Canada Considers Massive 'Internet Tax'

Google actively lobbying against it.
Michael Geist describes the situation in detail.

Basically, a few policy groups are asking the legislature for some laws that have applied to media content before the Internet, to be applied to Internet content. It makes intuitive sense to me until I realize that the government should have no right to regulate media content in the first place.

Obama's Technology policy

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/

It reminds me of the proverbial candidate for class president who promises CocaCola in the water fountains.

The list of expensive stuff he wants to do is only offset by his increases in taxes that will shrink the economy. He hasn't mentioned a single program that he wants to stop, just programs he wants to start and expand.

Philosophy of Liberty

This was posted 2 years ago, and I just now found it. I have now seen it 3 times, examining it closely for any idea that I even in part disagree with. The only point I have found is a minor one that can wait until you've seen the clip.



Back to that point, When the author says that people should stop asking their governments to initiate force on their behalf, it assumes democratic governments. Dictators pursue ownership of the life and liberty of their subjects as an objective for their own life. And may cause global atrocities without the deliberate consent of their people.

Reagan on the role of Government

Hat tip to Brian Hollar @ Thinking on the Margin
Who gave "(HT Stephen Bainbridge via Instapundit)"

Video Game Tax in New Mexico

New Mexico Proposes Video Game Tax to Punish Staying Indoors

But a coalition of groups, led by the Rio Grande chapter of the Sierra Club, is sold on the idea that outdoor education programs can inspire children in a way that video games and television cannot.

The coalition wants state lawmakers to create a No Child Left Inside Fund with a 1 percent tax on TVs, video games and video game equipment. The fund would help pay for outdoor education throughout the state.

Joseph Henchman says:

The fundamental purpose of taxes is to raise revenue necessary for programs, not micromanage people's decisions with subsidies and penalties. If a tax targeting video games is justified, it should be on the basis of actual negative externalities, not the whims of social engineers picking things they don't like at random.

For myself, I can say without ambiguity that I vastly prefer this type of policy to efforts to ban certain types of video game content. One advantage is that a direct tax creates a disincentive to hurt the industry.
More ambiguously though, I agree with the philosophy of government given by Mr. Henchman. While it's appealing to think that Parks'n Rec would be paid for by Gamestop, as a service, parks and rec should be paid for by people that use it, not by people that don't. People should want more outdoor activities, government should try to 'make them want' more outdoor activities.

Hat Tip to Joseph Henchman @ Tax Policy Blog

Libertarian Solution to a Political Conflict

A Libertarian Solution to Evolution Controversy: No More Public Schools

When you force people to teach a subject in a way they don't want it taught, and the school system is a political beast, which our public schools are, you're going to see the curriculum you have in mind corrupted by the political process. People campaigning for strong teaching of evolutionary biology in public schools are ignoring that this is what's purportedly been going for the last 50 years. There are no states with a theistic presentation in their classrooms. Real science is what's supposed to be taught; yet when you look at polling data, the ones who see a non-theistic, purely naturalist explanation are in the minority.

The particular libertarian speaking there is strongly pro-evolution, and is trying to resolve the debate about whether to allow the intelligent design curriculum to be taught in public schools.
A lot of people feel very strongly that EVERYONE should be well educated. I rather agree with that, education expands the human experience and gives them the tools to provide high quality services to the people around them throughout their lives. It preserves the knowledge base for a growing economy.
Many people assume however, that the ONLY way to do this is through a ubiquitous government run public education system. The argument for 'school choice' is that you could use the same tax dollars used to fund the public education system to provide limited credits that can be used to pay tuition at all sorts of educational institutions. This would make the market for education more competitive, raising quality, lowering price, and vastly simplifying the content debate.

I am in favor of school choice from kindergarden through the fourth year of college.

Stimulus Schimulus

Russ Roberts: Don't Jump the Gun on Stimulus Plans

The money has to come from somewhere. If you raise taxes to fund the plan, the people who are taxed are poorer and they'll spend less. If you borrow money to fund the plan, the people who buy the government bonds have less money to spend and that offsets the stimulus. It's like taking a bucket of water from the deep end of a pool and dumping it into the shallow end. Funny thing—the water in the shallow end doesn't get any deeper.

But you do spend time and effort moving a bucket full of water.

There's also other factors. If I told you I was going into debt JUST to consume more stuff, see more movies, eat out more, etc. Would you say that I'm doing my part to improve the economy, or would you tell me I'm ruining my finances because I'll have to pay that interest for years since I'm not using the money improve my productivity. Well, the stimulus package consists of taking on debt in the HOPES that people will consume with the money.

Forcing debt on the tax payers in hopes that they blow it on useless crap? Why won't Keynes just go away?

Taxes galore

I don't know for sure that Mr. Paskel is the gentleman who authored this text. But I thank him for forarding it. I especially thank Jerry Holsworth for sending it to me. I don't beleive in forwarding emails myself, but I encourage my friends to read my blog, so I'm posting this here.

---- Original Message -----
From: Stanley L. Paskel Sr.
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 9:18 PM
Subject: What is a Billion???

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases.

A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.
C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.
D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.

Add to this list: A billion grains of salt fills a bathtub.

UPDATE: I don't know how long this has been circulating, but I just recalculated how long it takes to blow through a billion dollars. According to figures in this white house report, it takes the federal government 3 hours, 7 minutes, and 48 seconds to spend a billion dollars.

There is a lot more to this email and you can see the rest at GoogleDocs.
I highly recommend it.