If the federal government wants to make internet sales taxed the simply thing to do would be to start a federal on-line sales tax for purchases where the ship to and ship-from states are different (interstate trade). The requirements of online retailers would be then to collect the federal tax, and report the ship-to state. The feds then take some % of the sales tax and pass the rest to the state.
For example; Federal internet sales tax is 10%. I buy a $100 widget from www.widgets.com. www.widgets.com charges me $110+shipping and send the $10 in tax and the state on the ship to label to the feds. The feds take 3% or $0.30 and send the remaining $9.70 to the state.
The federal law states that these payments are to be treated exactly like state sales tax collected in the state. If a state doesn't want to collect sales tax for physical locations in the state they simply need to en-act a state law that says the tax rate in the state is 0% and what to do with any money that comes from that. No change to people that live there and shop at a physical store, since the state collects no sales tax.
What this would likely encourage is major on-line retailers to set up distribution in each state and to simply move inventory between distribution centers to ensure that the ship-from address matches the ship-to state. Though I'm not sure if there already rules in place at the federal/state level to make those inventory exchanges tax-able.
I'd say something about the south, but I'm from MN, and I'd like to apologize for Michelle Bachman.
That said, this guy clearly didn't want anything other than the answer he already had in his head. That much was clear. Could the lawyer asked for a whiteboard and attempted a drawing explaining how the system worked, and asked that questions be held until the end?
actually this is more like, me suing you for going and buying a robot that someone else's replicating robot made, and then using that to make your own army of replicating robots. That first replicating robot, and the second are fine, it's the third+ that M is claiming are "BAD".
I wonder if there is some sort of "minimum scale" you need to be farming at for it to not count? Can I lease my land to 100 people for farming and then offer to farm it for them in exchange for $1 in rent, but I get 99.9% of the crops? If i get enough renters can i avoid being a "commercial" farm and remain a "series of closely spaced hobby farms"?
I would say sure, but if I had signed a multi-year contract, then surely I'm allowed to get some form of compensation when they break contract?
Also in my apartment building there are 2 providers. Centurylink and comcast. Once changes happen twice what am I supposed to do to to maintain an internet connection. These days internet is more like water or electricity than anything else. Where do you get tax forms in the analog world? (no cheating and using the internet to look it up)
Do you get optimum results in your car or could someone with hypermile-ing experience wring out a few more MPG, at least? Did it even come with instructions on how to optimize the number of miles you can drive on a tank?
I still haven't figured out what everyone's issue with the wifi data was? It was the digital equivalent of getting mad that you were shouting into you cell phone in your front yard and someone passing by remembered a small bit of your conversation...
Grabbing a small amount of WPA2 data isn't enough to do anything. You need a few sets of handshake data at least. This is unlikely to happen in the short time google was driving by.
By the way, no I don't care at all if google knows where my AP is, or has some encrypted data from it. Now if they park a van in my parking lot for a day or 2, and it turns out that they are harvesting data, then maybe I'll be concerned.
Hmm... So why is it that there are only two allowed service providers in my city? comcast and Century link. The only reason there are two is that CenturyLink (qwest) got a monopoly on telephone lines, and comcast on cable TV. Then each used that infrastructure to provide internet.
What I feel should happen is that the actual wires be owned by a heavily regulated not-for-profit (somewhat like the power and water companies), and then the ISPs can use that wire/line/fiber/etc to provide me with internet. Yes this would mean that I would likely have 2 bills, one for the line, and one for the ISP.
I'm not quite sure how to incentive-ise the line owner, but it's a work in progress.
Not always, maybe the rest of the device will be value engineered to make up the difference. I'm sure most of the low hanging fruit is long been picked, but save a few pennies here and there and it'll add up some.
Also Apples prices have never seemed to reflect any sort of consistent margin on the hardware, so it is possible that they like the devices pricing for some other reason and are willing to accept a smaller margin.
we could still have a trial with a jury, even if it wasn't a jury of randomly selection people. How about software patent cases should have a jury of 12 random professional programmers in the same space as the patent covers. So for example, 12 consumer device software programmers in this case for the software patents and 12 different jurors for the physical design patents, those that work in the mechanical design of portable consumer devices.