Actually I'd say the opposite. If I put down $500 once, I have that version. Patches and similar free updates don't sell me another copy or make the company any money. The only way to get more money out of me is to sell another major revision.

In a SaaS model (i.e. subscription method) I can jump ship in 6 months to another product with better products/features/updates and not lose my whole investment. Instead, if I'm paying the company monthly they have a very strong motivation to continue improvement. It basically removes the need for a major/minor release schedule. Just keep paying and you're guaranteed the latest, updated version regardless of what number it's assigned. If I walk away, I'm not out anything so the company is driven to keep me happy - in return they have a regular, predictable income stream that accountants and investors love to see.

Think World of Warcraft...though they do charge for major releases it's about the same cost as a 6 month sub (IIRC). Inbetween they constantly update, patch, monitor, etc. Granted they have FAR more overhead in running the servers the game 'exists' on which justifies their monthly sub.

I still don't like SaaS but I understand the business model. However, I prefer to own "my" things instead of giving some company arbritrary control of whatever they like. Some "fixes" are anything buy.

I'll go one better - fire and charge the teacher. S/he was ostensibly in charge of the class, provided the materials, and was 'supervising'.

With that said, I don't really support finger-pointing responsibility. Firing and charging the teacher is still far more than what should happen, but compared to expelling and arresting the student it's less extreme IMHO.

Everyone, everwhere seems to be playing an extreme version of CYA - and all it does is victimize people who do something silly, stupid, not allowed. That's HUGELY different than intentionally shooting/bombing people. Not expelling/arresting a kid for accidentally bringing a kitchen knife to school that s/he found and brought to a teacher doesn't mean others will take that as an invitation to bring their brother's M16 and start shooting.

You make some good points, but vastly under-estimate what property taxes can run depending on your area.

My $250k house costs 6-7 grand in property taxes. My mother's ~400K house is right around 10k owning to being in a much nicer neighborhood. 40K a year is high, but certainly not unbelievable.

Still, the overall income/tax breakdown that started this is very likely fiction (or the guy is getting enough tax advice to save himself a ton of money and should donate some to ./)

This times 10.

The problem is some of the big areas we *could* cut are the ones related to swing votes or political donations...which are essentially immune. So instead of ending corporate tax shelters and loopholes to get the $billions (and more) that SHOULD be paid, we're cutting air traffic controllers. Not administrative staff, not research staff, not 'tell passengers they can't use their ipad during takeoff but pilots can' staff, but the few people who actually serve a fucking purpose.

You don't know about. For one, federal income tax is, in theory, about that simple too. Reality differs greatly. Check yourself, I'm not getting paid to educate you.

Again, you just don't get it. First, define "sellers location" for us. That's the problem vexing tax collection NOW. As for the increase - internet sales that bypass sales tax suddenly get hit with it. In 2011 ecommerce was ~$255 billion. Let's say half of that went untaxed (probably much higher) and now we're taxing at ... 5%? That's $13 billion in additional taxes.

Straw man. Corporate tax shelters are an entirely different problem and discussion.

Which tax rate applies? See above.

Can purple eat from square rainbow? Sorry, my brain almost exploded because you can't seem to follow the discussion. I'm not suggesting a use tax, I'm explaining that we have (a broken) one now which you don't seem able to grasp. Buyers are supposed to remit the unpaid taxes but they typically don't. The proposed legislation will punish the SELLERS for what they buyers are doing.

Your original analogy/suggestion/proposal entirely ignores the definition of location in the modern world. Even take a simple ebay seller...their storefront exists on ebay servers in some datacenter. Their 'office' exists in their living room. Their warehouse exists in their garage...and in china because they drop-ship...and in another state because they sell for their cousin who's parents died. Do you really think the tax code for this will be SIMPLE and appropriate for small time sellers?

Yes, that's FAR simpler.

1-Let the US gov't collect tax from every state and then based on some magical "fair" formula re-distribute it. I'm *sure* that won't turn into a lobbying for fairness similar to all the current federal tax breaks/funding/etc. we have now.

2-so your idea is to just give the finger to large cities and crash their economy by forcing people out? Brilliant.

3-yes they do but forcing them to use only that is a huge shift to the tax environment. Better or worse is an argument that's not likely to end

4-once again, it shifts the tax burden to specific areas while other's pay less/nothing. While we're at it, how about anyone who smokes also makes a car payment for their neighbor?

If you think state tax i as simple as taking x% of a line from your 1040...please stop reading and leave the discussion. You're in so far over your head I can't even...

For the rest...

I'm not an expert, but I believe you're incorrect about how sales tax is supposed to work. Either way, it's obviously horribly complex and we can agree that buyers are basically ignoring/exploiting it. If you remove that, you add a major tax burden back on individuals. Basically raising the cost of goods by several percent in a substantial portion of sales. THAT won't do our economy any favors.

Beyond that, shifting the burden entirely to the seller based on their location? Impractical. I'll simply pick locale with the least (or no) sales tax or the best tax breaks (for larger companies who can negotiate such) and bypass tax once again. Consider how NY forced Amazon to charge sales tax on items sold to NY residents. The tax model is based on the buyer's location currently ... a use tax.

Sellers are taxed - they pay income tax. They *collect* tax on behalf of the state/city/etc.

You speak from inexperience. Something about walking a mile in my shoes...

While I understand this is /. and all ... consider the OTHER people who sell things - online, mail order, ebay, or other - and have no clue what SQL even is. Hell, plenty of people HERE wouldn't know a simple SQL query.

Entering every purchase into quickbooks to figure out sales tax and generate an invoice...BEFORE the buyer can complete the purchase? Or having to code a link between your shopping app and quickbooks? Or finding a ecommerce app that already has every tax jurisdiction accurately set up? ... not to mention who is responsible if they get one wrong somehow?

NO ONE is doing this today. No company has a physical presence in every tax jurisdiction and thus the requirement to tax every single order. Is it impossible? No. Is it easy? Nyet. Is it reasonable for small businesses? Can't say it is.

You can't just have a federal sales tax. How would you fund state/city/town governments? Since this tax rate would have to be significantly higher people would have a much greater motivation to shop in the lower tax towns/cities ... which further acerbates the problem.

They don't. What's SUPPOSED to happen is the buyer pays use tax in his/her home state. Really.

About 0% of people do so.

Since even the US Gov't realizes it isn't practical to go after the large majority of it's population they're shifting the burdon (or trying to) to those selling instead. Retailers are jumping onboard pointing at amazon and crying "no fair no fair no fair." Of course 'fair' for them is at the expense of...drumroll...the consumer of course. I'd totally continue to shop at a retailer that lobbied to make things from their competitors cost me more. Or not.

It would be better if we had a practical tax system instead of the nickel and dime charge this, deduct that, but charge this and don't deduct that while writing off this other unrelated thing and claiming a tax credit for a goat herding initiative in Somalia.

I love this (mis)quote. His lawyers are going to eat it up assuming he isn't smart enough to eat a gun on his own. You aren't given Miranda rights, they're just there. That's why they call it 'reading him his rights'. It's simply informing the individual.

Not that anything justified what he (likely) did but our legal system still pegs him as innocent until proven guilty. Oh wait, there's an exemption for that too I'm sure. Our legal system has truly become a mockery of itself.

For the longest time that was EXACTLY the case with cable in many areas. Same with phone service. It wasn't pretty...and most of what's come from bringing in 'competition' is an alternate option for basically the same ridiculous price..and market fragmentation.

All things considered, I'd trust Google further than Cablevision or Time Warner. Also consider...the classic encrypted, commercial-laden, non-interactive cable TV subscription is dead. It hasn't gotten the notice yet or been nice enough to curl up and die...but it's dead. On-demand, streaming, interactive TV delivered digitally to the devices I want, wherever I am is where it's all going. Given that most cable systems are already digital and streamed from media servers...there's zero reason why I need this ridiculous cable box with it's pointless restrictions other than to perpetuate a dead business model.

Consider if Google decided to combine Hulu, Netflix, Pandora, and tell the networks it'll carry them on it's terms - not the abusive ones they're trying to get out of the cable providers. Add in a per-channel or per-show cost (and offer a commercial vs non-commercial price)... Include that as a function on every android device...sure it's less per-viewer revenue upfront (maybe, but these viewers you know who they are and what they do!) but now you're getting to WAY more endpoints and people. And you can make your commercials targeted. It's a no-brainer. The only question is how long will the kicking and screaming last before we get there.

IS the majority better off? If you look at the ratio of CEO compensation vs average employee compensation over the last 30-40 years it's skyrocketed.

Now consider how easily someone can get a job to buy a house, a car, and support their family...nonono...not two parents who work 70 hours at 3 jobs each. One parent who comes home in time for dinner most nights.

My problem isn't immagrant labor per se, but the fact that they export much of the money they earn. They only need to be paid enough to survive on their own and send back enough wages to support their family who lives in a far cheaper place than the US.

...to the consumer.

No one minds WoW (etc.) requiring an online connection because that connection serves a purpose and delivers part of your experience. Without it you lose the basis of the game. Even while farming you have some social interaction and the chance to go off and raid or help out a guildy.

But what does this bring? As I understand it there is a social component to the new simcity but is it fundamental to the game? No. Can you build a city on your own? Yep. And on top of all that you don't bother getting your auth server (and save server) working properly? What's *wrong* with the people running this show?

Microtransactions can require internet *for the transaction*. Multiplayer? Sure. But the nonsense around single player games needing to be online to check in? It just walks down the restrictive path that the music industry tried with MP3 and DRM. You won't win.

Can't disagree.

When I was young (and perhaps naive) the concept of robots being able to do jobs in place of workers was new and profound. I thought to myself 'wow, if robots can do lots of this work faster/better/cheaper than the workers can work less hours for the same pay. We can make it so people don't have to work nearly as much to make a living and would have more time for their families.'

Needless to say I hadn't realized how greedy and corrupt the upper echelon of society was and is. It's disgusting.