February 06, 2003

Shaving your anger

What is it with the Republican party? In December it was Trent Lott speaking wistfully of what might have been if that good ole boy Strom had won in '48; today it's Rep. Howard Coble of N.C. speaking approvingly of the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War 2. I grant you The Guardian is a pretty lefty newspaper, but I don't think it would risk libel by printing something which it couldn't corroborate.

Men, regularly shaving keeps you healthy. So does anger, so if you require liberal use of styptic pencils all the while screaming in rage, you may lead a long life.

If you're a frequent online buyer, you may get a surprise shortly; some of the biggest e-tailers are beginning to charge sales tax. The PR is amusing;

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. spokeswoman Cynthia Lin said that voluntarily collecting online sales taxes was the right thing to do. "Many states are struggling with tax revenue shortages that affect funding for everything from schools to fire and rescue. This is our effort to help customers and the states they live in," she said.

I'm trying to decide whether the appropriate phrase is "butter wouldn't melt in her mouth," or "the cat that ate the canary."

Posted by Linkmeister at February 6, 2003 02:06 PM
Comments

I heard several companies may debate this, they feel that since no personal contact is made, no sales tax should be paid.
I don't know, I can't find a salesperson to help me anywhere and I still pay sales tax. The robot at the check out counter tells me what I owe....

Posted by: toxiclabrat at February 7, 2003 01:31 PM

The argument has been that if the online store (see Amazon) had no physical presence in the state from which the purchase was made, no sales tax accrued. I tried to send a book to a friend who lives in Washington State a while back, and suddenly the sale price jumped a little; I had to look twice to figure out that there was a line item there for taxes.

Not so hard to do for the big boys, but what if you're a one-person shop selling, oh, soap? What a horrific logistical hassle this could be. That's why Congress has so far avoided the issue.

Posted by: Linkmeister at February 7, 2003 01:47 PM

My personal opinion is that we should not have to pay sales tax on either mail order items or internet items - it is true that it is not fair to someone selling items via internet in Maine to have to be appointed to collect the sale taxes of a sale to a person who lives in Texas. However, since the American people allowed mail orders to be taxed per the state they live in no matter where the seller/company resides, how can we be baffled when stores are jumping on the band wagon to "do the right thing" and charge sales taxes to internet shoppers?

I must admit it is very unsatisfying that a company would automatically just implement a tax because they feel it is the "right thing to do". Personally, I would not pay it or I would just not use that online entity any longer as well as push written letters to my Senator....I'll be damned if I am going to pay a tax that is not law, I pay enough taxes as it is. :)

Thank you for your comment Linkmeister, I appreciated it and btw, the ear implants are exactly the very ones my specialist is speaking of and you are right, progress has made leaps and bounds forward - I expect to see them become ten times better in the next few years. :)

Posted by: Pristine at February 9, 2003 11:53 AM