You're asking if this is the planetary system from Firefly.

This is a perfectly legitimate subject for a social studies classes. It should not be included in the hard science classes.

To be fair, the article does state that Amazon supports such legislation. But again, they aren't being pro-active in collecting said tax and providing it to appropriate states; they are only responding to pressure from states on a case-by-case basis.

Amazon made an agreement; that doesn't mean that they were actively asking to be taxed. From the article:

"[The agreement] follows a lawsuit by Indianapolis-based shopping mall owner Simon Property Group against the state over the issue and a lobbying push on state legislators by traditional retailers to end what they call an unfair price advantage for online retailers."

They can claim that online retailers have an unfair advantage and pass this legislation. What they will discover is that the online retailers will still win customers' money.

This argument can be made for all kinds of technological conveniences, so what was the point of this "article" again?

I don't technically need a car, or a TV or a computer, or even a refrigerator.

But I can afford these things and like what they provide me. So why not?

What is *on* TV is content. This is a discussion of the content delivery device *itself*. Parent should have been modded funny, not insightful.

Being a prodigy at math and it's applications shouldn't excuse him from learning the things that everyone spends time learning from the social sciences and creative disciplines. Keep him in school and let him develop social skills while studying things that still require basic memorization.

See subject for details.

Research before you troll: 80 / 20 Rule