<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Misery Loves Company</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html</link>
	<description>Advancing liberty with responsibility by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 17:39:11 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Clovis Ouangraoua</title>
		<link>http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html/comment-page-1#comment-1536</link>
		<dc:creator>Clovis Ouangraoua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:37:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2675#comment-1536</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s just nonsense how government and the institutions go extreme to design templates to collect revenues to face their budget&#039;s deficiencies. What should then happen to international buyers? Should we levy a tax on a purchase made from Moldova based on US commercial internet tax rule? What would be the checks and balances governing such a tax? So far as I know the sky is the limit when dealing with the World Wide Web. The internet is world property not governement or the State. I do wander if it&#039;s even constitutional to do it. Oh my Lord, help us in this economic debacle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s just nonsense how government and the institutions go extreme to design templates to collect revenues to face their budget&#8217;s deficiencies. What should then happen to international buyers? Should we levy a tax on a purchase made from Moldova based on US commercial internet tax rule? What would be the checks and balances governing such a tax? So far as I know the sky is the limit when dealing with the World Wide Web. The internet is world property not governement or the State. I do wander if it&#8217;s even constitutional to do it. Oh my Lord, help us in this economic debacle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Nonnenkamp</title>
		<link>http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html/comment-page-1#comment-1530</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Nonnenkamp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2675#comment-1530</guid>
		<description>The notion that the state &quot;loses&quot; revenue when internet sales go untaxed is just collectivist nonsense, the idea that all money is owned by the state. Keep the internet free!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The notion that the state &#8220;loses&#8221; revenue when internet sales go untaxed is just collectivist nonsense, the idea that all money is owned by the state. Keep the internet free!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil Eckelkamp</title>
		<link>http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html/comment-page-1#comment-1513</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil Eckelkamp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2675#comment-1513</guid>
		<description>Nick,
Int&#039;l Shoe is a good example that states should have to actually have contact in order to have jurisdiction.  I think your analogy can apply to the back taxes but at the same time Int&#039;l shoe may be overturned totally within the next few years or if not formally overturned, gutted to impotency due to the spread of online sales.  Are we now going to allow jurisdiction on anyone because their product can be bought anywhere on the internet?  I certainly hope not.  If I sell a widget in Missouri at a traditional store then I should reasonably expect a tax for all the services I use here.  But if ship a widget to colorado I don&#039;t believe that I should have to pay a tax there because I don&#039;t use any services there.  So much about taxing internet products is a bad idea that it is hard to believe that someone would take the idea seriously.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick,<br />
Int&#8217;l Shoe is a good example that states should have to actually have contact in order to have jurisdiction.  I think your analogy can apply to the back taxes but at the same time Int&#8217;l shoe may be overturned totally within the next few years or if not formally overturned, gutted to impotency due to the spread of online sales.  Are we now going to allow jurisdiction on anyone because their product can be bought anywhere on the internet?  I certainly hope not.  If I sell a widget in Missouri at a traditional store then I should reasonably expect a tax for all the services I use here.  But if ship a widget to colorado I don&#8217;t believe that I should have to pay a tax there because I don&#8217;t use any services there.  So much about taxing internet products is a bad idea that it is hard to believe that someone would take the idea seriously.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Loyal</title>
		<link>http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/01/misery-loves-company.html/comment-page-1#comment-1512</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Loyal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:49:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2675#comment-1512</guid>
		<description>See...you have to talk about this right after I get done reading International Shoe, don&#039;t you?

Minimal Contacts? Anyone? Granted, that may only apply to the jurisdiction of courts, but what&#039;s to stop the Missouri Treasury from filing a claim against Amazon or Best Buy for back taxes owed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See&#8230;you have to talk about this right after I get done reading International Shoe, don&#8217;t you?</p>
<p>Minimal Contacts? Anyone? Granted, that may only apply to the jurisdiction of courts, but what&#8217;s to stop the Missouri Treasury from filing a claim against Amazon or Best Buy for back taxes owed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

