Why not tax a person every time they enter a library? Or, say, can we
tax them every time they ask a question?
Currently we have a society that is learning by an incremental amount
every day. Peoples in far away lands are communicating with each other
in ways this planet has never before been witness to. This must be truly
scarey for those who feel they have a /right to rule /. So, how to
control this runaway freight train of communication and expansion of
empathetic knowledge? Tax it. Begin chopping away at it. Cut it off at
the roots. */KILL IT!! /*.
Maybe not everything is true or of /needed /value but (at least in N.A.)
it is relatively inexpensive. Now we have a side-step from taxing the
wealthy appropriately and reducing the engorged gap BETWEEN THE
EXCESSIVELY RICH AND THE REST OF US to placing a tax on information
exchange or just of patter between friends or associates. (I hope
Natalia will enlarge on this as it is she who is reading about it at
present... but.) China has, through its long history of inventiveness
well ahead of *any* western civilization, destroyed its chances of world
supremacy repeatedly due to the blinkered and sometimes totally blind
attitude of destroying the accomplishments of a prior dynasty instead of
building upon them as it would subjugate the masses as it retained it
feudal imperialism. Just as this society is now beating up on the
educational, health and welfare systems just so specific people can
claim an unreasonable /power over/ , we reduce the level of contribution
by the entire society. One cannot contribute to a society if one must
scrabble for survival. The freedom and beauty of the mind is released
only through a relaxed state. Ideas must be /freely /accessible to be
built upon. Placing the mind in a box can only lead to ideas of building
more boxes.
You wish to tax bits??? Tax /corporate /bits. Tax the wealthy. Tax
bankers. Tax dividends but*/do not put blocks on the trading or
garnering of information /*. It becomes just another step at controlling
ideas and the building of humanity. Or do you want us to crawl back
into the jungle??
Darryl
P.S. You want to tax something? Tax the ads that flow over the web spaces.
More below.
On 9/28/2011 1:26 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
Yes!
M
-----Original Message-----
*From:* [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of
*Arthur Cordell
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2011 6:34 PM
*To:* 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION';
[email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] McKinsey Quarterly article: Measuring
thevalue ofsearch
COLUMN: Can a bit tax bring a New Wealth of Nations?
/By _Ottawa Business Journal Staff
<mailto:[email protected]>_/
/Sun, Dec 29, 2002 11:00 PM EST/
At a rough guess, the public sector needs another $20 billion a
year to meet the pressing needs of health, education and defence,
and to renew the crumbling infrastructure that carries our
traffic, carries off our sewage, delivers our water and provides
many other essential services. Maybe $30 billion. A lot, anyway.
Where's it going to come from? Increased income tax? This isn't a
very desirable option, either for the taxpayer or for the economy,
which has to maintain some semblance of equilibrium with low tax
competitors, such as the United States of Affluence. A jump in GST
from seven per cent to double digits? Not a big favourite among
politicians, who would find themselves en masse back in the
private sector the first election following such a move.
There's no painless way to raise the needed funds. Or is there?
One way that has the advantage of being scarcely visible has been
suggested by my friend Arthur Cordell, an advisor to Industry
Canada and originator many years thence of the "conserver society"
tagline, precursor to "sustainable development." His more recent
contribution to socio-economic discourse has been the notion of
the "bit tax."
"The new wealth of nations," Arthur points out, "is found in the
trillions of digital bits of information pulsing through global
networks. These are the physical/electronic manifestations of the
many transactions, conversations, voice and video messages and
programs that taken together record the process of production,
distribution and consumption in the new economy."
If there's a new economy, there should be a new tax base. To
follow the information highway analogy, it would be similar to a
gasoline tax, or a toll on bridges or highways. Why not tax
digital traffic, asks Arthur?
"Whether the digital bit is part of a foreign exchange
transaction, or a business teleconference, check clearance
information, or an ATM transaction, each bit is a physical
manifestation of the new economy at work. So let's imagine a 'bit
tax.' Automatically metered, it will cause fewer collection
problems than most other direct or indirect taxes. Collected by
the telecom carriers, satellite networks and cable systems,
revenues would flow directly to the revenue service of the
respective country."
There are a lot of questions to be answered, of course. Is a bit
tax progressive or regressive? Will it be absorbed by the carriers
or passed on to consumers?
Nothing is ever absorbed by a company. It is always passed on. Why do
you think profits continue to rise even in bad times?
Should lower rates apply to some heavy traffic items such as
digital movies downloaded to the home?
The customer already pays a tax on the service!!!!!
Can one nation bring in a bit tax or does it require international
collaboration?
International *of course* otherwise ideas are still flitting around
through other */non taxed countries /*.
The design of the Internet makes it impossible to determine where
someone making an electronic purchase is located. With a typical
mail-order purchase, the product is shipped somewhere. But if the
information is downloaded from an Internet site, the seller may
have no idea of its destination. And where does the merchant reside?
Where he or she actually has an office or where the computer
server is? It would seem that international cooperation will be
essential to collecting and distributing a bit tax, which should
give considerable comfort to the vanguard of the world government
movement.
Indeed, */the supreme beings of earth need to have control or their
fortunes will dissipate /*/*.*/
As Arthur says, *"The point is to begin a discussion on the sort
of new taxes appropriate for a new economy. A bit tax can lead to
the monetization of all productivity. One result: economic growth
numbers will more accurately reflect the productivity advances
brought by information technologies. With monetization will come
higher gross domestic product and higher revenues to be used in a
variety of ways. *
Indeed, about the same as taxing the wealthy appropriately.
**
"New revenues can be used for schools, parks, health care, to
re-train some for new jobs and, for those who cannot be retrained
to provide a continuing flow of income that allows displaced
workers to maintain their dignity - and purchasing power - in the
new economy. This last point is important since purchasing power
is needed to maintain effective demand in our economies if we are
to avoid chronic economic recessions or worse.
*"The bit tax may be one way to more fully distribute the benefits
of the new economy. *
Yes, taxes have always made this claim. It is the implementation of
programs and distribution of these monies that still remains a problem.
*One way for the productive power of information technology to
bring with it a New Wealth of Nations."*
Wonderful words and wonderful sentiment but oh so easily subverted and
/diverted /to a select group within the nation.
Essentially what I am saying is. Tax the wealthy and the system of
corporations that escape the tax or subvert to their personal profit the
tax system */then /*consider another 'general tax revenue'.
D.
**
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of
*michael gurstein
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2011 9:09 PM
*To:* 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION';
[email protected]
*Subject:* [Futurework] McKinsey Quarterly article: Measuring the
value ofsearch
*Measuring the value of Internet search*
Although the word "Google" has evolved from the name of an
Internet search company into a verb understood almost everywhere
on Earth, the economic value of Web searches has long remained a
mystery, approached through inexact or tainted metrics such as the
number of searches undertaken or ad revenues reported by search
companies themselves. A new McKinsey study takes a wider view. For
a truer reckoning of the way the Web turns our curiosity into a
powerful economic force, read "Measuring the value of search
<http://e.mckinseyquarterly.com/133a7f62flayfousiboeswxyaaaaabxlwp4gsptvgbiyaaaaa>."
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
