Slashdot Mirror
Wisconsin Mulls an Earmarked Video Game Tax
Mearlus writes "A Wisconsin lawmaker is proposing a law to add an additional tax on video games and equipment in order to help cover the costs of moving 17-year-old criminals back into the juvenile system." (According to the article, 17-year-olds are at present treated as adults by Wisconsin courts.)
The tax collector! Paya your taxes toa playa my newa system. Itsa the only waya we will bea good friends for lifea no?
This is like putting a tax on gas to pay for roads. Great, but what about hybrid cars, electric cars, and people who ride the bus?
Direct taxation works best. Tax the people who contribute to the juvenile delinquincy problem: Parents. Tax all crotchfruit. Figure out what the average child tax deduction is, double it, and apply it as a state tax to pay for the costs the state bears for the kids, schooling them, policing them, and raising them since parents don't do any of that anymore.
The state should be paying video game companies. After all, that's who's raising kids anymore, right? Parents sure as hell aren't doing it based on the screaming, obnoxious brats I see running around.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
If so, the lawmakers haven't seen any of the demographics estimates, which put the average gamer age at about 30...
Wow, the good folks in Madison must be hitting the nog pretty hard. It's obvious the ONLY connection here is youth. My favorite part of the article is how the lawmakers 'Aren't sure how much money would be generated'.
Can anyone help me understand this or is it nothing more than playing off mythical video game fears and targeting a group of people who don't vote?
Kids were always screaming, obnoxious brats. Not all of them, but not all of them are today.
There should be a GetOffMyLawn moderation.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
It's true that 17-year-olds are considered adults in the eyes of the law (if not elsewhere). And they can prosecute younger children as adults for some serious crimes.
As for this tax, though... it sounds like another freshman politician who's trying to show that he's got some fresh ideas. I suspect that the proposal will get some half-hearted consideration because the goal is a good idea (providing funding for rehabilitation efforts), but ultimately it will fall short when people realize that it's a backhanded way of equating video games and criminality. It will likely make for a few ticker mentions on CNN, adding to our image of hokiness, and then slip away. But this being Wisconsin (largely a conservative state, with the exception of its population centers in Milwaukee and the 'People's Republic of Madison'), it could end up getting a lot of attention for a while.
"The idea being that this is kind of a kids-kids thing, in other words, if we're going to do this for kids maybe this would be a good way to go about it. And if it's not the best way, I'm open to any other way"
Yes, I think it's pretty damn clear that "any other way" is likely to be rather less moronic than this.
Never mind that rates of nonviolent crimes, just like violent crime, have dropped steadily as videogames have become increasingly popular.
Being a native of Texas, and only living in Wisconsin for the last 5 years or so, I can say that Wisconsin is a tax friendly state. I mean to say that Wisconsin taxes just about anything it can, and the taxes applied are not trivial. It doesn't surprise me that Wisconsin is looking for a way to tax the gaming industry, it's unfortunate that the addition is even being mentioned though.
That all being said, I read the article but could not find a link to the proposed tax. Taxing video games specifically is wrong, though. If you really wanted/needed to generate revenue, I'd be more for a increase in the state sales tax so that it taxes all goods (not just video games) equally.
my 2 cents.
think before you write, it'll save me moderator points.
Add it to the booze tax, or the gasoline tax, or something else that's got a relationship to the problem.
Seriously here. How can this be more expensive than treating the kids as adults? The kids are in a lower security area (juvie detention), which doesn't cost nearly as much to maintain as similar adult areas. The court costs are less because typically the state will not spend as much money in lab work/analysis/expert witnesses, etc., since they will at most only put the kid away until he/she is 25, and there is normally only just a Judge, no jury, so daily costs for keeping the jury do not exist (food/drink, and if sequestered, housing and transportation). So again, how is this going to cost the state more?
I can see them wasting some money in the short term for cases that are already partially processed having to now be shifted back to juvie and started over, but that is probably only a few hundred cases at most and will be a one time cost... A cost that will be recovered shortly due to the reductions in other areas.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I hope they don't use too much cinnamon; some people find it overpowering.
Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
A message to darwin-rejects like yourself: that's fine, but everyone younger than you is expressively prohibited from changing your skanky ass diapers when you find yourself in a nursing home.
Seriously. Think about your attitude, and the absolute reality that your life and comfort will be dependent on today's children at some point in your miserable hateful life.
IANAL, but if it is interstate commerce, then no, state sales taxes do not and should not apply. Most states try to get around this by calling it a "use tax", but I still think that is questionable. Now if the federal governemnt created a interstate sales tax, then online companies would have to pay sales tax to the feds on their shipments across boundries and it would all be legal.
None of this would stop the state from breaking down your door and pointing guns at you if you don't pay their "use tax." And obviously, all this bullshit about the tax being earmarked for certain purposes is a lie. Once the video game tax is in effect, the politicians will use most of it to line their pockets and the pockets of their corporate buddies. The money going to "save the children" my ass...
Well, It is not where I live.
Starts humming Taxman
The earmark makes it sound like there is a connection between youth crime and video games.
Remove the earmark, and put the funds into the general fund. Then use more of the general fund to help fund what they wish they fund, allowing 17-year olds to go to juvenile court.
By trying to make this connection between youth crime and video games, they're opening up a mess of problems.
E-MAIL this BOZO ( Sen.Erpenbach@legis.wisconsin.gov ) and tell them HOW you feel. IF it happens in ONE STATE, the OTHER STATES will TRY to do it BECAUSE it would generate FREE MONEY that the STATE Governments could use for what ever they WANTED!!
Yeah, it MUST be the videogames' fault.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Nobody said that it was. But while correlation does not imply causation, causation does imply correlation. So while the statistical data does not prove that videogames reduce crime (although it is at least consistent with that hypothesis), it does prove that any supposed crime-inducing effect of videogames is so small that it is completely swamped by other social and demographic factors influencing crime rates.
Of course taxes on cigarettes are to dissuade smokers but taxes on games are not to dissuade gamers.
Lawmakers are also not sure how much the tax would generate.Why would a lawmaker need to know that? Next you'll be asking programmers to know which language they are going to use for their project.
Erpenbach said at this point, he's not sure how much it would cost to move non-violent 17-year-olds to the juvenile system. Of course he doesn't know. He didn't know how much the taxes would raise why would know how much money is needed?Also not from the article, Erpenbach is a democrat from a suburb of Madison.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Erpenbach
Wisconsin is the 6th most taxed state. So the money might already be available 5% sales tax and top income tax rate of 6.75%, it is 6.5% for most people. http://www.revenue.wi.gov/faqs/pcs/taxrates.html