OK, so the student did a stupid and illegal thing. Got it.
Now, let's ask ourselves this: Why is Sarah Palin using a private account when she is Governor? She has no respect for the sunshine laws that are supposed to make government transparent. She's not the first; the White House staff also used their acces to the RNC email system and other private providers to go around the legalites of compliance with archiving regulations.
If you're going to hunt the student down and make him pay for the crime, then I just hope some smart defense attorney uses discovery to fully explore what she was sending and what she was reading in her "private" correspondence.
While an intriguing concept, the overall point of taxation is to provide the services a society needs to function. In all of the rhetoric over 'no new taxes', the salient point is missed--we need taxes to create the core infrastructures we all use. Someone has to maintain the commons--and corporations don't have an incentive to do so.
The internet is a new 'commons'. It is displacing the existing commons of local shops and entities. Hence, the revenue is also displaced, but not the cost of maintaining the services.
(and please spare me the diatribes over gold plated hammers--we all agree it's wrong, and we all agree it doesn't happen that often).
So, if you want services like public education, roads, police and fire departments, then you have to fund it. And, in this world, we all get what we pay for--and if you pay a teacher 24K a year, you get 24K worth of employee...is that what you really want?
If you don't like service taxes on the internet, find the revenue elsewhere.
This isn't hard--if you want to have compliance, then train people to do the right thing. Having an check-the-block attitude towards security is a management problem as well as a user problem.
I'd bet they also have employee problems with sex discrimination (check the block to say you never tell dirty jokes) and with religious discrimination (a rabbi, a priest and an imam all walk into a bar....).
If you want to change behavior, set the example and train people.
Hmmmm...interesting. The point is larger, however. We expect government to provide services....national defense to schools and roads. You don't like the programs--ask your congressman to cut PROGRAMS not taxes.
If you don't need schools, then get out a lawnsign and demand change. If you don't need national defense, then advocate for peace. But, don't pull the answer of the current administration--buy now, pay later. Cut the programs first, not the taxes. We need the tax revenue NOW because I DON'T want to pass burdens onto my kids.
It wasn't when implemented; I agree it is now. Hence the red herring--the anti-government crowd can say they are against 'bad' taxes...and then argue at the same time that we should eliminate taxes on dead rich guys. (estate taxes, which are HIGHLY progressive but are being substantially eliminated.) Nope--this is a red herring....to hide the true nature of the anti-government/anti-tax crowd agenda.
We all acknowledge that there is some waste in government....until it comes to the programs you like! Taxes do good things--they generally build roads to somewhere...they pay for schools...they pay for police, fire, and other stuff. In business, you get what you pay for. In business, waste takes on forms like Ken Lay or Jeff Skilling....and other overpaid CEOs. (and, oh yes--it was GOVERNMENT, in the form of prosecutors, not stockholders, who held them accountable.!) Guess what--the principle works the same in government. You get what you pay for. You don't like it--then get involved in the process and change it.
This phone tax is a red herring....a right-wing fakeout to avoid the fallout over huge tax cuts to the rich which vastly overshadow the cost of this little sop to the masses.
I say keep my $18. Give me good roads, and good schools. Hunt down the criminals. Feed kids who go to bed hungry. And yes--make those who benefit the most in our society bear the burden for taking care of the least among us.
I get so tired of people running out the old saw about putting people's lives in danger...I'm one of those people...and I signed on to protect and defend the constitution. You either have to be a right-wing nutcase or have your head in the sand not to realize that the current administration is vastly expanding its role in relationship to the other branches.
Bottom line: if guaranteeing the 1st and 4th amendments (free press and unreasonable searches, for those of you who slept through Civics class) means we lose a few good guys, then that's the cost of doing business. Cold, but true.
And, for all the chickenhawks out there who use soldiers as shields for illegal acts-- to quote my favorite actor, "Pick up a rifle and stand a post."
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so the student did a stupid and illegal thing. Got it. Now, let's ask ourselves this: Why is Sarah Palin using a private account when she is Governor? She has no respect for the sunshine laws that are supposed to make government transparent. She's not the first; the White House staff also used their acces to the RNC email system and other private providers to go around the legalites of compliance with archiving regulations. If you're going to hunt the student down and make him pay for the crime, then I just hope some smart defense attorney uses discovery to fully explore what she was sending and what she was reading in her "private" correspondence.
While an intriguing concept, the overall point of taxation is to provide the services a society needs to function. In all of the rhetoric over 'no new taxes', the salient point is missed--we need taxes to create the core infrastructures we all use. Someone has to maintain the commons--and corporations don't have an incentive to do so.
The internet is a new 'commons'. It is displacing the existing commons of local shops and entities. Hence, the revenue is also displaced, but not the cost of maintaining the services.
(and please spare me the diatribes over gold plated hammers--we all agree it's wrong, and we all agree it doesn't happen that often).
So, if you want services like public education, roads, police and fire departments, then you have to fund it. And, in this world, we all get what we pay for--and if you pay a teacher 24K a year, you get 24K worth of employee...is that what you really want?
If you don't like service taxes on the internet, find the revenue elsewhere.
This isn't hard--if you want to have compliance, then train people to do the right thing. Having an check-the-block attitude towards security is a management problem as well as a user problem. I'd bet they also have employee problems with sex discrimination (check the block to say you never tell dirty jokes) and with religious discrimination (a rabbi, a priest and an imam all walk into a bar....). If you want to change behavior, set the example and train people.
700 boxes is nothing. Ever been to a federal records center? Think 'Raiders of the Lost Ark....'
and Wizardry...Ah, for the old days....
Hmmmm...interesting. The point is larger, however. We expect government to provide services....national defense to schools and roads. You don't like the programs--ask your congressman to cut PROGRAMS not taxes.
If you don't need schools, then get out a lawnsign and demand change. If you don't need national defense, then advocate for peace. But, don't pull the answer of the current administration--buy now, pay later. Cut the programs first, not the taxes. We need the tax revenue NOW because I DON'T want to pass burdens onto my kids.
It wasn't when implemented; I agree it is now. Hence the red herring--the anti-government crowd can say they are against 'bad' taxes...and then argue at the same time that we should eliminate taxes on dead rich guys. (estate taxes, which are HIGHLY progressive but are being substantially eliminated.)
Nope--this is a red herring....to hide the true nature of the anti-government/anti-tax crowd agenda.
We all acknowledge that there is some waste in government....until it comes to the programs you like! Taxes do good things--they generally build roads to somewhere...they pay for schools...they pay for police, fire, and other stuff. In business, you get what you pay for. In business, waste takes on forms like Ken Lay or Jeff Skilling....and other overpaid CEOs. (and, oh yes--it was GOVERNMENT, in the form of prosecutors, not stockholders, who held them accountable.!) Guess what--the principle works the same in government. You get what you pay for. You don't like it--then get involved in the process and change it. This phone tax is a red herring....a right-wing fakeout to avoid the fallout over huge tax cuts to the rich which vastly overshadow the cost of this little sop to the masses. I say keep my $18. Give me good roads, and good schools. Hunt down the criminals. Feed kids who go to bed hungry. And yes--make those who benefit the most in our society bear the burden for taking care of the least among us.
I get so tired of people running out the old saw about putting people's lives in danger...I'm one of those people...and I signed on to protect and defend the constitution. You either have to be a right-wing nutcase or have your head in the sand not to realize that the current administration is vastly expanding its role in relationship to the other branches.
Bottom line: if guaranteeing the 1st and 4th amendments (free press and unreasonable searches, for those of you who slept through Civics class) means we lose a few good guys, then that's the cost of doing business. Cold, but true.
And, for all the chickenhawks out there who use soldiers as shields for illegal acts-- to quote my favorite actor, "Pick up a rifle and stand a post."