has some kind of law regarding VAT where you are supposed to charge EU buyers VAT even if you are not an EU company. I have no idea how this is even slightly enforceable or how the EU thinks it has jurisdiction over foreign companies that are operating out of elsewhere. Anybody have any details?
Fair? Of course not! Our masters must have their chunk of anything that moves! Let us be fair, if you so much as move a finger, send a check to the Powers that Be, and don't forget to keep track of the 'work' needed to write that check as it is also taxable. Next we shall consider the possibility of taxing thought, as the Government has realised the extent to which we are denying them their fair share of our good ideas. Good Day, Komrades!
Provide some examples of these failed democracies, please.
Repeat after me. FOX NEWS is not a reflection of reality. Now go home and discover a "news" channel for the first time.
Get a job you god damn dirty hippie.
Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
This is one of the most stupid ideas that I have EVER heard of.
Actually there have been democracies for thousands of years
Where?
The government is really making doing the legal thing tough lately.
Tax on downloads = more people will download illegally and less legitimately.
Napster (itunes to a lesser extent) with DRM that cant be easily transfered and is in low quality format for $15 for the rest of our lives = More people seek illegal downloads to avoid not only heavy costs but crippled music files
Long waiting, no border security and lack of legal immigration = more people cross illegally and live illegally in the USA
the government with their stupid illogical policies and politics is shifting tax burdens all over the litter guy forcing more us to break the law to do the smart thing for ourselves.
BTW one of the founding principals of an open economy is that each person does what is right for them (and to a lesser extend those around them)-- these government policies anticipate us to not to what is best for ourselves with what we do, this is a fundamental problem i would say. Until it is advantageous, or at least break even to do the right thing, society wont accept it.
Mike
I heart the RIAA & MPAA, im sure its mutual...