RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to lesopp
Re: Idiots
How much are those sales taxes? And "intangibles" taxes, and ad valorem rates for god knows what? Having property in both Florida and Illinois I don't know which is worse tax-wise. And coming from IL, that's saying something.
Isn't Florida a greenish-grey state, The Mildew State? 
Anyway, the only reason the FCC is trying to prohibit state taxation of these services is because once they grow up the Feds want that revenue. Don't kid yourself that this has anything to do with consumers. |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| From the article: quote:
In November, the FCC ruled that Vonage-style VOIP service should be free from most state regulation because the service can’t practically be separated into intrastate and interstate components. Because Vonage customers can use the service to make a call from a broadband connection anywhere in the world, it’s hard to determine whether a call is local, interstate or international, the FCC said.
I fail to see how they could prove the last sentence untrue, which would be needed to overturn the ruling. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| Believe me, in the name of consumer protection, the California PUC would embrace a mandatory requirement that every VoIP capable device (including all PCs) would have to have a functional GPS receiver to determine its location.
In order to preserve its power, the CPUC would eagerly push for such a requirement, regardless of the fact that it would be:
1. unenforceable
2. unworkable, as GPS doesn't work well indoors
3. and worst of all, horribly expensive for consumers, both in the cost of the equipment and in the economic results of over-regulation.
Anybody who doubts the above scenario should recall the early years of cellular, when the CPUC prohibited "bundling" the phone with the service. The idiots thought that would lower the cost of service, as the service wouldn't be trying to recoup the cost of the phone. Instead, Californians got service at the same or higher cost as the rest of the country, and got the privilege of paying the full cost of the cellular phone upfront as well. The companies liked the enforced restraint of trade which lowered their costs (no promotional phones) until things reached a point where the cost of the phone was a real hurdle to new sales. About that time, the FCC preempted state regulation, thank heavens.
This being California, I'm sure otherwise the CPUC would be punishing cellular companies for not building new cell sites that other branches of California government are obstructing in every way possible.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc  :...I don't know which is worse tax-wise. You don't have to search far for the answer.
Ad valorem rates and intangibles are included in ones annual tax bill. I don't recall the specific rates but I think almost half goes to the schools.
In Florida there is not state income tax, sales tax is 7% for my county. I work with someone who is from Illinois, her home here is 2000 sq ft (garage not included) with a swimming pool. Her property taxes were approximately $1800. Her mother owns a 2000 sq ft home in Illinois (no pool) and pays nearly $6000 a year in property tax. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| Yeah I'm quite familiar with both states, thank you. I pay taxes in both. Real estate in desirable areas is much more expensive up here as well. 2000 sq. ft. where I live will run you $1/2 million and up.
My point was more aimed at that insipid "blue state" comment. There is no state with a monopoly on picking their residents' pockets, and the Federal government is where they go when they turn pro.
--
Too many churches and not enough truth. º Too many people and not enough eyes to see. |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| Just for the record the two states that are the subject of this article are blue states so my original observation is accurate. At least until a red state joins in.
If I offended you with a truthful observation, I apologize.
Just because you don't like the "blue state" comment doesn't make it insipid. The fact that people responded proves otherwise. If there were no responses then I would agree it is insipid.
in·sip·id Pronunciation Key (n-spd)
adj.
Lacking qualities that excite, stimulate, or interest; dull
(source: dictionary.com) |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Whatever. You obviously aren't going to address the problem, and you can't offend me. Have a nice day.
--
Too many churches and not enough truth. º Too many people and not enough eyes to see. |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | What problem? |
|
