Posted on 06/04/2007 12:35:31 PM PDT by George W. Bush
Great comments, one question does appear what if people have jobs they have to keep that deal a lot with using the Internet? What if they are lower-middle class?
I also think that this is a step to regulating the Internet, one thing that most(if not all) people on this site fear, including me.
Obviously that Enzi is tax-happy(the worse things that “pro-tax advocates”(what a group) can do is make excuses for their new ideas) and I bet that most people won’t give a darn. After all, we’ve got a new Democratic congress because of media bias and silencing on issues of Democrat corruption(which reached to the highest levels). In fact, since the Internet is seen like TV, expect this to be another sin tax that the Nanny Staters will love and adore.
It is indeed interesting that a proponent of the ban is Ted “Set of tubes” Stevens but it is nice that two Republicans are quoted in the article as being against this ridiculous new proposal. I honestly believe that the more cookie the new Congress takes and shares it with the party hogs the more of a Civil War there will be.
I mean, if you don’t want higher taxes on everything else, why not have reduced taxation? I guess that Enzi fears the Democratic Congress like us, it is just that he swallowed some beltway swamp water.
It also makes you wonder how many new things are going to be taxed before this nightmare ends. Ooh, a tax on window binds, a tax on beds, let’s have a friggin’ tax on coffee also since people drink a lot of it. If you want taxation to pay for the state police why not loan it to the private sector? Then again I guess that shades of Robocop are a reality to many people if this happens.
And schools, one of the most BS things I’ve heard from any politician is about how every child is equal and a G-d given person. No they aren’t. I’ve been to public school and seeing some of the miserable failures, who I can write stories about, doesn’t make me optimistic.
In fact, you can learn anything from a book, being homeschooled, knowing someone who is knowledgable or exploration. For that I may conclude, no taxation, a large cut in spending on education and perhaps some police forces taken over by the private sector.
There, Enzane. Oh yeah, and I am turning 21 this month. I watched a movie called Half Nelson which did deal with a politically passionate man who felt very powerless on what to do. He basically said “I am just one man.”
Garbage! it always takes one man to build a crowd. If you think about Julius Caesar and his assassination it only took 6 or so men to kill him. To save lives it can take one doctor, one soldier, one person. Just because congress gives it to you, doesn’t mean you can take it.
I believe that the situation we are in is like rape(a pretty uncomfortable analogy that is for sure but it is eerily true), sure it might be comfortable if you are raped by the right person, but you would feel strange, beaten aback and you wouldn’t like it. You would like the rapist(also only one individual) to take control over you if you have Stockholm syndrome.
You wouldn’t mind sending the rapist to jail, but you might be worried to identify the person to did it. The condition afterwards might make you a completely different person, never the same. You will always remember the night that a thug with no name came and interfered with your privacy or your private property.
In this “powerless” idea(it is these thoughts that are part of the reason why Left-Wingers are associated with activism and how they can control so many institutions to become Politically Correct) is the idea that we are all supposed to have either Stockholm syndrome or we are in court and we cannot identify the rapist for fear that it will open up a hole, the rapist will make your life miserable or that it will send a guy who you feel sorry for to prison.
But get this, the more you don’t identify the rapist, the more he comes after you. It could also be a she. If you are a woman you might get pregnant by the rapist. You might abort the child because you feel ashamed of yourself, and you don’t want the child to feel any responsibilities and it is out of your control.
I am sorry to say but there are only two questions: we accept the rapist’s will or we don’t. We fight back against the rapist even for fear of death, or we don’t.
I am not saying violence at all. But through peaceful activism(standing in front of a congressman’s office and doing things, sending a bird dropping in the mail to a congressman with his or her picture on it) you can make a chance. As for me, I guess I am as powerless as you.
I am only 20, and I feel very uninformed sometimes. I think it would be great to send congressmen the Barrett Report, the Venona Project and the Operation Blessed July papers along with some other papers but that is all that I can do exclusively. I am a big procrastinator and I am lazy. It would be nice to do something politically, but I doubt my sincerity. I have asperger’s, poor eye sight, acne, and other bad lessons and I have very slow reflexes.
As the base we can only do what we can. The purpose of a brand of politics or a political party is to appeal to a wide swath of Conservatives, Liberals, or other political ideas. We won’t always get what we want but we can try.
That doesn’t mean that I’ll agree with everything the base does. I am a little bit fiscally Liberal(80-85% fiscally Libertarian) and Socially Conservative/Libertarian. However, most of the ideas(especially the Iraq War) is what drew me to sites like this.
You can also do something at the ballot box, I predict that when Hillary gets the nomination we will all have lots of useful things to do. I cannot imagine why the Democrats would want her as their candidate but words fail me sometimes.
If we were all to unite as young Conservatives, we can help the future of Conservatism and what we as Americans will do to perserve our system. We had to have one Conservative to roll back the tide and to stop the USA from turning into the Soviet Union and we can do it again.
I am sorry if my message is long-winded it usually is, but I tend to be cold and analytical. However if you have seen my few posts, they tend to be long-winded and analytical.
I am very sorry for the long, tedious double-post. I hope for it to get erased but I might as well issue a traditional correction if it doesn’t. I had a minor computer error.
How can they collect sales tax on interstate purchases without interfering with interstate commerce? Since you can do it with a computer now, the Constitution no longer applies? Kind of like when people started using cars instead of horses the government got the idea you needed their permission to do it all of a sudden.
This crap is for the poor? LOL, I shop online because technically I AM poor!
Yeah, they’ll gather by candlelight in the dead of a Saturday night, and pass yet another tax burden on us.
Please keep us informed on any news about this. I could just scream right about now :(
Well since I am an internet retailer with less than 5 million in out-of-state sales, I could take the completely self interested view of this and hope it passes. That would certainly give me leg up on my larger competition since they'd be required to collect these sales taxes while I would not.
But... I can't do that. This is a dumb idea and they need to just stop trying. I'll oppose it every step of the way.
Yes, but the difference is that while the existing “use tax” laws are equally unconstitutional, they are also unenforcable.
There’s no ROI in catching spammers, and besides, it would be a legitimate function of government. Who wants to do that?
I would rather pay taxes and shipped than shop in any store.
My best friend is the UPS women ;)
Oh, please! The states will raise these other taxes regardless of whether the internet tax exists. Politicians in both parties have become spendaholics, both at the federal and state levels.
If the GOP had any brains (which they don't), they would stay clear of this debate and let the DemocRats skewer themselves on this issue. But after observing the immigration debate, it is pretty clear that pols in both parties could care less what the "little" people think, and they will do what they please.
Its not sales taxest that are at issue, as those are STATE taxes, not federal.
They taxed my DSL an extra $4.95 a month (on top of the $49.95 DSL fee) and I decided enough was too much,so back to dial-up at $19.95 and no extra tax.Of course this is on top of about $28 POTS ,of which more than half is access fees.The phone companies are even forbidden to refer to some of these TAXES as taxes but must call them fees under threat of the gov’t.(I’m stuck where there is no alternate ISP except satellite ;access to People PC,AOL,or any other ISP would entail long-distance phone charges,even though they have access numbers in my locality.It was explained to me these numbers only automatically forward to the real “Point of Presence” of the other ISP ,located in some large city,hence the long distance fees.)
From the article:
At the moment, states and municipalities are frequently barred by federal law from collecting both access and sales taxes. But they're hoping that their new lobbying effort, coordinated by groups including the National Governors Association, will pay off by permitting them to collect billions of dollars in new revenue by next year.
If one votes for Socialism, one is obligated to pay for it.
Once they have control of it, they will completely destroy it and tax anyone they don't like out of it entirely.
I'm sure that everyone in Congress has ALWAYS paid their taxes on purchases they made online.
The fed granted exemptions to let e-commerce get a foothold, at this point its firmly established, there is no justification anymore to leaving the internet tax free. Online commerce is now well established and far past the “incubator” stage.
If the reason for tax exemption was to spur online commerce and give it a break until it was established, which is exactly why it was given exemption in the first place, then its clear that its served its purpose and is no longer neccessary.
There are many taxes I don’t like, but the idea that if you buy or sell online you don’t have to pay or collect sales tax is not one of them. Online is firmly established, there is no reason they should not be collecting and paying the sales taxes like everyone else.
I agree with you, but they want to tax everything in every way. Dick Armey had an interesting plan a few years ago - he said we should have to send the government a check for our income taxes each month. He believed you would then see tax reform come swift and deadly. I believe he was right. Just imagine every month shelling out big bucks - very soon you would want very strick accounting about just what you were getting for your money.
No, no, no, no!!!! We can't do that!!!!!!! That would probably cost our esteemed legislators their jobs! And we can't have that, can we????
CA....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.