No, they'd be fundamentally viewed as equal as a baseline. However, there are a hundred years of precedents saying the Feds can meddle in state commerce however they like - so much so that these days you don't even need to mention the Interstate clause in a law to invoke it. It's simply assumed.
At this point, I honestly doubt a challenge to such a tax would even make it in front of the Surpreme Court. The only reason would be if SCOTUS suddenly decided that the Feds had finally gone too far in stretching the ICC and wanted to smack them down for it. But I'd rule that a remote possibility.
don't just try and make a loophole to get around it.
This "loophole" has been in existance since the creation of mail order in the US. Moving away from it is the radical shift, not trying to keep it in place.
Fundamentally, I would say a uniform rate across states would be FAR better than the alternative. However, at its heart, I believe this tax would cause more harm than good. And knowing our Congress, the chances of it being implemented so well that it DOESN'T represent a burden on small businesses is very slim - especially with all the big guns doing everything they can to make sure it burdens the little guy.
You know, Flamebait usually isn't this well-reasoned or lengthy. While I admittedly did not include citations, everything I say is based in fact. If you disagree with my conclusions, please post a rebuttal.
That's completely academic. The Interstate Commerce Clause, as currently misinterpreted, trumps anything the States say. If Congress passes a law specifically enabling states to tax each other, then So It Is Written, So Shall It Be Done.
Here's a good short version article if you're curious on the history. (it's Libertarian in bent, but gets the facts close enough to right)
The bill doesn't talk about taxing internet sales, it talks about taxing remote sales. Sales includes mail order, phone order, internet order, any order.
This somehow makes it better?
The bill only applies to states that agree on a unified, simplified tax system. The same items will be taxed in every state that agrees.
And I would tend to think that if Congress OKs this potentially HUGE source of income, they'll all come to some agreements but quick.
Let's see. I have a computer. I input the zip code of the person who has placed the order and it tells me the tax. Hasn't anyone reading slashdot heard of computers? They sometimes can be used to do computations for people.
Once a quarter, I fill out at most 50 forms and send 50 checks. A burden? Yes, but not that great. If the system is truly simplified, my computer should be able to fill out the 50 identical forms for me for the 50 different states.
You're greatly oversimplifying business finances here. And you're also ignoring the fact that it wouldn't necesarily be 50 checks. It could be, as the articles have noted, over two THOUSAND different tax codes to keep track of. Not to mention, anyone who relies exclusively on computers for accounting, without an actual eyeball verification of what's being submitted, is begging for trouble. It would be a nightmarish situation for anyone without a dedicated team of accountants.
The bill as introduced only applies to those with more that $5,000,000 in "gross remote taxable sales." Note it does not include local sales or sales of non-taxable items.
And the article, as read, says this point is under hot debate and many very large guns are trying to get that figure lowered precisely BECAUSE it will destroy small competition. (see above re: team of accountants)
Actually, while the original poster probably didn't realize it, he's right in a roundabout way.
The main reason all the states are in such a budget crunch (last time I checked, something like *5* states are still in the black) is that the Feds have been imposing Unfunded Mandates on them left and right. You know how we all snickered whenever the Rainbow Wheel of Terror got raised to Orange or Mauve or Oh Shitium or whatever? The state governments weren't laughing - every time that happened cost them millions per day. (depending, of course, on the size of the state) And they didn't see a penny from the Feds to help pay.
So when Bush announced his tax cuts, that virtually doomed the states. Either they raise taxes themselves, or they go bankrupt. (or, even worse, they lay off workers when unemployment is already rising universally) Fiscally, it was unimaginably bad. The money "budgeted" for the tax cuts should have been sent to the states to keep their economies stable, since for the most part it was Federal demands that were breaking them. But it didn't happen.
And it continues to not happen, as Bush pushes to send another $87 billion out of the country and into Iraq. Much of that WILL go into Halliburton coffers thanks to the contracts they have with the Feds. While, in the meantime, the States end up having to be the Evil Statist Trolls that are forced to raise taxes. (also not a good thing if the economy is struggling).
This is a particularly bad thing, though, because it's going to seriously hurt eCommerce. They're turning their guns on a particularly fragile chunk of the economy. Damage done now will take a long time to undo, if ever. They should be a bit more smart in raising taxes - like incremental increases in sales tax or income tax.
Like a lot of.com startups, it's too little, TOO SOON. I look over that list of games, and there are only a few I might possibly want, and they're the "expensive" ones. (considering the cost of "production" and "distribution" is nonexistant, it strikes me as slightly cynical that they priced the games solely according to which ones history has judged "best") They should have waited, and built up more contacts than JUST Atari. Maybe branched out a bit, roped in, say, whoever currently owns the Infocom archives, and other similar classic games.
Unfortuantely, I'm afraid while this is overall a noble attempt, it's going to go down in flames quickly just because, right now, there's just not enough there to attract enough people to get their business going.
Strictly speaking, that's not legal. You're only allowed to make your own copy of the work, not download someone else's. That one court decision against MP3.com, although silly, sort of cemented that one until a better challenge comes along.
Not only that, most of these games have been released in legitimate format at some point in the past. (sort of like those "2600 Action Packs" with 20 games each) With a little hunting and gathering you could probably legally get their collection at a fraction of the asking price.
That's actually a very interesting test of legal theory. Go read their FAQ on how their setup works. Apparently Nintendo considered their claim, while a bit shaky, stable enough to not be worth going after.
On the other hand, it seems like, if they get too many users, the service would become useless.
Unfortunately that's a flawed argument. Most of these old Atari games were considered work for hire - the programmers got paid a flat fee, and *never* saw a percentage of the profits. There's little point in trying to take a moral stand on it NOW.
Now, I notice that Tetris is on that list. Anyone know if Pazitnov gets a cut from this?
I'm on an old 1ghz Windows box. I don't know about everyone else, but the speed (without the Autoloader enabled) on startup is a *vast* improvement over 1.0 and\or whatever RC I had been using. About 2-3 seconds versus the 15ish it used to take. Enough speedup that it's finally become my default application for reading document files.
Hmmm... While I don't think he's ever addressed the issue, based on his philosophies, I can't imagine the Dalai Lama having any objection whatsoever to his teachings being freely passed around. He has no real need for the money from their selling, and his sole expressed desire appears to be that as many people learn from his teachings and grow from them as possible.
Of course, I think most of the profits from his books are funnelled into his campaign to free Tibet. But on the whole, I think he'd rather people learn from his teachings than to make money, even for Tibet.
Honestly, I'd say the easiest way to get an overview of Buddhism is to pick up a book of the Dalai Lama's teachings. Granted, there are several schools of Buddhism out there, but the Dalai Lama is an excellent teacher, so it's a fine starting point. (and generally a lot easier to get into than translations of the old scrolls) You can go explore the various paths later if you're still interested.
"The Art of Happiness" is good for an absolute novice. If you are familiar with the basic principles, just about any collection of his writings or teachings should work fine. (I often see a book or two of his in bargain bins, even, just because there are so many collections of his lectures and speeches and whatnot.)
Campbell's fun. Hero of a Thousand Faces is a must-read, except it will *ruin* you on action movies forever. (or, worse, lead you into pretentious debates as to whether McClain picking glass out of his feet in the bathroom represented his "cave";-> )
But that's my point. How do you propose we have a sewage system, without some poor bastard down in the tunnels keeping the flow going? Or a power grid without people spending all day climbing up and down poles?
Those people CAN'T quit. Or else all our modern system shuts down.
It's the Fight Club paradox - those people most necessary to run the world are the ones getting the most shat upon.
BTW - mocking the mods will only get you modded into oblivion. If you get an unfair mod, just swallow your pride and accept it, happens to us all, griping will only make it worse.
5 years of money to ride on? I'd say go for it. If I had had those sorts of cash reserves, I would have.
Of course, in my case, I'm not really "starting a business." I'm just taking on enough freelance work to pay the bills. (which amounts to the same thing except I don't get tax breaks. I wonder if I could incorporate myself...;-) )
But ultimately, it IS all about food. We're plotting to get food, one way or another. (and shelter, and sex)
The problem, ultimately, is that as we moved away from the insular village\tribal life, the idea of people's contributions to society became more and more abstract. At its heart, the most romantic definition of money is that it's a symbol of how much you have put into society. (I know, I know) Without trying to slip into some idealized Marxist fantasy of a world-tribal culture where everyone does exactly what work they want, and is rewarded with a decent lifestyle in return, money is pretty much the closest you can get.
Those people who have the ability to make money entirely on their own are, ultimately, in the minority. Not bragging here - I have a real problem with self-motivation that's a hinderance. Many people simply don't have the resources to work for themselves. But more than that, as our world gets more streamlined, more efficient, there simply are not enough "fun" jobs to go around. Once we were a huge nation of millions of farmers, now we have corporate owned farms with thousands of workers.
But you can't get rid of it without getting rid of all the infrastructure we take for granted - power, the Internet, running water, etc etc. Every modern convenience creates a new category of menial drudge work that SOMEONE has to do.
It's pretty much an unsolvable problem. If you have the resources to get out from under the corporate thumb, then more power to you. But for our world to function as it does, large numbers of people have to stay put.
Slashdot Mirror
At this point, I honestly doubt a challenge to such a tax would even make it in front of the Surpreme Court. The only reason would be if SCOTUS suddenly decided that the Feds had finally gone too far in stretching the ICC and wanted to smack them down for it. But I'd rule that a remote possibility.
This "loophole" has been in existance since the creation of mail order in the US. Moving away from it is the radical shift, not trying to keep it in place.
Fundamentally, I would say a uniform rate across states would be FAR better than the alternative. However, at its heart, I believe this tax would cause more harm than good. And knowing our Congress, the chances of it being implemented so well that it DOESN'T represent a burden on small businesses is very slim - especially with all the big guns doing everything they can to make sure it burdens the little guy.
You know, Flamebait usually isn't this well-reasoned or lengthy. While I admittedly did not include citations, everything I say is based in fact. If you disagree with my conclusions, please post a rebuttal.
Here's a good short version article if you're curious on the history. (it's Libertarian in bent, but gets the facts close enough to right)
This somehow makes it better?
The bill only applies to states that agree on a unified, simplified tax system. The same items will be taxed in every state that agrees.
And I would tend to think that if Congress OKs this potentially HUGE source of income, they'll all come to some agreements but quick.
Let's see. I have a computer. I input the zip code of the person who has placed the order and it tells me the tax. Hasn't anyone reading slashdot heard of computers? They sometimes can be used to do computations for people.
Once a quarter, I fill out at most 50 forms and send 50 checks. A burden? Yes, but not that great. If the system is truly simplified, my computer should be able to fill out the 50 identical forms for me for the 50 different states.
You're greatly oversimplifying business finances here. And you're also ignoring the fact that it wouldn't necesarily be 50 checks. It could be, as the articles have noted, over two THOUSAND different tax codes to keep track of. Not to mention, anyone who relies exclusively on computers for accounting, without an actual eyeball verification of what's being submitted, is begging for trouble. It would be a nightmarish situation for anyone without a dedicated team of accountants.
The bill as introduced only applies to those with more that $5,000,000 in "gross remote taxable sales." Note it does not include local sales or sales of non-taxable items.
And the article, as read, says this point is under hot debate and many very large guns are trying to get that figure lowered precisely BECAUSE it will destroy small competition. (see above re: team of accountants)
The main reason all the states are in such a budget crunch (last time I checked, something like *5* states are still in the black) is that the Feds have been imposing Unfunded Mandates on them left and right. You know how we all snickered whenever the Rainbow Wheel of Terror got raised to Orange or Mauve or Oh Shitium or whatever? The state governments weren't laughing - every time that happened cost them millions per day. (depending, of course, on the size of the state) And they didn't see a penny from the Feds to help pay.
So when Bush announced his tax cuts, that virtually doomed the states. Either they raise taxes themselves, or they go bankrupt. (or, even worse, they lay off workers when unemployment is already rising universally) Fiscally, it was unimaginably bad. The money "budgeted" for the tax cuts should have been sent to the states to keep their economies stable, since for the most part it was Federal demands that were breaking them. But it didn't happen.
And it continues to not happen, as Bush pushes to send another $87 billion out of the country and into Iraq. Much of that WILL go into Halliburton coffers thanks to the contracts they have with the Feds. While, in the meantime, the States end up having to be the Evil Statist Trolls that are forced to raise taxes. (also not a good thing if the economy is struggling).
This is a particularly bad thing, though, because it's going to seriously hurt eCommerce. They're turning their guns on a particularly fragile chunk of the economy. Damage done now will take a long time to undo, if ever. They should be a bit more smart in raising taxes - like incremental increases in sales tax or income tax.
Another bad idea being done badly.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports
They're currently seeking the Consent of Congress.
And beyond that, sadly, the Interstate Commerce Clause can be used by the Feds to trump the states on any issue.
Sadly, thanks to 200 years of deliberate mis-application and resulting precedents, the Interstate Commerce Clause trumps it.
Well, except you can't use eBay, since they'll happily cough up your sales record upon request. And likely ditto for Paypal.
One more reason to use Cash. :-)
The point wouldn't be the exact dollar amount. The point would be setting one so high (punitive damages) as to guarantee the business goes belly-up.
Unfortuantely, I'm afraid while this is overall a noble attempt, it's going to go down in flames quickly just because, right now, there's just not enough there to attract enough people to get their business going.
Strictly speaking, that's not legal. You're only allowed to make your own copy of the work, not download someone else's. That one court decision against MP3.com, although silly, sort of cemented that one until a better challenge comes along.
Not only that, most of these games have been released in legitimate format at some point in the past. (sort of like those "2600 Action Packs" with 20 games each) With a little hunting and gathering you could probably legally get their collection at a fraction of the asking price.
On the other hand, it seems like, if they get too many users, the service would become useless.
Now, I notice that Tetris is on that list. Anyone know if Pazitnov gets a cut from this?
But, of course, YMMV.
Now to go see how well the new features work.
Of course, I think most of the profits from his books are funnelled into his campaign to free Tibet. But on the whole, I think he'd rather people learn from his teachings than to make money, even for Tibet.
(just my interpretation)
"The Art of Happiness" is good for an absolute novice. If you are familiar with the basic principles, just about any collection of his writings or teachings should work fine. (I often see a book or two of his in bargain bins, even, just because there are so many collections of his lectures and speeches and whatnot.)
Campbell's fun. Hero of a Thousand Faces is a must-read, except it will *ruin* you on action movies forever. (or, worse, lead you into pretentious debates as to whether McClain picking glass out of his feet in the bathroom represented his "cave" ;-> )
Those people CAN'T quit. Or else all our modern system shuts down.
It's the Fight Club paradox - those people most necessary to run the world are the ones getting the most shat upon.
BTW - mocking the mods will only get you modded into oblivion. If you get an unfair mod, just swallow your pride and accept it, happens to us all, griping will only make it worse.
Of course, in my case, I'm not really "starting a business." I'm just taking on enough freelance work to pay the bills. (which amounts to the same thing except I don't get tax breaks. I wonder if I could incorporate myself... ;-) )
Hey great, and those're actually useful things to know. Now just gotta find a way of utilizing your newfound l33t sk1lLz.
The problem, ultimately, is that as we moved away from the insular village\tribal life, the idea of people's contributions to society became more and more abstract. At its heart, the most romantic definition of money is that it's a symbol of how much you have put into society. (I know, I know) Without trying to slip into some idealized Marxist fantasy of a world-tribal culture where everyone does exactly what work they want, and is rewarded with a decent lifestyle in return, money is pretty much the closest you can get.
Those people who have the ability to make money entirely on their own are, ultimately, in the minority. Not bragging here - I have a real problem with self-motivation that's a hinderance. Many people simply don't have the resources to work for themselves. But more than that, as our world gets more streamlined, more efficient, there simply are not enough "fun" jobs to go around. Once we were a huge nation of millions of farmers, now we have corporate owned farms with thousands of workers.
But you can't get rid of it without getting rid of all the infrastructure we take for granted - power, the Internet, running water, etc etc. Every modern convenience creates a new category of menial drudge work that SOMEONE has to do.
It's pretty much an unsolvable problem. If you have the resources to get out from under the corporate thumb, then more power to you. But for our world to function as it does, large numbers of people have to stay put.
Then it's a meme and it's free for all. ;-)
Heh, I was just looking at that post again. Six months ago I would not have understood my own sig.
"Downward Nobility." I'm going to steal that, hope you don't mind. :-)