Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Government United States News Your Rights Online

Internet Tax Approved By Louisiana House 305

Stinky Litter Box writes "WWL-TV in New Orleans reports that the Louisiana House voted 81-9 on Thursday to propose that a '15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activity.' Can you say 'slippery slope?' The good news is that Gov. Jindal opposes such a tax. Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet Tax Approved By Louisiana House

Comments Filter:
  • Re:I'm confused (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2009 @09:16AM (#28221235)

    Seems to be working out pretty well. Do you like the highway system? See any economic value? The gas tax is the natural way(*) to pay for the common infrastructure (roads) that are used and degraded by the vehicles that run on gas.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Highway_Trust_Fund_(United_States)

    For what it's worth, the original federal tax on gasoline was $0.03 /gal, about 10%. Inflation adjusted, that would now be about $0.27 / gal. It's not. It's $.184, which is one of the reasons we the Highway Trust Fund is busted (higher mileage also hurts).

    Some studies put the rate of return on the Interstate investments at 10-35%(1).

    To sum up, you fail. In real terms the gas tax has actually decreased, it has worked out OK at the Federal level, and the interstate highway system is money fairly well spent.

    (*) at least for the time being
    (1) http://www.interstate50th.org/docs/techmemo2-1.pdf

  • by Late Adopter ( 1492849 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @09:19AM (#28221259)
    Agreed.

    An economist will tell you money is fungible [wikipedia.org]. It doesn't matter where it comes from. If you earmark a particular source for a destination, that just means the destination needs that amount less from the general supply, which is then freed up to go wherever.

    It's a great way to get unpopular revenue streams passed (my state uses Lotto to fund education), but it's entirely meaningless.
  • by NovaHorizon ( 1300173 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @09:31AM (#28221387)
    HOW did they explain the whole concept of slavery for the... 10,000 years BEFORE Darwin then?
  • by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @10:00AM (#28221807) Homepage Journal
    "Do they similarly tax photographs? How about telephone service? "

    Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service. At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.

  • Re:I'm confused (Score:4, Informative)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland&yahoo,com> on Friday June 05, 2009 @10:59AM (#28222619) Homepage Journal

    "I can easily break 50MPG"

    [Citation seriously needed]

    Becasue the rated gas mileage of ov a Chevy Impala is about 27 MPG:

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/15989.shtml [fueleconomy.gov]

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/Feg/bymodel/2000_Chevrolet_Impala.shtml [fueleconomy.gov]

    http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/11/02/chevrolet-impala-gas-mileage/ [mpgomatic.com]

    A lot of geeks really enjoy cars, so you need to take your lie to some other place, or prove it.
    If you had said 30 MPG or even 33 MPG I could see that maybe you ahve an odd driving pattern. 50? Bullshit.

    In short Mod -1 Pants on Fire

  • by twidarkling ( 1537077 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @11:58AM (#28223553)

    The problem is, we do hear about damned near every case. It's a numbers game. There's a lot of parents, or friends of parents out there. Those people want to know about threats to the kids. Thus, if you run a story involving danger to kids, you get the numbers. So every case that comes up gets publicity, even if it's on the other side of the country.

    Remember, the majority of recent studies show that a) the number of incidents involving children is decreasing, and b) they're more likely to be kidnapped/abused by someone they know (parent, teacher, relative, etc) than a random stranger.

  • by nxtw ( 866177 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @12:05PM (#28223669)

    Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service. At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.

    But these taxes are typically allocated to:

  • by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @12:58PM (#28224515) Journal

    A lot of people forget that during the 1500s and 1600s, there were a lot of white-colored slaves. The practice of enslaving whites was gradually replaced with black slavery during the 1700s, but if you are a white person it's entirely possible you have slavery in your background.

  • by yawn9 ( 848734 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @01:23PM (#28224911)
    I thought this kind of tax was prevented by federal legislation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tax_Nondiscrimination_Act [wikipedia.org]
  • by coolsnowmen ( 695297 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @01:25PM (#28224937)

    Darwin was a racist. Just because you believe in micro + macro evolution (well I do, and because you are defending Darwin you probably do too), doesn't mean its founded wasn't flawed.

    I promise, just google it and you'll find quotes like this:

    At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ⦠will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. [2]

    [2] The decent of man, Charles Darwin

    Darwin's logic was used and abused by many to continue racist beliefs and actions. The man was a scientist with a great idea; not a saint.

  • by Attila Dimedici ( 1036002 ) on Friday June 05, 2009 @02:44PM (#28225991)
    You overlook one important thing in your exposition. The U.S. government was desegregated when Woodrow Wilson took office, he re-segregated it. There is a significant possibility that if it had not been for Woodrow Wilson, the 60's civil rights movement would have been unnecessary (or would have taken place in the 20's).
    If Woodrow Wilson had not re-segregated the Army (and the rest of the military), whites and blacks would have served side by side in WWI. This would have exposed a lot of men to people of the other race in circumstances where what a person does far outweighs who they are.

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Working...