Slashdot Mirror


Internet Tax Approved By Louisiana House

Stinky Litter Box writes "WWL-TV in New Orleans reports that the Louisiana House voted 81-9 on Thursday to propose that a '15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activity.' Can you say 'slippery slope?' The good news is that Gov. Jindal opposes such a tax. Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s."

8 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. I'm confused by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1, Troll

    This surcharge is $1.70 per year. That's not that much.

    I've been to Louisiana. They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated, violent, and poor urban populace is any indication. Also, their roads are pretty bad, so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.

    1. Re:I'm confused by geekoid · · Score: 0, Troll

      "See FEMA, many useless taxes in general, etc."

      I hear the rederick all the time, yet there are almost no examples of 'taxes that go nowhere'.

      Since the cost to build,. maintain, and gneraly do stuff goes up faster then the price og gasoline, of course taxes go up.
      This is why it should not be a percentage tax, but a fixed tax.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  2. Tax child porn! by Engeekneer · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think those who commit the crime should pay. If you'd tax the child porn, you'd even get a nice feedback loop. When your anti-childporn measures (uhm.. discount coupons to stores that sell childrens clothes?) are working well enough, your funds get cut, If it picks up again, boom! Automatic funding!

  3. My Thoughts Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    From the summary:

    Can you say 'slippery slope?'

    Can you say 'boy who cried wolf'?

    When we complain about $1.80 per year we not only distract attention from real issues, but we also discredit any future complaints we might have. What kind of person overlooks the massive amount of money we ship off to the likes of China and Saudi Arabia but can't tolerate even the smallest trickle of cash to our own government?

  4. Re:HAHAHA! by mcgrew · · Score: 0, Troll

    Flamebait? Wow, looks like Republicans have mod points. Of course, you could have as easily said "Coroprationist blue", because the Democrats are just as much in the pockets of the corporations as the Republicans. When you have only two viable parties and it's legal to donate to both candidates in any election, and you don't even have to be eligible to vote for them, your vote doesn't mean very much. What would you expect?

  5. Re:HAHAHA! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 0, Troll

    1. Louisiana is a Republican state 6-1. If your political representitives can't agree on the best policy for a given situation, they shouldn't be in power. Why do you think we (English) are requesting a General Election?
    2. Typographical error. Please excuse my lack of proof-reading. This is, after all, the internet. It's par for the course.
    3. I am far more thankful that I am not American than you are.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  6. Re:Make 'em pay by neomunk · · Score: 1, Troll

    Somalia is the answer to your wildest Libertarian dreams... Bon Voyage, and good luck.

  7. Re:Bad policy yes, slippery slope... not really. by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's just another tax on something that shouldn't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles, water, gasoline, cheeseburgers, cable television, telephones, and almost everything else.

    If you're worried about a slippery slope, please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.

    It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting "online crime". Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".

    If the Libs had there way, there would be. If someone committed a crime against you robbing our house, you would have to pay to keep them incarcerated, not the people.

    And if someone happened to actually kill somebody, they would only go to jail in as long as the victim's family could afford to keep them locked away.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.