When Politicians Tax Violent Video Games
talien79 writes "Taxing video games has a storied history in state legislatures. The reality is that video games, violent or otherwise, simply make too much money to be stopped. But taxing them is a viable compromise, a 'sin tax' of sorts similar to that levied on cigarettes. This article reviews the time-honored tactic of politicians pandering to their base: taxing violent video games."
I'm sure ALL the tax revenue will go towards educating kids on the dangers of violent video games and/or to the victims or violent video game inspired violence, right?
RIGHT?
First they came for the AIG executive bonuses, but I did not speak up, because the AIG executives were a bunch of jerks...
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
When will they eventually get to the point of taxing what comes out of my butt?
Unless you make more than $250,000, you have nothing to worry about. Obama said so:
"Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Maybe you'll have to take your pay stub into the store to prove that you make less than a quarter mill' a year. I'm still waiting for my cigarette tax refund paper work to come in the mail I paid the extra $1.00 tax recently and I don't make more than $250,000/yr.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Uh-oh, March is gonna be screwed come tax time.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
This is a perfect example of a sin tax error.
Thank you, I'll be here all night.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
This is an example of the fallacy that consuming energy requires one to expel carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. For counterexample, check out the promising new 'photosynthesis' technology that the plant world has been working on.
We've heard that before, though, haven't we?
No, we beware those.