What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- igorvolsky, on 10/21/2007, -1/+21No I say to that....
- bluezinc, on 10/22/2007, -0/+191Let's throw servers into Boston harbor. It will be known as the Boston LAN party.
- Kardall, on 10/21/2007, -0/+8If there's a tournament, i'm there...
- mllawso, on 10/20/2007, -1/+8But the authorities might be able to identify us by our faces. If only there was something we could dress up as to pass the blame off...
- Directrix1, on 10/20/2007, -1/+18I know!!! Indians!!! Like from India!!!!
- jackyyll, on 10/21/2007, -0/+37We shall dress up as Anonymous.
- superal1394, on 10/20/2007, -1/+2No, better, dress up as Chinese government hackers.
- HyperionCC, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4We did it for the lulz?
- MaxPayne3476, on 10/20/2007, -4/+1delete
- N3M3515, on 10/21/2007, -0/+21Bluezinc you Win Best Comment of the Week
- kjk437, on 10/19/2007, -5/+1N3M3515, you win the defeating-the-comment-system-to-garner-more-diggs award of the week...
- clothmonkey, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4Does that mean you just lost on the same grounds?
- kjk437, on 10/19/2007, -5/+1N3M3515, you win the defeating-the-comment-system-to-garner-more-diggs award of the week...
- bluezinc, on 10/22/2007, -0/+191Let's throw servers into Boston harbor. It will be known as the Boston LAN party.
- gsmaster, on 10/21/2007, -4/+36no to internet taxes
- jackyyll, on 10/20/2007, -2/+8no taxation without representation!
- TenebrousX, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1do you know what that means?
- superal1394, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1Um, did you fail American History?
- EmitStop, on 10/20/2007, -0/+2NO! to Internet Taxation
- jackyyll, on 10/20/2007, -2/+8no taxation without representation!
- iirrkk, on 10/21/2007, -7/+65Gas tax goes to improve the road system, so internet tax should go to bringing me FiOS right?
If so, then yes on the tax. If not, where the hell has my money been going to?- willyjlyles, on 10/21/2007, -2/+26Because the government is so nice and quick at maintenance of roads. I'm sure that if your internet was down, they'd be along in the next few months to fix it.
- bitt3n, on 10/20/2007, -1/+37your FiOS has been going to a small island community in Alaska, through a series of tubes.
- Kardall, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4In addition to willy's comment, they 'say' it goes towards infrastructure costs for new developments and/or repairs. In Canada, I highly doubt that it happens. If you doubt that statement, goto Edmonton or Winnipeg. Winnipeg is the oldest city in Canada, and it shows... plus it takes them months and months to do anything to the roads when they actually get around to it. But ya, if the tax goes towards getting north america in general, an average of 60mbit connection (like Japan), then go for it.
- aedes, on 10/20/2007, -1/+1"...winnipeg is the oldest city in Canada..." WTF are you talking about? this is not true in temporal terms, in terms of infrastructure, or in terms of age of people.
The reason that we take so long to fix our roads is it prevents annoying jackasses from Alberta from driving into town.
p.s. :P
- aedes, on 10/20/2007, -1/+1"...winnipeg is the oldest city in Canada..." WTF are you talking about? this is not true in temporal terms, in terms of infrastructure, or in terms of age of people.
- forgottenhope, on 10/21/2007, -1/+8Stop relying on the government. Look what the government did to social security, look what they do to anything they get their hands on? They ***** it up. They charge us some new tax to do nothing more, provide no more service than they did before.
People need to understand that the government is not supposed to regulate and watch over the FREE MARKET. If internet providers start blocking sites and acting like the pricks that run them, then boycot them. Stop dragging our lame ass government into the middle of a free market problem.
The problem is there is no free market. Our government chooses who makes money and who doesnt. Its a joke, just like the idea that you have a choice between democrat or republican. The difference in the two is the spelling.
If ron paul doesnt win the election we will be at war with iran no matter what. The trick is they make you think you have a choice, the media has picked your candidate. Do you like the front running shills? - isellmacs, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1The federal government has already granted over $200 billion dollars for FiOS installation to major carriers, with the understanding that they would "host" yet share that line with others. This money came directly from tax dollars.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fios+%24200+b ...
- Gabberwok, on 10/20/2007, -3/+31Is this a vehicle to kill net neutrality? I don't want the internet taxed, but I don't want the telecoms to be able to dictate what's on it either.
- dinostabOMG, on 10/20/2007, -0/+15What makes you say that? Please share if you've noticed something slipped into the bill.
- Gabberwok, on 10/19/2007, -1/+1I haven't read the bill, but if I wanted to kill net neutrality this is exactly how I would do it and exactly the justification I would give for it (opposing government regulation/taxation of the internet). People should be very suspicious of bills like this, especially if they're coming from the Republican side of Congress.
- SiNN4R, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4Its only a matter of time before the internet as we know it is gone.
- forgottenhope, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5It will be monitored anyway. Stopy relying on the government. United Welfare States.
- dinostabOMG, on 10/20/2007, -0/+15What makes you say that? Please share if you've noticed something slipped into the bill.
- fractalman, on 10/21/2007, -16/+114This is a pointless post. The moratorium on internet taxes passed earlier this week and has been extended for 4 years. There will be no taxation of the internet for the next 4 years.
- Bridea, on 10/21/2007, -0/+61Passed the House. Senate vote is scheduled. You need passage by both houses and the President to make a law, or did nobody teach you about bicameral legislature?
- fractalman, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5To pass a new tax requires the same process. Since the house introduces legislation, it is unlikely that a tax bill will be passed. I also like the term "bicameral legislature", may I use it in future posts? It is clear that our law makers are against taxing the internet. Why spoil the mood. Enjoy the moment, for it may not last.
- Victorface, on 10/20/2007, -0/+3But what will happen once those four years are over?
- fractalman, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3Simple, They vote again. And with the proper leadership, they may pass a bill preventing the taxing of the internet forever. However long that is.
- Bridea, on 10/21/2007, -0/+61Passed the House. Senate vote is scheduled. You need passage by both houses and the President to make a law, or did nobody teach you about bicameral legislature?
- SilentJay74, on 10/20/2007, -8/+2To little to late.
- cawpin, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4I know, I know but it's "too"
- SilentJay74, on 10/20/2007, -3/+2You are correct sir. My Bad.
- cawpin, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4I know, I know but it's "too"
- Sil369, on 10/20/2007, -6/+23So, this isn't "BREAKING"? or "JUST IN"?
- stympman, on 10/20/2007, -1/+21No its just Action Alert
- cvelusc, on 10/21/2007, -2/+8Taxes would ruin shopping online to a certain degree. In my mind, shipping costs are equivalent to taxes on a given product. Including shipping costs and taxes for a purchase may sway me from shopping online.
- nateboom, on 10/20/2007, -1/+4Unless you live in California. Just about every online store I would ever want to buy from is in CA.
I already have internet taxation! - EntropyFan, on 10/20/2007, -0/+10You realize that isn't the tax they are talking about? Sales tax can already be applied to internet sales( http://tinyurl.com/jr567 )
They are talking about 'taxing the tubes', namely the broadband connections themselves. - Tiemmothi, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5This would make your Internet bill look like your phone bill once local and state governments were given the opportunity. Service fees and taxes equaling 20% or more of your total Internet bill. Ever look at all the fees and charges added onto your phone bill? that's what this is about. And yes this is a non issue for 4 more years? Or should we just keep pestering our representatives to do the right thing and make it permanent!
- NJank, on 10/20/2007, -0/+3nothing is permanent when the people creating the lockbox hold the key and the right to pillage said lockbox at will with no extra effort. Didn't we learn that 7 years ago?
- regexp, on 10/20/2007, -0/+0In the state of Minnesota - if I buy something from mailorder or from the internet - you are required by state law to pay sales taxes on it. Even if that business doesn't reside or have an office in the state. Of course - no one does and is not enforced on individuals (businesses are a different matter).
- nateboom, on 10/20/2007, -1/+4Unless you live in California. Just about every online store I would ever want to buy from is in CA.
- nastronomical, on 10/20/2007, -4/+9To get this to pass all they gotta do is tack on "helps fight global warming".
- potsy, on 10/20/2007, -2/+6OR "It's for the children"
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8Yeah right. Like they'd pass something about global warming! I think you'd be better off just titling it "Congressional Pay Raise"
I mean it doesn't seem like your title has to have anything to do with the actual bill now a days anyway.
- anonatron, on 10/19/2007, -9/+2LOL they already extended it! http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2199123,00.as ...
what, is this supposed to be one of those "submit this to digg 1000 times and kevin rose will give you $1000" things?- cawpin, on 10/20/2007, -0/+14Hey, jackass, RTFA you just cited. "The House of Representatives approved a new four-year ban on state or local taxation of Internet,..." The Senate has to pass it, too, and then it goes to the president to be signed.
- skidme, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3Well, we can't exactly do anything about it if they do enact net taxes.
- coreyb, on 10/21/2007, -0/+4If everyone refused to pay, what are they going to do? It happened in 1776...
- crapmatic, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6What the hell is "state or local taxation of Internet"? There's a ***** of taxes on my broadband bill.
- cawpin, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2There are no state or city taxes on it right now. That's what this bill will prevent. If it doesn't pass, and the ban expires, you could see as much as a 17% increase in your internet cost.
- crapmatic, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1Cool... thanks for the info.
- cawpin, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2There are no state or city taxes on it right now. That's what this bill will prevent. If it doesn't pass, and the ban expires, you could see as much as a 17% increase in your internet cost.
- IHaveIssues, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1Reminds me of http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/pending/internet.asp
- Bridea, on 10/19/2007, -2/+8The HOUSE passed it. the SENATE has yet to vote for it. Ever heard of Bicameral Legislature?
- Lennalf, on 10/21/2007, -2/+3Actually, no. But I Googled it, and I've now added another word to my vocabulary, which I will use to belittle the intelligence of others in a condescending manner. Mmmm... I find this thread to be shallow and pedantic.
- thugok, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6As long as the voting on this is left up to Congress there is nothing you as a citizen can do about it. Unless you happen to have a few million dollars in kickback money.
- StandupShowcase, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1oh you want to take money out of politics? according to libertarian thought that is interfering with the free market and the "free speech" of corporations to influence and do as they please.
- StandupShowcase, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1oh you want to take money out of politics? according to libertarian thought that is interfering with the free market and the "free speech" of corporations to influence and do as they please.
- reed311, on 10/20/2007, -7/+2Jefferson would also probably be shocked that an Internet actually exists and that people actually have to work instead of getting their slaves to do all of it. Jefferson was very much a man who had an "error of opinion", as a slave owner.
I wouldn't use Jefferson as a morale compass.- junkdigg, on 10/20/2007, -1/+14Your comment is somewhere between ignorant and flippant. Jefferson, like just about all men, was hardly a man without fault. But to say he didn't work hard? That man is at the tippity top of a very short list of the greatest contributors to society in American history. Seriously - look up the man's accomplishments - you should be awestruck - people like him don't exist anymore.
The slavery issue is a lot more complex than you make it out to be. - cawpin, on 10/19/2007, -0/+8Also, just because somebody had slaves doesn't make them a bad person. Who's to say his "slaves" didn't want to be there? A lot of them stayed where they were after being set "free" because they were treated well.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/19/2007, -1/+1If you are required to work with no pay, you are a slave. Argue about their attitude if you want, but they were slaves.
- bubbadoo989, on 10/22/2007, -0/+12We should be so lucky to have a Thomas Jefferson in our national politics today. As an agrarian democrat, he set the bar for other statesmen. You don't really have 'statesmen' in politics today... you have millionaire lawyers who are plundering the system.
- ProgressBar, on 10/19/2007, -0/+4Best description of modern politicians i've heard in awhile.
- StandupShowcase, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1***** I got 5 slaves right now..does that make me a bad person?
- junkdigg, on 10/20/2007, -1/+14Your comment is somewhere between ignorant and flippant. Jefferson, like just about all men, was hardly a man without fault. But to say he didn't work hard? That man is at the tippity top of a very short list of the greatest contributors to society in American history. Seriously - look up the man's accomplishments - you should be awestruck - people like him don't exist anymore.
- pepsiguy94, on 10/20/2007, -1/+13I for one welcome our new internet tax overlords, No wait I don't. Damn them all.
- isseki, on 10/21/2007, -1/+2Me: "Internet Taxation? No!"
Everyone put a 4-yearly reminder in their outlook now! It's time for some action!
Buried. - tdishman, on 10/19/2007, -9/+3I am VP of a small-midsized ecommerce company, so I certainly have an interest in this topic.
For those that obviously don't know what this is about, the tax is whether or not to require tax collection on sales of products on ecommerce sites (similar to paying tax on retail items at Wal-Mart). As time goes on, and online sales continue to flourish, it will become more and more obvious that people are simply not paying the tax for online goods via their tax returns, and the government will have no choice but to begin taxation online without requiring nexus (having a physical presence in the state where taxes are being collected).
I'm not a huge fan of our tax system in general, but currently you are required to pay x% sales tax when you buy an item in a brick-and-mortar store, so why should you be exempt from paying that same tax if you buy online?
The whole point of buying online is either 1) get something cheaper, 2) get something hard-to-find, or 3) convenience. The reason things online can be cheaper is because there is typically less overhead required to sell things online versus a brick-and-mortar store. Shipping is the cost of getting a product from the retailer to the customer. If you don't want to pay it, either buy it offline (and pay for your own time & gas), or get lucky and find somewhere who will ship it for free (and still offer an overall lower price).
A lot of the most successful online stores already collect sales tax and still flourish (CDW, for example). I think it's only a matter of time before the government is forced to impose online sales tax once they get their hands around how to do it.- josefresco, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3Consumers are only taxed on about 30% of purchases currently. Just because taxes do exist on /some/ transactions does not mean they should exist for /all/ transactions. Transferring tax charges to your ISP bill for online purchases would unfairly benefit states with lower tax rates and would hurt states (Chicago?) with higher rates. Not to mention the effect it would have on broadband access and ecommerce growth in general (the one bright spot we have in our economy)
Your motivations as a 'VP' of an ecommerce company also are questionable as you will be looking to "normalize" the idea of increased fees for your customers so it won't effect your bottom line. You should step up for the consumer (who pays your salary) and help fight this grab for even more tax revenue. - cawpin, on 10/20/2007, -0/+9for being a VP of ANY company, you sure are dumb. This isn't about sales tax. What company do you run? I want to be sure to stay clear of it.
- Nothlit, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8This is about internet service tax, not internet sales tax...
- bubbadoo989, on 10/19/2007, -0/+4The prior comment says it all: You sure are dumb, you dumbass.... this debate is not for sale tax, but Internet Access TAX. Boy, do you feel stoopid now.
When you buy something online, and the merchant doesn't charge you sales tax, you're supposed to calculate the state portion of the sales tax and send the money to your state's tax department. No one ever does, so that's why simpletons like you believe there's no such thing as internet sales tax. - rcook18, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1Thank you for your intelligent post. Here is a link to a summary of the opposing viewpoints for anyone who is interested. http://www.powerhomebiz.com/vol4/internet-taxation ...
- josefresco, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3Consumers are only taxed on about 30% of purchases currently. Just because taxes do exist on /some/ transactions does not mean they should exist for /all/ transactions. Transferring tax charges to your ISP bill for online purchases would unfairly benefit states with lower tax rates and would hurt states (Chicago?) with higher rates. Not to mention the effect it would have on broadband access and ecommerce growth in general (the one bright spot we have in our economy)
- Bridea, on 10/19/2007, -1/+4http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110 ...
Track it. The bill isn't even scheduled for debate yet.- cawpin, on 10/19/2007, -1/+1It's already been passed by the House. I'd say that website isn't keeping up.
- Bridea, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2Did you even read it? The site is for S.1453 - that's a Senate bill. The corresponding House bill is H.R. 3678. (S) for Senate. (HR) for House Resolution.
- AbyssV3, on 10/28/2007, -0/+0http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=main& ... - That bill was passed by both House and Senate, and it basically does the same thing. It extends to Nov 2011.
Yey, our government is doing one thing right.
- cawpin, on 10/19/2007, -1/+1It's already been passed by the House. I'd say that website isn't keeping up.
- URnotheonly1, on 10/19/2007, -6/+1Should Google not pay taxes?
- noahhoward, on 10/19/2007, -3/+1For all of you saying you don't want taxes on the internet is there any reason why? This could be used to bring broadband to rural areas, light the dark fiber all over the nation and make improvements in Wireless spectrums. It isn't like someone will just pocket the money and run. I don't like having to pay as much tax as I already do but I do like having safe roads, good schools, water and sewage, and emergency services. You have to give a little to get a little.
- josefresco, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8"It isn't like someone will just pocket the money and run"
You sure about that? Ask your gonvernment to account for all of your tax money and see what they say (I bet you 50% goes up in smoke or lines someone's pockets)
"You have to give a little to get a little"
Currently the lower-middle class gives a lot, and gets very little.- noahhoward, on 10/19/2007, -3/+1So the alternative is to not pay taxes and make sure no one benefits? No. We are supposed to watch where our taxes go if we can't sort them out then we need to figure out how. You shouldn't block something because it could be abused.
- Scheissen, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4Whatever can go wrong, will.
This internet access tax would make it even harder for the poor people to afford internet connections. As a whole, Americans have far less access to broadband as it is.
- Scheissen, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4Whatever can go wrong, will.
- noahhoward, on 10/19/2007, -3/+1So the alternative is to not pay taxes and make sure no one benefits? No. We are supposed to watch where our taxes go if we can't sort them out then we need to figure out how. You shouldn't block something because it could be abused.
- josefresco, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8"It isn't like someone will just pocket the money and run"
- robobeau, on 10/20/2007, -1/+3You all realize there is no law that enforces the payment of taxes, right...?
- Nothlit, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5You do realize that if you fail to pay your full bill (including taxes) your ISP will just cut you off, right...?
This story is not about sales tax. It is about internet service tax... - bubbadoo989, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1Well, technically it's your state's tax department that would enforce sales tax on the internet. As far as internet access is concerned, it would probably be the feds, or the IRS. I don't believe there are any local govt units that enforce this tax though.
- crapmatic, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3In California, the Terminator will personally disconnect your Internet.
- Nothlit, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5You do realize that if you fail to pay your full bill (including taxes) your ISP will just cut you off, right...?
- madroneDorf, on 10/19/2007, -6/+1Of course their should be taxes on the internet, you are required to pay declare value of goods purchased over the internet on state tax returns anyways.
If there are problems with overtaxing, then it should be dealt with by lowing expenses, not through loopholes that allow people who use the internet to cheat the systems.- tuxidomasx, on 10/19/2007, -0/+8I bet you were the kid in elementary school who always tattle told on other kids
- govsucks, on 10/20/2007, -1/+3Government has shown that it wisely spends money in the past. Look at Social Security, a firm great program that our tax dollars were well spent on and will be around for hundreds if not thousands of years due to the way our wise leaders have managed the funds. It is certain that they would use the additional property seized from us for internet taxation in the same wise methods they always have. Besides, the people in government are much smarter than us and know so much better how to spend the resources that we created through refinement. Even though they produce nothing they are far wiser about spending resources than those that produced them. I mean, we only forged the steel, made the cars, computers, software and millions of other products because we were fortunate and had government to look over our shoulders and tell us how to do it. Government has to make sure that those of us that were fortunate enough to work 50 or 60 hours a week do our part. Because working 50 or 60 hours a week, giving people jobs that feed their families and producing products that drive the world isn't enough, and politicians do so much more than that. They grace us with their expensive ideas and we should be thankful for it. These people are so smart that they have figured out how to give free healthcare to everyone, so what if "a dog can get a hip replacement faster than a human in Canada" (Quote: President, Canadian board of Doctors), its free! How they got around all the production required to bring people healthcare without cost is not the issue and we are just to stupid to understand how the enlightened have pulled it off. So don't argue with the Government when it says it needs more of the resources you struggled to produce, without government, the whole world would stop and none of us would eat.
- StandupShowcase, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1oh yes, put our country in the hands of corporations whose one and only directive is profit. sounds like that should be good for the public good! more naive libertarian corporate fan boyism.
- iupetre, on 10/20/2007, -1/+6Hey guys, in your letters to your senators, mention (if you support it) the Fair Tax bill in the additional comments as an alternative. We need to abolish the IRS!
- c0ldfusi0n, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8Come on people. These tubes aren't free! Congress has to manufacture them, your money helps buying more tubes to expand teh intarweb.
- jobo5432, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2We've been saying no for 10 ***** years. Also, they've never actually been really close to passing an internet taxation bill.
- LeadOffMan, on 10/20/2007, -5/+2why should Amazon.com customers not pay taxes, while the mom & pop local book store has to?
Seems unfair to me- bubbadoo989, on 10/20/2007, -2/+2Um, moma's wrong again! Which taxes are you referring to? Neither entity, amazon.com nor mom & pop, will pay internet access taxes, because there is no internet access tax... at least not yet.
- op12, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5You're talking about a different issue (sales tax) and if the mom & pop store sells something to someone out of state they most likely don't have to charge sales tax, just like Amazon doesn't. (Online transactions in the same state are subject to a sales tax, just like for a physical store, though that may vary in some states).
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/jan20 ...
This is about putting a tax on all internet purchases, separate from any applicable sales tax. It would apply to all online transactions. - MrXfromPlanetX, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1This is an issue where we would have to pay taxes to use the Internet.
- CaptainRant, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2Are there any citizen activist groups actively campaigning to get the internet taxed? Just seems to be very little, if any, demand for it among the citizenry. The people don't want the internet to be taxed...the politicians do. So are they serving our interest or theirs?
- mclumber1, on 10/21/2007, -1/+3As soon as the Federal Government is able to tax the internet, they will be able to regulate. We complain about the FCC and it's ability to censor broadcast television and radio...The same would happen to the internet.
- gradkiss, on 10/20/2007, -1/+1 Congress taxes the air we breath...and they think the 16th Amendment did not start involuntary servitude all over again after it's prohibit with the 13th Amendment orders to the contrary...except whereof the party had been duly convicted of the crime.
- Grumps, on 10/19/2007, -2/+2I think Bush is going to Tax it. This ***** needs all the money he can. Looking at the way he spend, he will never have a balance budget.
- m0laria, on 10/20/2007, -1/+4If you tax my interents I will through ur tea in the ocean, while wearing an indian costume.
- holyskeleton, on 10/21/2007, -1/+3if america get anymore taxes people would flee to more free countries like south korea, sweden, etc and overcrowd them. think of the koreans people!
- rodeosmurf, on 10/19/2007, -2/+1There's really no need to take action here, our legislators are almost unanimously any kind of internet tax, and the bill will pass easily through the house.
- dt07, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2Aol is saying a $2.00 tax will start soon.........
- Laiskumus, on 10/20/2007, -1/+1All I can say is "Haa haa" with Nelson Muntz's voice.
That's ridiculous.
This deserves "Only in America" stamp. :) - JoshChan, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2The Americans can always come up innovative ways to destroy themselves
- noseeme, on 10/20/2007, -5/+2Ron Paul: Anti Internet taxation, anti net neutrality.
- theangrybaby, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4WRONG
Ron Paul is anti-internet taxation, but he's for net neutrality. - swears, on 10/21/2007, -0/+3
He voted against the net neutrality bill because there was regulation in it. He may be for "net neutrality" but voted against the Net Neutrality Bill.
http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Opposes_Net_Neut ...
http://digg.com/videos/people/Ron_Paul_Voted_AGAIN ...
- theangrybaby, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4WRONG
- orangekid13, on 10/19/2007, -0/+5I want internet access without internet taxes! (you gotta say it out loud so it rhymes)
- Enfilade, on 10/20/2007, -5/+1buried for ACTION ALERT
- MrXfromPlanetX, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1I guess you are content to be a dumb ass? What's wrong with an action alert. That's what the US needs is for people to get off their butts and do something.
- ronaldst, on 10/20/2007, -1/+6Ain't big government great!
- r69er87, on 10/20/2007, -1/+4Yeah its alomost like I have someone permanently holding my hand.....
- MaryLynn321, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4What the H aren't they going to tax. We already don't have total privacy on the internet. My sister was talking with a friend from England on the internet before and after 911. Well the government went to both of their homes to go through there computers. Gree country, land of opportunity, what's that. I am not putting anyone down. But, if I was an immigrant I would know all the in's and out's of our governments system. I think it is time our government starts worrying about their citizens, and what they have been going through. The economy sucks, they say this is the closest we have ever been to the great depression. My Mother grew up during the great depression and she would agree. So I definitely say no to Taxation on Internet. Like my hubby says, we might as well live in over seas. They have more freedom in some areas. Now don't you all start yelling at me. I haven't been on in quite sometime, still recovering from surgery, plus PT and OC. We are all entitled to our own opinions, and some of us are living the tough times, BIG time.
Hugs Mary - jmpeagle, on 10/20/2007, -2/+2as long as government cannot regulate the inernet, I doubt they will be able to tax it successfully.
- forgottenhope, on 10/20/2007, -2/+1You can not tax a nation into prosperity.
9/11 was big lie for you cowards to hide behind.- theangrybaby, on 10/20/2007, -0/+1How does 9/11 even remotely relate to Net Neutrality?
- thebrawl, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1The "Internet" is just a description of a world-wide network. It's not a service or product that any one party provides. How do you tax a description?
- Cosmox, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1forget the extension - make it permanent.
No more taxes! - senixon, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1It's a matter of time before they start taxing online transactions, the reason in my opinion why they have yet to do so is... they are waiting for this shopping method to fully mature. EU is already charing VAT on international online purchases... They may hold out a few years longer but eventually there will be tax--mark my words.
- looselips, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1Can I assume that every American read this and signed it:
http://www.populistamerica.com/hands_off_the_inter ...
Here is my addition:
We already pay taxes on commerce over the internet. If we need to get our own lobbyist from our "new" outsourced providers we will. And we will fight with their power to enact fair business practices against the current monolopy's lobbyist.
If we cannot stop them by denying the funds which make their convincers convincing, then perhaps we might look to outsource the bigger organization which allowed the injustice in the first place. I hope you decide what is right for ALL of the American People.
P.S. Please tell AT&T to pay us back for their undelivered "fiber promise". Do not let them continue to stonewall everyone.
Appreciatively,
AnAMericanWhoCares -
Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is