Does it surprise me that Illinois in a worst-of top 10 list when it comes to stealth taxes?
http://www.mywireless.org/issuestaxes/
I was surprised to see my cell phone taxes so ridiculous high as a portion of my bill so I happened to look into a bit. I thought it must have been a mistake. Who was I kidding?
We listen to the pro-spending and anti-saving bureaucrats argue for higher fees because the cost of performing a service is higher than the actual cost they charge for the service. It sounds good to the city council and they raise taxes and fees. Ok....so what services are they providing me when they tax the hell out of my cell phone?
No service at all, they got you by the shortones,,,,anything that generates a dollar the taxers want a piece of it,,anything,,,,,it was an old joke,,,,but maybe I am not so sure,,,if they could find a way to tax the air we breath,,,they would do it!
I was shocked the first time I got a schmancier cell phone how much the taxes were. My first cell phone I hadn't noticed because I was on a criminally cheap plan. Sure noticed when I got my first big bill. It was over 10% just for the local taxes. One way or another, they'll get your money.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
The only municipality that I can recall that actually stated what the cell phone tax money would specifically go to is St. Joseph where they are using the money to fund their growing parks system.
Please don't feed the troll.
Thanks.
Hey, wait a minute, IP. I'm a troll because I dispute that cell phone taxes are worth complaining about?
Unit 4 raising my taxes, MTD raising my taxes, City of Champaign raising my taxes, sure, that's something to complain about, but discovering that cell phones have taxes?
C'mon. What's next, someone discovering that there is a luxury tax on their 60 foot boat, or on their Maybach, or brand new Lear jet, and it cannot be criticized?
Believe it or not, cell phones are luxuries, they are toys. When governmental bodies raise my taxes on the house I already live in, that's one thing, but cell phones?
I know you have a Blackberry, or a Treo, or a Palm, and you think you really, really NEED it, but you don't.
You have a very low threshold for what constitutes a troll. Deleting my comments. Boggles my mind.
From the MyWireless.org web page:
MyWireless.org brings together consumers from across the country to protect their wireless rights in their cities, states, and nationally.
RIGHTS? RIGHTS?
Where is having a wireless (cell) phone a right? US Constitution? Illinois Constitution?
The People are to be secure in their homes... Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the Press... All persons regardless of race may vote... No person shall be compelled to be a Witness against himself... Those are RIGHTS. Having a cell phone isn't a Right.
If you buy into the MyWireless.org propaganda, then sure, having a Blackberry, keeping taxes low on it, using it whenever or wherever you want is a right. If you believe in fair market consumerism, if you believe in the Constitution, a cell phone is a luxury, a toy, a discretionary purchase.
Before you careen down the slippery slope of "all taxes are bad" you should re-examine just what a right is, and just what a discretionary purchase might be.
If I don't want to pay taxes on my home, I'm out on the street. If I don't want to pay taxes on my cell phone, it shuts off, but I still have a roof. I can even walk to my neighbor's house and speak with him, I don't have to bump him on my Nextel.
When you buy a cell phone you voluntarily agree to pay taxes. Don't want the taxes? Don't buy a cell phone. Pretty simple.
I'm moved by all this talk about rights, but back to taxes and spending....
If policy makers were even remotely creative with cost savings as they were with finding revenue sources, we wouldn't need all the shameless stealth taxes.
We just heard arguments from a city manager office arguing that fees should be increased because the fee they charge doesn't cover their expenses. They go all out on creativity when it comes to raising taxes and fees, but don't even put in a respectable effort when it comes to managing expenses.
At the state level, the governor implemented 300 new businesses tax and fee increases, but he claims not to have raised taxes on us consumers. My favorite was him raiding the dry cleaners environmental trust fund and then raising those fees by 300%. Then there was that GRT....that idiotic plan that labor unions and teacher unions thought was smart. Are we so stupid that we cannot spot a pyramid scam?
I'm not opposed to all taxes and fees, but I will state strongly that I pay more than enough in taxes and we don't need any more tax rate increase or fee increase that increase faster than the consumer price index.
"Hey, wait a minute, IP. I'm a troll because I dispute that cell phone taxes are worth complaining about?"
No, I deleted your comments and the responses to it because you felt the need to be so insulting in your response. You didn't need to call anyone clueless, or babies, or whiners - you could have made your point just as well without the insults. The comments responding to yours were responding to your insults, not your arguments, and the whole thread was heading towards a flame war.
"You have a very low threshold for what constitutes a troll. Deleting my comments. Boggles my mind."
I have a very low threshold for comments by unregistered users. Sorry - some rude jackass trolls have ruined it for everyone. If you want more leeway, go get a free, anonymous email address and register.
IP, you have crossed a threshold that you have said you would not cross.
While it is true that IP.com is owned by Gordy Hulten, so Gordy Hulten can do what he chooses, "IP" in the past has stated (no, I don't have that quote in my cache) that you delete in your threads, but others have the freedom to delete or not in their own threads. iI can see an adminstrator deleting seriously crude words (the 'f" word, or the "c" word), or seriously infammatory words, (the "n" word) , or direct personal insults (instead of saying, run4cvr, saying Jim, you are a ...) but this?
Are you actually "B is for Business", yet another name for IP, or have you taken it upon yourself to protect everyone from everything? As long as I am asking, do you have multiple screen names here? Are you Arvid, AnF, akibare, xian, Oil Man, Champaign Dweller, ILVoter, redstatewannabe? HandyMom, realitychick, eggs ackley?
BTW, the 'n" word isn't Nanny, but it looks like it should be.
I have a question: if I do register, just what words are not allowed, and just to whom may I say or not say something? What subjects are off limits? You know, some people are in fact, opinion, actually, just clueless. If I register, start a blog, and express my opinion that person "A" is clueless will my thread be deleted? What if I opine about Rep. Johnson? What if I opine about OJ Simpson? What if I opine about Britney Spears? Am I barred from using the word "clueless"?
May I choose any anonymous screen name? What's off limits for that? This 1st Amendment stuff can get really confusing.
I follow rules, I just have to know what they are.
"IP, you have crossed a threshold that you have said you would not cross."
I have. Repeated anonymous trolling and flame-baiting have caused me to be more restrictive in what I allow anonymous commenters to post. I'm sorry that it's come this - I liked it better before. But anonymous name-called was causing multiple threads to degenerate into flame wars, and I'm not willing to tolerate that. I had two options - tighten the leash on anonymous commenters, or outlaw anonymous commenting entirely.
I hope I can loosen those restrictions eventually.
"Are you actually "B is for Business", yet another name for IP, or have you taken it upon yourself to protect everyone from everything?"
I'm not trying to protect anyone. My goal here has always been constructive discussion, and I'm trying to preserve that with as little interference as possible. The name-calling by anonymous commenters was making such discussion impossible, because the threads became discussions about the insults rather than the topics.
My arguement remains - you could have disagreed with everything ever written on here without the name-calling, and then an actual discussion would have occurred, instead of a pointless flame war.
"BTW, the 'n" word isn't Nanny, but it looks like it should be."
Meh. If you have a better solution, I'm all ears. And if you can't stand what I'm doing on here, please feel free to start your own blog. It's free and easy and anonymous, and the more the merrier.
Also, we've derailed the conversation enough on this thread. If you want to discuss this further, please email me, or take the discussion to an Open Thread.
Thanks.
One last comment about this, I promise.
"Please don't feed the troll" referred specifically to me. Not trolls, but troll. There are 'trolls" here, but not me.
I am not a troll, that was an insult, pure and simple, no other innocent construction or interpretation can be had.
That's all I have to say.
From the MyWireless.org web page:
MyWireless.org brings together consumers from across the country to protect their wireless rights in their cities, states, and nationally.
RIGHTS? RIGHTS?
Let me agree with that. Way too many things are called "rights" these days. The improper use of the word has really watered down its true meaning.
""Please don't feed the troll" referred specifically to me. Not trolls, but troll. There are 'trolls" here, but not me.
I am not a troll, that was an insult, pure and simple, no other innocent construction or interpretation can be had.
That's all I have to say."
As I said, I have different standards for unregisterd users.
And forgive me for mistaking your name-calling as trolling. Perhaps, in the future, you could help me avoid making a similar mistake by avoiding the name-calling in the first place.
Thanks.
Are cell phones taxed higher than home phones? YES and why? Because it's a "toy"? Then why not tax "toys"? Should Pokemon cards have a nickle tax... ? Why not? Should ALL discretionary spending be open to unlimited taxation? Maybe limit the taxes to the sales tax rate?
I'm not against taxing cell phones altogether but why so high? Does that tax go to just defraying the taxing body's expenses only? or is it just a way to tax a few for the "benefit" of the many. And does "benefit" just mean spending more for services or adding services rather than finding a way to control expenses?!
What is the deal with trying to tax certain groups for services that everybody uses. ie smokers, cable TV users, cell phone users, home owners..... wht not tax EVERYBODY for things that EVERYBODY uses (on a "progressive" tax basis), and limit the "other taxes" to the costs incurred to the public by said uses? I realize this is over-simplistic, but IMO that should be the "Spirit" of the rules of taxation...
I agree with B isfor Business.... how about being more creative on how to save money, ( pay down debt burdens, or pay the medicare bills on time). At least be as creative as they are about how to tax us yet again, or NOT finding some new "indespensible" service that the public can't live without.
PR- The problem with many taxes is that do we really need what they fund? I wonder if all these little taxes on everything that moves or doesn't move are really the most efficient way to collect taxes. I don't think they are but are the easiest way politically to get them past an apathetic public because the other guy may “pay them” not me, like many other taxes.
Anon is not wrong. The cell phone is something we can technically live without. What's funny are little tag lines like "luxury tax" that are applied to the tax to provide justification for squeezing money out the taxpayer. If you think I'm just realizing that cell phones are taxed, you are mistaken. I was taken back by HOW MUCH my cell phone is taxed. In fact, I would surprised if I found a transaction that was not taxed.
The bottom line is that if there is a transaction, it will be taxed. It is much easier to manufacture a rationale to raise taxes/fees and spend money than it is to control spending and impose constraints on yourself. Especially if the taxpayer is going to stand for it. Today when you're out and about, try to find a transaction that is not taxed. If there was drinking game where you had to drink every time you got taxed, we'd have to have a full-time designated driver.
I am not calling for no taxes. I would gladly welcome a commitment from someone running for office who is committed to holding the line on spending by not allowing any more new taxes, no new fees, no tax increases, and cap fee increases to the CPI. If someone is asking for something that does not allow for those conditions to be met, just say no. I thought good fiscal conservatives thought like this to begin with, but I've realized we have an uphill battle just to get republicans on board with this thinking. The government can live within their means. We find a way, they can find a way.
I would very happy to avoid any annoying arguments and politely nod my head when people like Anon try to make themselves feel better about taxing us to death. You can call a tax anything you want, but please no more. At this point, enough is more than enough. Before we start justifying how to spend money, let's just all appreciate how easy that really is...
ANy one just change their mailing address to a lower tax location. Since bills can be delivered electronically does it matter?
skynet:
For at least one of the major carriers, the place of primary use is used to calculate the taxes. So if you travel for business and use your phone primarily in one major metropolitan area, your taxes will be for that area.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the taxes for the usage are calculated as an average for all of the tax rates in the areas where you use your phone, with the percentage of minutes used in each area figuring into the equation. Otherwise, business travelers who find themselves in a different city each week would have lower taxes than business travelers who travel frequently to the same city. Now I'm curious... something to look up tomorrow at work.
Kem