Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!midway!news
From: gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Luxury tax on computers!
Message-ID: <1990Oct4.181823.18052@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 4 Oct 90 17:07:54 GMT
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: University of Chicago Graduate School of Business
Lines: 55

------ 
In article <6356@bgsuvax.UUCP>, denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) writes...

[...]

>> it appears that computers have been included as taxable products....
>  [at the rate of 10% of the amount over $1000.00]
>> If anybody is concerned about this proposal, telephone calls to
>> Congressional representatives and senators could be a critical help. 
>> Interested persons should do the following:...
> 
>No. No. Please don't.  If I have to spend a couple of hundred dollars
>when I buy my next commputer, I don't care.  What I do care about is
>the fact that every person owes about $2000.00 (yes two thousand dollars)
>per year in interest on the national debt.  (national debt/population
>size * interest).  Until the deficit goes away, we can't work on the debt.
> 


Yes, please do!

I'm sorry, but I work hard for my money.  Maybe a "couple of hundred dollars"
isn't much to you.  It's a hell of a lot to me.  I pay income tax.  I pay sales
tax if I buy computer stuff.  That's enough.

Before they start taxing computers, why don't they think about soaking the
rich? (and if you think only rich people buy computers, dream on.  Besides, a
flat tax on computers is regressive: poor and middle income people would pay
more proportionately than the rich).  I mean look at the so-called budget
compromise: they're going to stick it to the middle-class again: people with
incomes in the $30k to $50 k range are going to see something like a 3.3%
increase, while those with over $200k in income are going to see about a 0.3%
increase: 1/10th as much!  

Besides the fact: if we make computers harder to buy (and believe me, 10%
_does_ make a difference to most people), then fewer people will buy computers
(or alternatively, buy fewer computers), fewer people will use computers, fewer
people will buy software: thus a decrease in sales, something _real_ healthy
for our current economy.  And having fewer people use and learn about computers
is _just_  what our country needs to remain competitive in the upcoming years.
(Lest anyone miss it and flame me: I'm being sarcastic in the last couple of
points).

So: the reason this isn't in misc.politics or whatever: if you're interested in
computers, and you feel we shouldn't be putting this massive tax on them: DO
get in touch with your congressman/congresswoman.


Robert

============================================================================
= gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu * generic disclaimer: * "It's more fun to =
=            		         * all my opinions are *  compute"         =
=                                * mine                *  -Kraftwerk       =
============================================================================