Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Tax-free Internet shopping days could be numbered
news.com — If tax-hungry politicians get their way, the days of ordering items over the Internet and not paying sales tax may become just a fond memory. Pro-tax politicians want to change this
kfed2- 902 diggs
- digg it
- bohemianowl, on 04/16/2008, -11/+35thats ok, I don't have any money to buy anything anyway...
- inkyblue2, on 04/16/2008, -2/+5thread hijack. *yoink* before leaving a stupid comment on this page, plase read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_tax
you're already legally required to pay taxes for things you buy on the internet, most people just don't bother paying it and the state doesn't bother enforcing it in most cases. - sinurgy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+12FTA (regarding Use Tax): "But state tax collectors have long complained that in practice, that just doesn't happen, and that money has been unfairly left in taxpayers' pocketbooks."
Unfairly left in taxpayers pocketbooks? UNFAIRLY?!?! Wow...*****! - Karna101, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3it's not okay. government needs to get out of our lives, not invade MORE into our lives. this is very very bad.
- inkyblue2, on 04/16/2008, -2/+5thread hijack. *yoink* before leaving a stupid comment on this page, plase read this:
- vault, on 04/16/2008, -2/+100Hopefully Amazon and other retailers with a big enough online presence have enough clout to stop this. Not that there's ever a good time, but a recession is definitely the wrong time to start charging sales tax left and right.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+35They may not have enough clout, but we do. Vote those people out of office. It's just that simple. If you can't get enough support, then apparently, that's the will of the people, not just the legislators. Personally, I don't think the problem is that they don't collect enough money, I think the problem is they're manifestly incompetent when it comes to managing what they do collect.
- Pstall, on 04/16/2008, -3/+15Hmmm digg wont like this post since the politicians that are pushing for this are democratic. I would not be surprised if *gasp* Obama supported taxing all online sales.
I am ready to be dugg down for my comment that puts Obama in a bad light.- inkyblue2, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9everyone here realizes that internet sales are already taxed, right? it's called "use tax," and you're required to pay it. right now, most individuals don't really bother paying it, and states don't put a lot of effort into cracking down on it for small purchases, but it's still technically the law.
the only reason anyone bothers paying sales tax is because you have no choice; the seller is required to collect it from you at the time of sale. if you were on the honor system for keeping all your receipts and paying sales tax once a year, nobody would bother paying, and 99% of those failures to pay would be worth the time spent trying to follow up on them for the state. proposals to start collecting tax on interstate transactions aren't creating new taxes, they're just shifting the burden to the seller in order to make implementation and enforcement easier. - sinurgy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8Someone needs to invent a Democrat that doesn't like to tax or a Republican with a conscience.
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 04/16/2008, -2/+8They are called libertarians.
- inkyblue2, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9everyone here realizes that internet sales are already taxed, right? it's called "use tax," and you're required to pay it. right now, most individuals don't really bother paying it, and states don't put a lot of effort into cracking down on it for small purchases, but it's still technically the law.
- dt40, on 04/16/2008, -9/+5Argue against sales taxes if you want, but it is silly that the mechanism of purchase defines whether sales tax gets paid. There should be consistent payment of taxes for purchases, or there shouldn't be taxes for purchases. There should not be a loophole for buying something through a catalog or through the internet.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+13It's not a "loophole", it is this little document called the "constitution." There is a mechanism to change it; it's in article V, entitled "amendment." Until that happens, one state has no authority to tax purchases made from a seller in another state. The feds have authority over interstate commerce. No one else. There are very good reasons for this, for instance, you wouldn't want a state downstream of you taxing you for water use, would you? Or taxing you for road work that leads to your state? Or for things that have no obvious connection to you and your actions at all?
- brob2234, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1States have every right to tax the citizens within their state on purchases made by those citizens. In fact, it is currently the law in most states that people are expected to pay sales tax on their out-of-state purchases, but this is not currently enforced.
Per the Supreme Court (they’re mentioned in the constitution, something about them being able to interpret the constitution), a constitutional change is not required for this enforcement of existing sales taxes. FTA:
'States are currently limited in their sales tax collection authority because of a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Quill v. North Dakota case. It says retailers aren't required to collect sales taxes from customers who live in states where they don't have a physical presence, or "nexus." The justices did, however, make it clear that Congress could step in and change the rules.'
- brob2234, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1States have every right to tax the citizens within their state on purchases made by those citizens. In fact, it is currently the law in most states that people are expected to pay sales tax on their out-of-state purchases, but this is not currently enforced.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+13It's not a "loophole", it is this little document called the "constitution." There is a mechanism to change it; it's in article V, entitled "amendment." Until that happens, one state has no authority to tax purchases made from a seller in another state. The feds have authority over interstate commerce. No one else. There are very good reasons for this, for instance, you wouldn't want a state downstream of you taxing you for water use, would you? Or taxing you for road work that leads to your state? Or for things that have no obvious connection to you and your actions at all?
- TRScheel, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9Incompetence I will agree with, but it also seems like they have no value in the money they do collect.
A day in the life of the average politician: Throw a few million there, a few million here, what we are out of millions? Tax more and print more! Problem solved, now back to throwing around millions...- lazyfisherman, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5Agreed, throwing more money at political problems only prolongs the problems. Cut off the money and you'll start to see change (bad at first for everyone, better as more people who are only in it for the money leave politics).
- Frnnkdlxx, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1Yeah, just like you voted Bush out... Enjoy Arnie as prez in 2012.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6I voted against him both times. That -- in the final analysis -- is the only thing I can control. I have always spoken out against having a moron as president on general principles, I have spoken out against putting troops on the ground in any country that hasn't actively attacked us as a matter of state policy, I have spoken out repeatedly and in detail against the erosion of the basic principles of liberty the people of this country have allowed to occur to suck up to the imaginary "it will save the children" lies. I have spoken out against ex post facto laws, against the inversion of the commerce clause, against the erosion of virtually the entire bill of rights, against racial, sexual, and age based discrimination... doesn't seem to matter much. We got Bush anyway. Twice. And now, when we could have had Ron Paul, someone I actually thought had it mostly right, we're going to get either Obama (who, for a constitutional law professor, shows very little comprehension of the constitution) or McCain, who while I laud his service, I fear his leadership, or Senator Clinton, who I fear above them all because I don't believe for an instant that she makes choices based on liberty, honor, or common sense. Add that to the roaring recession, verging on depression, that Bush has crafted for us by incurring incredible amounts of debt and allowing the financial sector to run wild, and I think the next few years are going to be very, very rough for this country.
Not that any of that will stop me from trying to encourage others to vote. - huntersquid, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Arnold can't run for president anyway. But he (Or Mr. T, for that matter) would make a better president than Bush any day of the year.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Not yet.. but check out theblackcommentator in the google search engine with arnold schwarzenegger and dana (forgot her last name) they're pushing legislation that makes him eligible...
- Divals, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2I pity the fool that voted for Bush!
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6I voted against him both times. That -- in the final analysis -- is the only thing I can control. I have always spoken out against having a moron as president on general principles, I have spoken out against putting troops on the ground in any country that hasn't actively attacked us as a matter of state policy, I have spoken out repeatedly and in detail against the erosion of the basic principles of liberty the people of this country have allowed to occur to suck up to the imaginary "it will save the children" lies. I have spoken out against ex post facto laws, against the inversion of the commerce clause, against the erosion of virtually the entire bill of rights, against racial, sexual, and age based discrimination... doesn't seem to matter much. We got Bush anyway. Twice. And now, when we could have had Ron Paul, someone I actually thought had it mostly right, we're going to get either Obama (who, for a constitutional law professor, shows very little comprehension of the constitution) or McCain, who while I laud his service, I fear his leadership, or Senator Clinton, who I fear above them all because I don't believe for an instant that she makes choices based on liberty, honor, or common sense. Add that to the roaring recession, verging on depression, that Bush has crafted for us by incurring incredible amounts of debt and allowing the financial sector to run wild, and I think the next few years are going to be very, very rough for this country.
- Pstall, on 04/16/2008, -3/+15Hmmm digg wont like this post since the politicians that are pushing for this are democratic. I would not be surprised if *gasp* Obama supported taxing all online sales.
- litkaj, on 04/16/2008, -0/+7Large retailers are probably the only ones who would be able to cope with having to charge sales tax for hundreds, if not thousands, of jurisdictions. Small retailers would never be able to keep up with all of the state and local taxes they'd be forced to collect.
I for one don't like the government double dipping into my pocket, taxing my income when I receive it and then taxing me again when I use the money they let me keep. I would support the complete abolition of sales tax in favor of slightly higher state income taxes as it would make everything easier on the consumers and retailers and the states would still get their money.- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6I'd prefer complete abolition of income tax and a uniform sales tax on everything [except the home you live in, utilities for that home, one car per individual, food purchased from a grocery store, medical care and education], from which the feds get a cut, and the states get a cut. Sure would save a lot of screwing around. Of course, that's why it'll never happen.
- seekskater21, on 04/16/2008, -2/+9"I'm I'm elected president, I'll be sure to make sure commerce on the internet is permanently tax free." - John McCain
- RedRoomGames, on 04/16/2008, -5/+4That's like "Read my lips, no new taxes" for the Internet generation.
Which was a lie because Bush Sr raised taxes.- dmadzak, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Your comment would be 100% correct, but for one fatal flaw. This is John McCain and not George Bush. John McCain also has a voting record to match his words in the specific case as well.
- KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2@dmadzak: John McCain sponsored immigration legislation that he said he would now vote against. Thus, we have evidence of John McCain flipflopping under pressure from Republican voters.
- irinotecan, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2When politicians crow about wanting a "tax free" internet, they are being duplicitous. What they really mean is an "excise tax free" internet. That is, all those little surcharges that you pay on your phone bill for who knows what every month is what they promise to keep away. But they are almost all universally for the proper collection of sales tax.
The only reason why it hasn't happened already is because they are so goddamn greedy over it, that nobody can come to a consciousness of how to force retailers into collecting the sales tax, because all the various state, city, county, and local sales tax rates are such a jumbled mess.
- RedRoomGames, on 04/16/2008, -5/+4That's like "Read my lips, no new taxes" for the Internet generation.
- speedk0re, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4I used to work for one of those big retailers, and I was in charge of taxation. Trust me; they don't care about taxing people; they just want to make sure the correct amount is charged. The creators of the software needed to breakdown the sophisticated taxation based on state (and in some cases city), not to mention product types, etc... those are the people who should care and protest, because if there's a uniform tax, they lose their business
- rcook18, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1There is no reason state sales tax would not be collected on internet sales. Why should the stores in your home town be at an economic disadvantage?
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+35They may not have enough clout, but we do. Vote those people out of office. It's just that simple. If you can't get enough support, then apparently, that's the will of the people, not just the legislators. Personally, I don't think the problem is that they don't collect enough money, I think the problem is they're manifestly incompetent when it comes to managing what they do collect.
- lucidguru, on 04/16/2008, -7/+52Lol... they think that they can regulate the internet!? Can you say P2P sales?
- Railz, on 04/16/2008, -5/+18wt---How the hell are you going to P2P something like oh say, a ***** Video Card?
- litkaj, on 04/16/2008, -0/+18I think he meant person-to-person, as in eBay, Craigslist, etc., not peer-to-peer, as is "|33ch 4|| my m0v135 d00d!".
- Alfredosauce, on 04/17/2008, -0/+11
- litkaj, on 04/16/2008, -0/+18I think he meant person-to-person, as in eBay, Craigslist, etc., not peer-to-peer, as is "|33ch 4|| my m0v135 d00d!".
- rudy23, on 04/16/2008, -1/+10you mean ebay?
- talonstriker, on 04/16/2008, -4/+2That would only validate crazy politicians' notions that bittorrent is illegal.
- Planets, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1So, you believe P2P is legal if politicians don't say otherwise?
- talonstriker, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3I couldn't care less of what they think. The danger is when they pass laws and get ISPs to start snooping on us. The worst part is that they'd have a moral highground for doing so, because they're merely attempting to collect taxes to keep the State running.
- MewtwoReturns, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2He doesn't mean P2P downloading -- he means P2P sales, setting up a system (kinda like eBay, but kinda not) where you connect someone who wants to sell something with someone else who wants to buy it, and then they complete the deal on their own -- think Craigslist. Government doesn't track it, government doesn't get its cut.
- Planets, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1So, you believe P2P is legal if politicians don't say otherwise?
- vinnyvenus, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4This already happen in European Union in the form of VAT which applies to internet purchases..So they have already pulled it off.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6...and NOW you wish you were allowed to have guns... heh heh heh.
- DavidGX, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1You idiot.
- terajoule, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1The internet is not a big truck. It's a series of tubes!
- Railz, on 04/16/2008, -5/+18wt---How the hell are you going to P2P something like oh say, a ***** Video Card?
- freedomwv, on 04/16/2008, -3/+67`money has been unfairly left in taxpayers' pocketbooks` Those greedy bastards. The less the government gets the better. If they would actually do the job they are elected to do then maybe more people would not have such a big issue paying their taxes.
- benbfree, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3I was thinking the same thing. If government officials want to start a debate about fairness I'm all for it. 1st round) Let's discuss the outrageous spending habits of the government. It's insatiable appetite for our tax dollars has reared it's ugly head, and we're not going to take it.
- paker, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2"The less the government gets the better"
If I remember correctly it was a Bill Clinton campaign promise during his first run for office to make government smaller and not create more government jobs. - UtilityPole, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4"Money has been unfairly left in taxpayers' pocketbooks"?
***** that- we worked for that money. There's nothing "unfair" about wanting to keep money that you worked for. Assholes.
- zombird, on 04/16/2008, -10/+3My bank already charges me a fee for online transactions. It's pretty lame.
- T8erT0T, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9Get a new bank, stat!
- skatastrophy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+11You need to put your money in a new bank.
- pandlcg, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6Why would you possibly stay at that bank?
- rudy23, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5what bank do you use?
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9Tell your bank they could at least buy you dinner before they ***** you.
- Amythe, on 04/16/2008, -23/+1If the Fair Tax goes through this will have to happen anyway. I say HERE HERE!
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -7/+8you mean the unfair tax.. it's funny how the super rich have been able to sell this to middle income americans on a regressive tax.
how bout we get rid of the sales tax, and instead of getting rid of the the estate tax(which the ultra wealthy want because they are the only ones effected by it).. change it to a 75% tax on all estate over a million dollars for the deceased..
tax, and disparage problems solved.. care of me.. k thanx- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -1/+7No one deserves to be taxed 75%. The best solution would be to drastically decrease our spending, which in itself tends to benefit the rich and those in power, only then can we decrease our national debt.
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -6/+2if you die, and your estate is worth 1 million.. the people receiving your estate would receive 1 million dollars..
2 million dollars they would receive 1.25 million dollars..
you die with 1 billion.. your inheritance check would still be 251 million dollars after taxes..
750 million to the betterment of the u.s. 250 to the betterment of some rich kid..
seems fair...
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -6/+2if you die, and your estate is worth 1 million.. the people receiving your estate would receive 1 million dollars..
- mesasone, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2I'm no fan of the "Fair Tax" but what you suggest is ludicrous.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -1/+7No one deserves to be taxed 75%. The best solution would be to drastically decrease our spending, which in itself tends to benefit the rich and those in power, only then can we decrease our national debt.
- FascistUtopia, on 04/16/2008, -3/+5you are both wrong. NO tax, at all, EVER.
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -5/+6no roads, and internet for you
- FascistUtopia, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2ahh, because those things couldn't continue existing without daddy govt. since taxes are stolen from me to pay for these items, i have no choice but to use them since private competition isn't allowed by the state. you may be happy with state control over your life but some of aren't.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -1/+5Unlikely, but government should be severely limited in its power, and giving it ***** tons of money always serves to impose the opposite. In 2012, when our zombie founding fathers rise from their graves, they are gonna be hella pissed.
- jtscira, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3So we go back into living in caves ? The government just has to learn to use the money more efficiently. Too much waste.
- FascistUtopia, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2so those are the 2 options? loss of technological advancement or state sanctioned theft??
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -5/+6no roads, and internet for you
- plarp, on 04/16/2008, -7/+8you mean the unfair tax.. it's funny how the super rich have been able to sell this to middle income americans on a regressive tax.
- Lane, on 04/16/2008, -9/+3Or.....make it legal and TAX IT
- dimebonics, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Agreed! We'd solve the deficit overnight!
- Nick22, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Internet shopping is illegal now?
- dOOBiEx213, on 04/16/2008, -1/+64This won't work on Craigslist. ^_^
- galeninjapan, on 04/16/2008, -0/+17craigslist is the wild west of the internet.
- rakous, on 04/16/2008, -0/+16I thought 4chan was, oh wait it is the ***** hole of the internet.
- MasterGrief, on 04/16/2008, -1/+8Keeping with the Wild West theme, I'm gonna call 4chan the outhouse of the internet.
- allisonaxe, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3no, 4chan is the looney bin, full of all the concentrated crazy of the internet.
- Sairgem, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2They're not crazy, they're just idiots. Crazy people don't really have control over how stupid they act. 4chan is just full of immature preteens (or at least, people who act that age).
- rakous, on 04/16/2008, -0/+16I thought 4chan was, oh wait it is the ***** hole of the internet.
- galeninjapan, on 04/16/2008, -0/+17craigslist is the wild west of the internet.
- Planets, on 04/16/2008, -9/+2Transactions online are tax free? Might want to tell that to Newegg.
- Pstall, on 04/16/2008, -1/+13You might want to check what state you live in and what states Newegg is based in...
- duster805, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2You only pay tax now on intrastate transactions, i.e. if the store you are buying from has an actual storefront or is headquarted in your state, like BestBuy down the street from you or Amazon if you live in Washington.
- Pstall, on 04/16/2008, -13/+9Wha... you need taxes to support national heath care?
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -4/+13Wha... you need taxes to support a worldwide occupation force and to line the pockets of our so called elected representatives' corporate buddies?
- ExRe, on 04/16/2008, -5/+5Huh, you need to pay for health insurance?
And it costs more because it is a for-profit business?
What kind of craziness is that!?!?!?!?- mbonnin, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Is there such a thing as a for-loss business?
- shauncorleone, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1And then it costs less because another for-profit business figures out a better way to package and market it for cheaper? Huh?
Repeat after me: Free market competition good. Boo, Government Monopoly.
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -4/+3No level of taxes that wouldn't have the people fleeing across the borders could support national healthcare in this country. Anyone who thinks otherwise is suffering from delusions...
- 808kick, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2I probably pay less tax than you and I have access to national healthcare
- dan222555, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1In case you haven't realized, not all nations are identical. Other nations may be able to afford national health care but this country cannot.
- ExRe, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2The solution is simple really, don't give treatment to illegal immigrants, which they would not do (except in very serious conditions) anyways.
- dan222555, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1The same liberals that give illegal immigrants driver's licenses, let their kids attend our public schools, want to give them social security, and whatever other handouts they're giving them these days are going to deny them access to national healthcare? Keep dreaming.
- 808kick, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2I probably pay less tax than you and I have access to national healthcare
- rjn17960, on 04/16/2008, -8/+23I'll be happy to pay sales tax on Internet purchases as long as they also start taxing capital gains and dividend income the same as earned income. Don't just stick it to the middle class.
- FascistUtopia, on 04/16/2008, -4/+12nice. so as long as everyone is getting screwed by the govt, you're ok with it. do you even hear what you are saying? here's a radical concept- how about nobody pays taxes? taxes are theft, regardless of economic class.
- sloppychris, on 04/16/2008, -1/+7You're the one who is mistaken. Stealing is allowed as long as the person you're stealing from makes more money than you.
- KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -3/+5If taxes are theft, then please never call 911, use roads, use city hospitals, go to a state university, use the municipal water supply, use public parks, etc., because that would make you complicit in theft.
- cubicledrone, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Hmmm... toll roads, hospitals ain't free, state universities ain't free, municipal water ain't free, it's $10 to park at the... heh heh... park. What theft again?
- KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Every road you use is toll? You didn't talk about 911. Municipal water, state universities, and state hospitals are HEAVILY subsidized. For an example regarding state universities, when more state tax monies were funneled to the UT system here in Texas, tuition was half of what it is now. Tuition at The University of Texas has literally DOUBLED in the past six years because of a decrease in state support.
- sloppychris, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Ok, ok, calling taxes stealing is a bit oversimplified. But I'd be willing to bet that 90% of our taxes fund programs that aren't roads, police, or schools.
- cubicledrone, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Hmmm... toll roads, hospitals ain't free, state universities ain't free, municipal water ain't free, it's $10 to park at the... heh heh... park. What theft again?
- AlKo, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3Of course taxing Internet purchases hits the middle class the hardest.
Do you really think the politcos are going to reach into the pockets of the lobbyist buddies? They may be our representatives but I know that at least my Congressman doesn't really represent us when he votes to keep the troops in Iraq and provide more funding for the war. Polls done in my area call for the opposite of what he votes for...
There are states in the Union where there is no sales tax. It hurts those states the most. - irinotecan, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3You are aware that capital gains, if taken in under a year from when you purchased the stock, is in fact taxed at a higher rate than ordinary income, and that capital gains after that are taxed at the same rate as income tax?
- Mothrog, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3The middle class can own stock too, dimwit.
- FascistUtopia, on 04/16/2008, -4/+12nice. so as long as everyone is getting screwed by the govt, you're ok with it. do you even hear what you are saying? here's a radical concept- how about nobody pays taxes? taxes are theft, regardless of economic class.
- digitallysick, on 04/16/2008, -2/+13I buy anywhere that i don't have to pay tax, so i hope they keep that in mind.
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Which would be where? If your state has a sales tax, then you are supposed to be paying tax on internet purchases anyway.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2My state doesn't have a sales tax. Montana.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2My state doesn't have a sales tax. Montana.
- Thorlord, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1im wondering how and if this will effect Oregon purchases, since oregon does not have sales tax even in physical stores im wondering if they are going to attempt to tax our online purchases? if that is so then it would be more like taxing the internet than taxing the purchase.
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Which would be where? If your state has a sales tax, then you are supposed to be paying tax on internet purchases anyway.
- CrunchyDeluxe, on 04/16/2008, -4/+20This is not okay. Not in the slightest.
- WilliamDavis, on 04/16/2008, -2/+8Not only will you be expected to pay the taxes, but you'll also be expected to pay for the record keeping nightmares of etailers.
- JoeBaynham, on 04/16/2008, -6/+7Its always been that way in the uk, sucks.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6If they pass it here, people will be extremely pissed off. We have a long history of refusing to pay unjust taxes. Remember the Boston Tea Party, why not a Boston LAN Party. We could easily subjugate internet taxes, for we know it is a series of tubes, and not a big truck.
- bosssmiley, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1The Boston Tea Party was actually a revolt over a *just* tax, just not one the colonies were accustomed to paying. "Pay for our protection against the French and Indians? How dare they!" Tea ---> overboard
- nonpareil, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Don't you poms have VAT? "Tax" as it appears in the states - an irritating percentage that you don't see until *after* the item is wrung up - is different from VAT, psychologically and in terms of economic effect in the marketplace.
- nandasunu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Our prices normally have the tax included, but its still there and much more than in the USA, its 17.5% I believe.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+4Oh, prices in the US have many taxes built into them. This is just *one* tax that they show us, so we're deluded into thinking that the price on the item is actually its worth.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+6to the moron who dug me down: Consider a loaf of bread. The baker pays X for the materials, Y for the baking, packaging, transport to him, etc. He also pays Z for the income taxes of his laborers. And where does he GET that amount, Z? Why, from you, when you buy the loaf of bread. Yes, that's right. When you buy bread, you're paying hidden INCOME tax. But wait, there's more! That bread had to be transported to YOU. And that price too is built into the bread. And again, YOU pay it at the till. Nothing wrong with that, in essence, right? I mean, it DOES have to be transported... but of course, the trucker pays income tax, and where does he get that money? From YOU. More hidden income tax.
Every material item you buy has income tax built into it for every person that handles it as a matter of a job. Every single thing. But YOU pay for it out of the money you have left AFTER they take income tax from YOU. In other words, I pay you $100, and the fed takes (let's say) $25) from you. So you think you're done paying income tax. But you're not. As I outlined above, everything else you buy has income tax built into it.
The problem with the current tax structure is that it literally hides taxes right under your nose, and most people don't understand they're being taxed over and over again.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+6to the moron who dug me down: Consider a loaf of bread. The baker pays X for the materials, Y for the baking, packaging, transport to him, etc. He also pays Z for the income taxes of his laborers. And where does he GET that amount, Z? Why, from you, when you buy the loaf of bread. Yes, that's right. When you buy bread, you're paying hidden INCOME tax. But wait, there's more! That bread had to be transported to YOU. And that price too is built into the bread. And again, YOU pay it at the till. Nothing wrong with that, in essence, right? I mean, it DOES have to be transported... but of course, the trucker pays income tax, and where does he get that money? From YOU. More hidden income tax.
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -2/+4Oh, prices in the US have many taxes built into them. This is just *one* tax that they show us, so we're deluded into thinking that the price on the item is actually its worth.
- iFrikkenR, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4That was the most annoying thing when i visited Canada too - Tax isn't included in the price. It's ***** retarded. If the sign says a something is $4.95 then it should cost $4.95 not ***** $5.33. beter yet, the dolalr store, nothing actually costs a dollar it's $1.14 how about adjust the price to that price + tax = advertised cost. it's simple. the minority who are tax exempt should do the math to work out their price is lower
- nandasunu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Our prices normally have the tax included, but its still there and much more than in the USA, its 17.5% I believe.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6If they pass it here, people will be extremely pissed off. We have a long history of refusing to pay unjust taxes. Remember the Boston Tea Party, why not a Boston LAN Party. We could easily subjugate internet taxes, for we know it is a series of tubes, and not a big truck.
- dimebonics, on 04/16/2008, -2/+43Jesus christ when is it going to be enough? Everyone else has to budget their goddamn income, why do the politicians feel when they are running out of money they can just tax us more? Apparently they didn't have a summer job or allowance when they were younger, because they obviously have no idea of the value of a dollar (in the sense of the phrase, not the actual unit).
- WakeUpToFreedom, on 04/16/2008, -8/+7Just now finding this out slave?
- dimebonics, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Hardly, I've been listening to Bill Hicks for years now, watch who you try to call out.
- WakeUpToFreedom, on 04/16/2008, -8/+7Just now finding this out slave?
- talonstriker, on 04/16/2008, -3/+7This is stupid. How would they regulate websites that are not based in the US?
- darkciti2, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6Shipping.
- nandasunu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4They can charge tax when it arrives in the country. This is how it currently works when shipping stuff from the USA to the UK for example, double tax for us, yay!
- fyngyrz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6Actually, that was the original source of funds for the government. Import duties and the like. They considered it absolutely unacceptable to tax the citizens, and the idea of an income tax was enough to get someone shot. That didn't really change until 1861.
- bosssmiley, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Mutual trade agreements?
- darkciti2, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6Shipping.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -3/+36Not paying sales tax online can dissuade consumers from buying locally, but since when you order online, you have to pay shipping costs, which can be quite outrageous in their own right, if the sales tax were applied to online shopping it could destroy the market. Leave it to Congress to think they know whats best for the American economy. No doubt there will be Republicans voting on this as well as Democrats, since neither party stands for ***** anymore.
- jtown, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4That doesn't account for the cost of shipping. You'll often be charged more for shipping than you would have paid in tax. It's not the tax that pushes people to online purchases. It's the total cost of the transaction. If I can buy an item for $400 plus tax 10 blocks away or $350 plus tax and shipping online, I'll buy online if I don't need it right away. In fact, I did just that very thing recently. Saved me around $40. Physical storefronts are an anachronism when it comes to commodity goods. It's all about price. I don't care who sells me a hard drive, camera, television, washing machine, desk, lamp, book, dvd, etc. The vendor is irrelevant. It's the same item whether I pay full retail or wholesale. The only advantage to buying locally is customer service. Take a poll and see how many people are happy with the customer service they get at their local box stores. Ignorant staff, worthless management, insulting "security" checks.
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Not everything comes at a discount online(especially one that big(unless you count those websites that are a little tough to trust) videogames for example would stop being purchased online, for example I just bought a PS3 off Amazon at about 400 bucks + shipping it was about 30(yeah at that price i can get free super saver shipping but no freaking way am i shipping ground on something as delicate as a console, UPS is already tough enough to trust i've recieved boxes already open at times that looked so beat up i couldn't believe the guy who was handing me the package didn't have any problem), I can walk down to gamestop and pay 400 + tax about 32 in my state for a 400 dollar purchase, If i had to pay 400 + 32 + 30 why would i go shop online especially since i could go get that ps3 right now, this would apply to video games as well because at most i'll say 1-3 dollars(if any) on a game(a new one) on the internet
- mesasone, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1You used plenty of commas and apostrophes but not a single period. Truly amazing.
- jtown, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0How do you think your console gets to gamestop? Do you think it's made in the back room by magical elves? It's shipped there. Ground.
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Not everything comes at a discount online(especially one that big(unless you count those websites that are a little tough to trust) videogames for example would stop being purchased online, for example I just bought a PS3 off Amazon at about 400 bucks + shipping it was about 30(yeah at that price i can get free super saver shipping but no freaking way am i shipping ground on something as delicate as a console, UPS is already tough enough to trust i've recieved boxes already open at times that looked so beat up i couldn't believe the guy who was handing me the package didn't have any problem), I can walk down to gamestop and pay 400 + tax about 32 in my state for a 400 dollar purchase, If i had to pay 400 + 32 + 30 why would i go shop online especially since i could go get that ps3 right now, this would apply to video games as well because at most i'll say 1-3 dollars(if any) on a game(a new one) on the internet
- jtown, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4That doesn't account for the cost of shipping. You'll often be charged more for shipping than you would have paid in tax. It's not the tax that pushes people to online purchases. It's the total cost of the transaction. If I can buy an item for $400 plus tax 10 blocks away or $350 plus tax and shipping online, I'll buy online if I don't need it right away. In fact, I did just that very thing recently. Saved me around $40. Physical storefronts are an anachronism when it comes to commodity goods. It's all about price. I don't care who sells me a hard drive, camera, television, washing machine, desk, lamp, book, dvd, etc. The vendor is irrelevant. It's the same item whether I pay full retail or wholesale. The only advantage to buying locally is customer service. Take a poll and see how many people are happy with the customer service they get at their local box stores. Ignorant staff, worthless management, insulting "security" checks.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 04/16/2008, -7/+2I'm ready to fight and die for a tax free internet!!!
On Runescape, of course...
GIVE ME FREE MMO OR GIVE ME RPG DEATH!- IndigoMoss, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3I'd rather have "RPG death" than play Runescape.
- lhbaker, on 04/16/2008, -3/+6How many politicians have EVER made a purchase on the Internet?
- viserov, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6I think one member of Congress tried once. I know this because I was sending an e-mail one day and noticed the intertubes were slow.
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3probably quite a few. I love how you think you are more technoloigically savvy than anyone else.
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4how much money does a politician have(the average one) This kind of tax is a burden on the middle class not the upper, and the decision makers are the upper
- lhbaker, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Yeah. One ***** refers to it as a series of tubes, and the President refers to it as the Internets. So I'm guessing they don't use it much. I love how you think you and a politician have anything in common.
- bjos144, on 04/16/2008, -10/+11I know this wont be a popular opinion, but I really do not have a problem with this. I don't mind paying taxes, I mind what they get spent on a lot(Iraq etc) , but I also like having paved roads, police (usually) and the like. If they can find a way to do it that isn't completely retarded I'm all for it
- reed311, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1It's kind of similar to what large companies do to cheat taxes when they set up a mailbox in the Bahamas. People are purchasing goods that they would normally have to pay sales tax on. We've had a free ride for a while for Internet purchases, but it may soon be coming to an end. Obviously, no one wants to pay taxes; but they wouldn't be paying any more tax than they normally would on the goods they purchased.
- nonpareil, on 04/16/2008, -3/+13Get bent. There are ample other ways to raise revenue for "paved roads, police and the like." If your leadership wasn't dropping 3 TRILLION MOTHERFRACKING DOLLARS on A POINTLESS WAR, taxing people who have and make millions as if they were broke, and doing a million other things completely wrong, these assholes wouldn't have to spend their days and nights thinking up new areas of commerce to tax.
- mancat, on 04/16/2008, -1/+5A better alternative would be to cut spending on the things that don't matter.
- IceSabre, on 04/16/2008, -6/+1I had to digg you up because this was exactly my thought. People will argue against because they don't want to. Just like they argued that Napster was legal because they want free music. If you drove to another state and bought something, you paid taxes on it. Why should internet sales be any different. Now what is retarded is they want the etailers to charge the tax for the state the person is buying from but that is just stupid. You don't drive to Maine and buy gas and has Roscoe find out where you came from to figure out your taxes... no you pay the tax where the stuff was sold. I think that should apply to this also. No tax on internet has also thrown off local sales of goods. Buy a new computer off newegg and pay $60 shipping with no taxes... or buy local with $80 taxes. No incentive now. Add taxes and that online computer goes to $140 taxes and shipping and is not attractive anymore.
What crap they spend it on is a whole different and sad topic. - KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2I would support sales tax on the internet if it meant that the state would use the funds to constantly update the pipes to be the fastest they could be, and then to make an internet connection free.
- sphigel, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Don't take this the wrong way but ***** off. You can do whatever the hell you want with your money. If you don't think you're paying enough money to government write them a check at the end of the year. There is nothing noble about telling other people what to do with their money.
- whyufail, on 04/16/2008, -2/+4I have to pay tax on just about everything I buy online as it is. It's very, very dumb.
- KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1You must buy everything from Apple, because they're the only store online that has me pay sales tax.
- Jegzzy, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3They are just trying to nail us down even more.
- duster805, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3Time to start short selling FedEx and UPS...
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1yeah this would hurt them a lot too they're already getting hurt because of rising fuel costs
- darkciti2, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6I want names...
- tumbler360, on 04/16/2008, -1/+15"The Senate version is sponsored by Republican Michael Enzi of Wyoming and Democrat Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, and the House of Representatives version was introduced by Democrat Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts and is co-sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the influential House Judiciary Committee."
That is all you need to know. Don't vote for these guys. And anyone who votes to pass the bill, don't vote for them. - MrsButtersworth, on 04/16/2008, -1/+25If they practiced responsible spending with my taxes they already take, I dont think there would be a need for more tax.
- blugill, on 04/16/2008, -7/+17All you Digg liberal socialists pay attention!
Liberals are wanting to TAX YOU for internet purchases!
The same people who you vote for.....well those of you who are old enough to vote that is......- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -7/+6No doubt members from both parties will vote to pass this *****. We now have two big-government parties. McCain will probably vote for this, he is not a true republican, ***** squirrel cheeked piece of *****, and so would Obama.
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -5/+2"No doubt members from both parties will vote to pass this *****."
Delusions....I'll be my life that if a vote ever came to floor on this more people with (D)'s next to their names than (R)'s will be shouting yay.- mesasone, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3Why would you put your life on the line for that?
- dan222555, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Because it's not really on the line...it's no contest. It's like betting my life that pigs will fly tomorrow.
- mesasone, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3Why would you put your life on the line for that?
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -5/+2"No doubt members from both parties will vote to pass this *****."
- DavidGX, on 04/16/2008, -5/+4I'll take taxing the internet over pushing christianity on other countries.. with explosions.
- dan222555, on 04/17/2008, -6/+2LOL is that what the far left is charging now? We're modern day crusaders!? Loosen up that tinfoil hat...
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2nah, but you guys have a nack for pushing your beliefs on others, keep it to your congregation and leave me alone
- dan222555, on 04/17/2008, -6/+2LOL is that what the far left is charging now? We're modern day crusaders!? Loosen up that tinfoil hat...
- ecidnac, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Sounds good to me.
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -7/+6No doubt members from both parties will vote to pass this *****. We now have two big-government parties. McCain will probably vote for this, he is not a true republican, ***** squirrel cheeked piece of *****, and so would Obama.
- Chairboy, on 04/16/2008, -3/+6I live in Oregon, so... nope. kthxbai
(Oregon has no sales tax, for those scratching their heads.)- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -0/+12The Federal sales tax is coming, soon as they can trick you into thinking you need it.
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -3/+4If it replaces the income tax (a la FairTax) then bring it on...
- Chairboy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I'm the grandparent poster, and I endorse this comment. Loon47 for prez,
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -3/+4If it replaces the income tax (a la FairTax) then bring it on...
- duster805, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4too bad they make it up in your property tax and your monthly rent if you're not a property owner. The money's gotta come from somewhere.
- coreman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Hmm... Oregon property taxes are capped. Most Oregonians do not really know what taxation is. Hmm... Illinois (along with many midwest states): sales tax, income tax (and income tax for Chicago). In 2003, my house was valued ~200K (Lake Co., IL), property taxes were close to $6000/yr. And Portlanders complain about their property taxes... (but property taxes on $1million+ house in Lake Forest were ~$15K/yr. Go figure).
I'll take Oregon's income tax vs Washington's sales tax, or both like in California.- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1damn i wanna move to oregan, how do you guys feel about people who are half asian and half white, cause over here in new york white people think i'm asian, and asians think i'm some kind of mutant-i don't belong to any group sadly : (
- coreman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Hmm... Oregon property taxes are capped. Most Oregonians do not really know what taxation is. Hmm... Illinois (along with many midwest states): sales tax, income tax (and income tax for Chicago). In 2003, my house was valued ~200K (Lake Co., IL), property taxes were close to $6000/yr. And Portlanders complain about their property taxes... (but property taxes on $1million+ house in Lake Forest were ~$15K/yr. Go figure).
- cnot3, on 04/16/2008, -0/+12The Federal sales tax is coming, soon as they can trick you into thinking you need it.
- FukUrCouch, on 04/16/2008, -2/+4It's time for all the online retailers to unite and use their tons and tons of money to lobby congress against this!
- Shaman760, on 04/16/2008, -2/+25Why not just declare marijuana legal and tax it? There's the national deficit problem, fixed.
- DavidGX, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3jesus freaks, that's why not.
- phlashlite, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4That would be too logical and sensible. Heaven forbid we do something intelligent like that...
- adml_shake, on 04/16/2008, -2/+18You fat pocketed *****. I JUST GAVE YOU MONEY!!! I wonder what they would say if you asked them..."You give your child and allowance, however your kid comes back up to you a little while later and says "I need more, you didn't give me enough." Do you think it would be A. "well Jr. you have to learn to be more careful with the money you get and don't waste it on things you don't need and can't afford." Or would it be B. "Well Jr. Why don't you go next door and see if any of the neighbors will loan you some cash, and if you need more you can try going back to them again!"
- KyleGoetz, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Join the Change Congress movement. http://change-congress.org/
- subversive1, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9"It's not exactly clear how much money states are losing to uncollected use taxes" How can you lose it if you never had it in the first place?
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1You aer a simple minded individual, aren't you? It is lost revenue becuase people are SUPPOSED to be paying taxes on it. People hsould have been paying it for the past 13 years that the internet has really been around.
- benbfree, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4Except for the whole use tax thing. We're not supposed to be paying taxes for things bought out of state. They want to change the law, not enforce it.
- bingobongony, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Uhhh...wrong. Nice try, but tryingt o bluff your way through life is not a good way to go.
You are supposed to claim your internet purchases and pay a tax on them when you file your tax return. And this includes items bought out of state.- benbfree, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1What are you talking about? I just mentioned the 'use tax'. Go read, it will help you learn things.
- bingobongony, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Uhhh...wrong. Nice try, but tryingt o bluff your way through life is not a good way to go.
- benbfree, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4Except for the whole use tax thing. We're not supposed to be paying taxes for things bought out of state. They want to change the law, not enforce it.
- ShempRider, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Aw, fer chrissakes stop making sense.
- hipsocket, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1""It's not exactly clear how much money states are losing to uncollected use taxes" How can you lose it if you never had it in the first place?"
:::
They always use that kind of terminology. Bastards. I guess it's "lost" 'cause they haven't come up with a palatable way to "find" it. Yet.
I love how, out of the four stooges that sponsored this, they managed to find a Republican to sign on to this crap too. And yet his web page pays homage to fiscal responsibility and tax freedom.
* rolls eyes *
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1You aer a simple minded individual, aren't you? It is lost revenue becuase people are SUPPOSED to be paying taxes on it. People hsould have been paying it for the past 13 years that the internet has really been around.
- nonpareil, on 04/16/2008, -3/+16Complete godamn ***** and stupidity. The notion of raising taxes, let alone implementing new ones during a recession is beyond belief, ***** crazy. For many people, particularly lower middle class folks, the tax benefit from ordering stuff on the internet - from hardware, to clothing, to food (I buy lots of non-perishable stuff on Amazon) is substantial.
Shame on assholes Republican Michael Enzi of Wyoming, Democrat Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Democrat Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts and *****-knocker Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. - govsucks, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6You know government, when you are down, they make sure to kick you. Those among us that produce nothing are salivating at the thought of stealing more resources.
- XFARB6, on 04/16/2008, -8/+4I notice that news.com spun the story to sound like this sales tax thing is the Democrat's idea. Sorry, ever since duuuuuuhbya came into office, the main agenda in Washington has been to divert more and more money into fewer and fewer hands. The sales tax is "regressive", which means that it impacts lower income folks more than upper. The so called "free marketers" would like nothing better than to have everyone pay sales tax at every stop so they can have [another] income tax cut.
One thing that has been over looked in all the noise is that when joe lunchbucket saves 7 or 8% by purchasing on line, that money does not stay in his pocket like it may with someone who has lots of discretionary income. That money gets spent into the local economy, helping to generate commerce, jobs, and yes, even additional sales taxes.
Suppose everyone was able to do all of his/her shopping on line. Suppose further that instead of spending the 7 to 8% saved, the shopper put it in a savings account. That means that if everyone did that, the local economies across the country would be hit to the tune of perhaps a billion or more per year, and the money would instead go into banks and other financial institutions (the same stupid, greedy bastards who brought you the mortgage meltdown) so they could charge premiums, handling fees and commissions, and instead of obtaining that money from the sale of their products, local merchants would have to BORROW it in order to pay their expenses. It does not take too much imagination to figure out where that leads.
Yeah, those Damn Democrats.- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -3/+4Wow...lots of words, and every single one of them made you look pathetic.
- XFARB6, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2Really? Well, I am open minded, so tell me where you think I am wrong.
- triont, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3That would be pretty much everything you said.
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1take an economics class a lot of what he said made sense
- XFARB6, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1Gee, that is instructive. Are you going to offer something, or just throw sand?
- albatross2147, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Stupid American.
- XFARB6, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Yeah, I thought as much. You have just told us everythng we need to know about you.
- XFARB6, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2Really? Well, I am open minded, so tell me where you think I am wrong.
- bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -3/+4Wow...lots of words, and every single one of them made you look pathetic.
- JasonMath, on 04/16/2008, -2/+6I'm willing to bet that most of the money from these taxes will go to socialized medicine, the war in Iraq, and pork-barrel projects. Therefore, I hope that this bill doesn't pass.
- Birdie1111, on 04/16/2008, -6/+0LISTEN. . . .ANYONE RUNNING AS AN INCUMBENT, VOTE THEM OUT. DO NOT VOTE DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN FOR ONCE!!!! VOTE THE LIFELONG POLITICIANS OUT.
IF THEY START LOSING THEIR CUSH JOBS WITH HEALTH CARE, WONDERFUL PENSIONS AND ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS MONEY TO SPEND AND SQUANDER THEY WILL WAKE UP.
VOTE ANY INCUMBENT OUT. THEY ARE NOT REPRESENTING US, THEY DO NOT CARE IT IS TIME TO DO THIS!!! WAKE UP . THEY ARE SUCKING US DRY AND THEY DON'T THINK WE WILL VOTE THEM OUT!!!- nonpareil, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT BUT SOUND DUMB.
- krnldmp, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1Some politician's days are numbered.
- stix213, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Nah, the Democrats always use the tactic that they will give you so much free stuff! Free healthcare, free welfare, free this, free that..... All that stuff sells at the voting booth..... Problem is someone is paying for it, whether it is your boss (IE the rich) so then you miss out on your next raise, or directly from you.
- dan222555, on 04/16/2008, -8/+5Democrats have never met a tax they didn't like...
- Kenzan, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6And you thought that Economic Stimulus Refund you are getting was a "gift."
- diggathome, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0That's coming out of federal money. This article is dealing with state-level taxation.
- Lunarbunny, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Makes me kind of glad I just made a tax-free purchase on Newegg. At the rate it is here I'd be paying $41.36 more for the same base price.
- jnava121, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3I can't wait until second life and stuff like that gets taxed.... I want that sword but it's 8% heavy weapon tax!! NOOOOOooooOOOOooo
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1they already tax stuff digitally, i get a tax on my world of warcraft subscription for some odd odd reason... ( i live in new york they passed something that screwed us over-yep spitzer's work also can't believe i sat in the same room as that ass once)
- onefatfrog, on 04/16/2008, -4/+5"But now, with a Democratic Congress and a potentially Democratic administration next year, the arguments may gain more political traction."
"...money has been unfairly left in taxpayers' pocketbooks."
Think very hard before you vote. I wonder how many people realize that the more liberal you get, the closer you get to socialism? We have to be very careful because, while socialistic ideas are much more "fair" and compassionate, socialism doesn't work in practice. With the current state of affairs in China and all the protests surrounding the Tibet situation, one would hope the United States (among other large nations/trade entities) would start to carefully evaluate the direction we are headed.
I am just saying we should very carefully evaluate ALL the consequences of electing each candidate in this presidential election (and the elections to come), and not let the media's talking points dictate how we vote.- XFARB6, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Amen, brother. However, the rubber really hits the road not in national elections, but in the local elections. On balance, as much fun as it is to be outraged and make sad jokes about the goings on in Washington, the real damage to us is being done right at home where 60% of the tax money is spent, and on average, less than 20% of the eligible voters bother to cast a ballot. It would be great fun to blame piss poor education, failing penal systems, weak pollution laws, crumbling infrastructure, jammed freeways, etc., on the Feds, but the plain fact is that those little nuggets belong right on the door step of the local and state governments. Everybody needs to spend just 2 hours per week making sure they stay up on what is going on down the street at City Hall, and up/down state in the capitol. the more you know, the harder it is to fool you. Is it worth 104 hours a year to you to keep the politicians from picking your pockets, restricting your liberties unnecessarily, refusing to address critical problems, and dictating stupid social policies that serve no purpose other than to fill their campaign war chests with donations? If it is, then DO IT. If not, then quit bitching and go back to watching American Idol.
- ceraphin, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Communism only works in theory, socialism can work in practice and has worked in europe in several countries(although i wouldn't want to live in one because they tax you to hell, but everything is much more relaxed and everyone seems to live longer and happier- the trade off of higher taxes and less economic growth and fewer consumer goods(they still have lots of stuff though) for fewer working hours(b/c of less competition) and health care and longer lives is pretty good for a lot of people.
- albatross2147, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Of course the joke is on you since the standard of living in the US is below that of European nations and slipping. And that is before China wakes up and realises it owns your sorry asses - which I am predicting will be about 7.5 minutes after the Olympic closing ceremony.
- XFARB6, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Just who owns who is a matter of perspective. Our economies are tied together and getting more so every day. We are China's biggest export market, so if we suffer, so do they. Don't believe it? Watch China's GDP slide if we go into a for real recession. Moreover, since they now have about a trillion dollars invested in us through currency acquisition, treasury notes and other securities, they stand to lose a ton if we even hiccup, let alone go under. It is like Chesty Puller said at the Cho San when informed that he was surrounded by 100,000 Chinese solders: "I have those little yellow bastards right where I want them".
- albatross2147, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Of course the joke is on you since the standard of living in the US is below that of European nations and slipping. And that is before China wakes up and realises it owns your sorry asses - which I am predicting will be about 7.5 minutes after the Olympic closing ceremony.
- Jforsyth89, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Blizzard has recently started charging taxes on subscriptions bought online by players that live in certain states. I know that in Massachusetts I am one of them.
- Juaquin, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3I live in CA - all the good retailers are here so I have to pay anyways :(
- Thekirby45, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1I already had to pay anyways so doesn't affect me
- SpookyApplePie, on 04/16/2008, -2/+6***** THE RIAA!!!!!
***** TAX LAW!!!!!!! - hellbent88, on 04/16/2008, -1/+5DO NOT WANT
- crugg, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1Live in CA and already pay for taxes.
-
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by