| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| tericee |
Posted - 09/12/2007 : 10:47:02 AM
While taxes may be one of life’s certainties, the internet has, so far, miraculously managed to escape the clutches of revenue-hungry government tax collectors. That may change if Congress doesn’t get its act together – and fast.
Back in 1998, Congress passed the Internet Tax Freedom Act, imposing a three-year moratorium on state and local taxes on internet access. The moratorium came just as some local governments began to extend their very high telecommunications taxes to internet access. State and local governments want to tax your cable modem or DSL bill, as well as internet services, and the internet backbone, but the bill stopped them cold.
Since then Congress has passed multiple extensions of the internet tax moratorium, the latest of which expires this November. This time around, Congress should make the ban on internet taxes permanent. Two bills, S. 156 in the Senate and H.R. 743 in the House, would do just that, but movement thus far has been stagnant and the clock is ticking.
State and local internet access taxes could add 20 percent to 25 percent to the average internet consumer’s bill – a tax hike of about $150 per year. That may not sound like much in Washington, D.C., but it could strand millions of low-income Americans on the wrong side of the digital divide. And higher internet charges could hinder small business from gaining access to the technology they need to compete with larger companies. Schools, libraries, and other educational and research institutions with limited budgets would also take a hit.
Supporters of new internet taxes make the case that Congress’ “Hands Off the Internet” strategy has served its purpose. The internet is no longer an infant technology, they say. After all, internet use in the United States has soared from about 36 percent of the population at the end of 1998 to over 70 percent today.
But in the warp-speed world of the internet, that’s yesterday’s news. America still lags far behind our economic competitors when it comes to wiring homes and businesses with high-speed internet access or broadband. Even though the internet was largely invented here, America still ranks 16th in the world in terms of broadband deployment, behind countries like South Korea and Japan.
Members of Congress have a choice to make. They can give the green light to state and local governments to saddle internet users with myriad new taxes and fees. Or they can lock the tax man away permanently and throw away the key. That should be a pretty easy call.
If you're against an Internet tax, contact your U.S. Representative and Senators and let them know how you feel about taxes on your email. |
| 5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| dan p. |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 12:36:14 AM
you're using someone else's bandwidth (without permission) and not paying for it. taking or using something that costs money without paying for it is stealing. stealing is illegal. therefore, using someone else's bandwidth without permission and not paying for it is illegal.
there's no reason to rename the network something to spite the other person, though. that's just stupid, which is weird, because spite is usually awesome. |
| gnome44 |
Posted - 09/13/2007 : 4:35:55 PM
I guess they look at that the same way as if you got a cable-splitter and were "stealing" your neighbors cable. If your name isn't on the bill...I guess you can't use it.
Kind of makes sense...but it still kind of blows... |
| tericee |
Posted - 09/13/2007 : 4:31:08 PM
And while I'm on the e-mail tax thing, let me just vent about something I found out today: That using somebody's unprotected WiFi network is also illegal -- in some European countries and some U.S. states.
What?  If I'm out in a park (or sitting in my own house) and my notebook computer tells me there's an unsecured network available, I am highly likely to access the Internet. Apparently I can be arrested for this.
That blows.
Note 1: a friend of mine moved into a new apartment in Northern VA and started using an unknown neighbor's unprotected network until his own DSL got installed. He logged in one day and it worked; logged in the next day and the newly secured network had been re-named "Get the Fuck off my WiFi." Well, duh! Why didn't the neighbor have it secured in the first place? I just don't get people. He's lucky my friend just wanted to surf the Internet and not the neighbor's computer.
Note 2: for those with WiFi who don't do "technical," there are a few options for securing your network. The strongest (for now) is WPA2; the weakest is WEP. (You need to use strong passwords with big/small letters, numbers, AND special characters like !@#$%^&*(), if possible.
Note 3: Regardless of password strength, due to a crappy encryption algorithm WEP passwords are easily hacked by somebody willing to buy the equipment and take the twenty minutes. It is, however, enough to let people like my friend know they're not invited to share your bandwidth. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 09/13/2007 : 1:29:27 PM
NOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooo................... |
| dan p. |
Posted - 09/13/2007 : 12:14:39 PM
what are you? some kind of libertarian? 
i say we tax everything. food? taxed. medicine? double taxed. taxes? tax those. |
|
|
