Comments on: Internet sales tax proposed again

By: Jeff Hoyt

Jeff Hoyt — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:15:42 +0000

Many thanks, Paige. But you’d probably love my views more than me…

By: Paige

Paige — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:11:50 +0000

Jeff- I think I love you. Or at least your views.

By: Jeff Hoyt

Jeff Hoyt — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:06:38 +0000

sheryl,
One could get the impression that your actual desire is to find flaws in my logic specifically so that you can avoid giving anything I say credence. Are my arguments really that inconvenient for you? The metaphorical reference to the purchase of electricity is illustrative of the principal of voluntary exchange. I do not think people buy electricity from the government, so I guess you’re stuck with giving what I say credence… Oh, and by the way, if I believed people bought electricity from the government, the flaw would be my premise, not my logic.
At the risk of presumption, I suggest an epexegetical “voluntarily” placed between the “I” and “pay” of your opening statement would more clearly express your meaning. Having assumed that, I will point out that unless your local or state government requires you to buy electricity, you are indeed paying utility taxes on your electricity consumption voluntarily, as your agreement with the power company is a voluntary one. If you decide not to buy electricity from the power company – something that you are completely free to do, however inconvenient it may be – you will owe no taxes on electricity. Should you decide to convert to solar- or wind-generated power, and your municipality forced you to continue to pay taxes based on a public utility service, that would be involuntary taxation.
But forget anything I may have said; what do you think of Mr. Jefferson’s opinion?

By: sheryl

sheryl — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:44:35 +0000

Jeff Hoyt, I don’t pay electricity tax voluntarily any more than I pay sales and use tax. Unless of course you actually think that we buy electricity from the government which it sounds like you think. In which case your logic is flawed and there is no point in giving anything you say any credence.

By: Jeff Hoyt

Jeff Hoyt — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:10:27 +0000

patriot45,
You’re kidding, right?
We are 45th in all the things you list – which I don’t dispute at the moment, because I just heard that figure for infant mortality from a well-informed friend – and your suggestion is that the citizenry should encourage the United States government to work on this problem? Hmmmmm….
I’m tempted to offer an explanation as to why your suggestion is naive to a point somewhere beyond egregious, but there are occasions where having to explain something in the first place means it won’t do any good to explain it. I think this is one of those occasions.
“There is no decent, civilized country in the world that does not collect major taxes.” Except maybe Costa Rica, Monaco, Cayman Islands, St. Kitts, Nevis, and a dozen others or so.
“People who complain about “Tax and Spend” are not only unpatriotic but also are trying to con the rest of us.” This statement is beyond belief. Challenge: Find a specific case in which an individual who has gone on record as being against the “Tax and Spend” philosophy of Congress has done so with the express purpose of harming the U.S.A. Conning the rest of us? How? By telling the truth that confiscatory taxation levels cause a decline in personal wealth and liberty? Where in the world do you get your ideas?
Let me give you a simple example that will help you understand how proper and moral taxation works. Let us suppose that you have $10.00 in your pocket. There are only two ways by which I can properly get that $10.00 from you: earn it, or receive it as a gift. Any other means constitute theft, no exceptions. If I get together with two or three other people and gain their agreement and support to use any other method, it is still theft. If I get the agreement and support of 96% of my community to use any other method, it is still theft. If I get the support and agreement of everybody in all 50 states to use any other method…well, you should be getting the point by now. Legitimate, moral taxation exists only when an individual voluntarily exchanges property in return for services from a government agency, such as he does when he agrees to buy electricity. For the government, at any level, to force an indivdual to pay taxes in exchange for service he does not want, or to pay more for them than he thinks thay are worth, is the equivalent of the phone company forcing you to use their services while deducting their fees from your paycheck before you even get it, and giving you no choice as to whether or not the service is worth the price.
Bottom line: All taxation that is not voluntary is theft.
“It could be a lower rate to start with.” Un-hunh. At what rate do you think it should top out?
Undisputable fact: the greater the involvement of government, the worse the matter becomes. And greater involvement by government always means higher taxation. Therefore, the higher the taxation, the poorer the result.
I’ll close with an offer from a fellow you have heard of…
A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. – Thomas Jefferson (1801)

By: patriot45

patriot45 — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:53:57 +0000

Our country’s infrastructure is falling apart. We are 45th in enducation, 45th in health care, 45th in how long we live, 45th in infant mortality, and our pensions are going down the drain. It goes on and on. In some statistics we are worse off than former communist countries. There is no decent, civilized country in the world that does not collect major taxes. People who complain about “Tax and Spend” are not only unpatriotic but also are trying to con the rest of us. It is necessary and patriotic to pay taxes and the good news is it means you made some money. The simplest idea would be to tax internet sales at one national rate and distribute the money to the states that participate. It could be a lower rate to start with.

By: realityseeker

realityseeker — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:28:27 +0000

Most Americans, including many posters, are short-sighted on this issue. If you own no property, current bans on e-tailers enforcing the collection of taxes on internet sales is a benefit. The average apartment dweller browsing on his/her computer to buy the newest Apple gadget on an already maxed-out credit card loathes the thought of actually paying taxes on the transaction (…which they are legally required to do, although it’s not enforced. If you aren’t paying the tax, you ARE currently breaking the law). But, that individual pays no property taxes. Americans who pay property taxes make up for the BILLIONS in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile, local business go under and Amazon carries a valuation = 70X that of Walmart. The money for local parks, schools, roads, police etc. comes from somewhere. Lets spread the burden out instead of continuosly placing in on the middle class. You buy the crap…you pay the tax.

By: sally

sally — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:54:33 +0000

I think taxing the online businesses is stupidty! After all the internet is global,and to try to stop people from buying out side own state is is socialitic

By: panthercat

panthercat — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:20:34 +0000

Keep the government out of the internet. They foul up everyting they touch and it only gets worse from then on. Hands Off The Internet

By: The Levelers

The Levelers — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:02:09 +0000

Those “levelers” really need to get their asses moving to get rid of all those unfair and unequal sales taxes.