|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 29, 2008 13:28:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on May 29, 2008 14:18:26 GMT -5
Yes, I think it will be cool.
On the other hand, what the government provides, the government can also monitor and restrict?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ralph on May 29, 2008 15:04:00 GMT -5
Yes, I think it will be cool. On the other hand, what the government provides, the government can also monitor and restrict? figure out a way to tax you to death for!  |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 29, 2008 15:15:02 GMT -5
Possibly, but they can already do that now, so there really isn't much of a difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 29, 2008 20:33:19 GMT -5
I'm not an expert at this, but I've been rather closely following BPL (Broadband over Power Lines), which was (is) a scheme to provide internet access via power lines. My interest is due to my status as an amateur radio operator who uses shortwave often for US and overseas communications and whose frequencies would be polluted and made virtually useless with any but an extremely careful implementation of the technology. Power companies practically ejaculated over this potential new revenue enhancement to existing lines. But the installations in a dozen cities in the US proved dismal failures, technically. The FCC was provided with clear and compelling evidence of radio interference, but chose to do nothing. The FCC chairman, Michael Powell (son of the general and sec'y of state) refused to end the BPL experiment or to insist the power companies fix their problems. This instance, plus similar things going on now with the FCC's counterpart in Canada (Industry Canada) are beginning to show that those agencies that were established to monitor institutions for the public good have turned into nothing but taxing (indirectly) and controlling entities that will eventually limit our freedom as citizens. (E.g., State Insurance Commission, as well as Public Service Commission.) Government and the Internet is a very bad combination. Eventually, the Internet could become a government corporation that will be able to crush any competition as a bureaucratic behemoth but to act in a limiting capacity in their role as a private corporation. What is allowed or not allowed on the Internet, and what is charged for the service, will become corporate "business decisions," and have no oversight by voters, similar to the Post Office.
So the specter of the feds controlling the Internet is none to appealing. They can't even get the technology right when politics is involved and their interest in the free spread of information is clearly not in government's own best interest. But the ability to control opinions expressed and especially to tax transactions doesn't bode well for us. Can you imagine when the government decides that taxing internet transactions is so appealing they will dis-incent local big box stores in favor of Internet companies, thereby increasing their Internet revenue, their Postal delivery revenue and thus destroy local tax revenues from retail stores, the only local businesses left.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 30, 2008 5:11:20 GMT -5
the big chain stores and multi-national conglomerates have done a good job of destroying most of the local businesses.
Interesting point. But with the W3c and the other international internet standard agency, i don't see the Internet becoming a government entity per se. Those two agencies were purposely formed to prevent any corporation or government from controlling the Internet.
I would like to think that something like the ACLU would keep on top of the government to prevent it from violating our constitutional rights, e.g. the 1st amendment. But I think it would be too much of a legal nightmare for our government to regulate it as you imply. Suddenly, free speech, and al the other amendments kick in. they wouldn't be able to search your computer without a warrant, etc. I see too many legal issues that would need to be resolved before the government took over the internet.
I don't think you will see an Internet tax from Congress. However, I would not be surprised if NYS pulled scheme like that. The state already has an "optional" field to include sales tax from Internet transactions. In February, I read how there is a bill in committee that seeks to collect its sales tax from Internet companies like amazon.com for sales to NY residents. Amazon and others went up in arms about this, claiming it violated the Interstate commerce clause, and other constitutional provisions. I don't know if the bill still exists or if the committee killed it. But I would not be surprised if something similar to that showed up again with the constitutional issues ironed out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 30, 2008 5:21:56 GMT -5
I spoke too soon. I just looked at the paper and the "friday fourm" discusses the bill I just mentioned, but it's a law now. Internet companies are required to collect sales tax from NY residents.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 30, 2008 9:45:00 GMT -5
I spoke too soon. I just looked at the paper and the "friday fourm" discusses the bill I just mentioned, but it's a law now. Internet companies are required to collect sales tax from NY residents. I thought that had been true for a while. I was under the impression that although a retailer would collect sales tax on line only if they had a bricks-and-mortar presence in the state of the buyer, that legally they have for some time been required to do so regardless of their physical presence, but that states had not been enforcing that provision. Re how soon the sky will fall, so to speak, I was certainly ranting, but I believe these to be reasonable possibilities. |
|
|
|
Post by wilum47 on May 30, 2008 12:05:07 GMT -5
The bill was passed and Amazon is suing NY as unconstitutional under Interstate Commerce. Most on other boards favor Amazon.
Check my view point letter this morning....
Guess Who
Wilum
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 30, 2008 15:25:20 GMT -5
I'll take your word for it, dave. I admit my knowledge in the area is quite rusty.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 30, 2008 15:45:43 GMT -5
The bill was passed and Amazon is suing NY as unconstitutional under Interstate Commerce. Most on other boards favor Amazon. Check my view point letter this morning.... Guess Who Wilum Wilum how do I find it online? thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 30, 2008 15:52:52 GMT -5
I'll take your word for it, dave. That's a scary thought. |
|
|
|
Post by rrogers40 on May 30, 2008 18:43:28 GMT -5
I'm not an expert at this, but I've been rather closely following BPL (Broadband over Power Lines), which was (is) a scheme to provide internet access via power lines. My interest is due to my status as an amateur radio operator who uses shortwave often for US and overseas communications and whose frequencies would be polluted and made virtually useless with any but an extremely careful implementation of the technology. Power companies practically ejaculated over this potential new revenue enhancement to existing lines. But the installations in a dozen cities in the US proved dismal failures, technically. The FCC was provided with clear and compelling evidence of radio interference, but chose to do nothing. The FCC chairman, Michael Powell (son of the general and sec'y of state) refused to end the BPL experiment or to insist the power companies fix their problems. This instance, plus similar things going on now with the FCC's counterpart in Canada (Industry Canada) are beginning to show that those agencies that were established to monitor institutions for the public good have turned into nothing but taxing (indirectly) and controlling entities that will eventually limit our freedom as citizens. (E.g., State Insurance Commission, as well as Public Service Commission.) Government and the Internet is a very bad combination. Eventually, the Internet could become a government corporation that will be able to crush any competition as a bureaucratic behemoth but to act in a limiting capacity in their role as a private corporation. What is allowed or not allowed on the Internet, and what is charged for the service, will become corporate "business decisions," and have no oversight by voters, similar to the Post Office. So the specter of the feds controlling the Internet is none to appealing. They can't even get the technology right when politics is involved and their interest in the free spread of information is clearly not in government's own best interest. But the ability to control opinions expressed and especially to tax transactions doesn't bode well for us. Can you imagine when the government decides that taxing internet transactions is so appealing they will dis-incent local big box stores in favor of Internet companies, thereby increasing their Internet revenue, their Postal delivery revenue and thus destroy local tax revenues from retail stores, the only local businesses left. O who cares about shortwave radio and other radio frequencies- Ryan, who just brought his first shortwave radio yesterday (its cheap so we'll see how well it works)- and occasionally does RC stuff. As far as taxes- just another case of NY targeting something other than the actual problem- just us a shipping address from another state and then have it forwarded from there. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 31, 2008 0:26:50 GMT -5
I'll take your word for it, dave. That's a scary thought. I know. I'm not one to admit when I'm wrong. I hate being wrong. But I'm trying to work on it. Seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 31, 2008 7:56:04 GMT -5
I know. I'm not one to admit when I'm wrong. I hate being wrong. But I'm trying to work on it. Seriously. No, not you. I meant it's scary that someone would believe me. |
|
